3 ms·
a lot of assumptions here. I thing the major point is that Windows will be less a pain in the ass if you have to deal and develop for Linux production systems.
by therealmarv 11y ago
a lot of assumptions here. I thing the major point is that Windows will be less a pain in the ass if you have to deal and develop for Linux production systems. So IF I ever have to use Windows I don't need to deal with Cygwin anymore.
But for me the biggest reason not to switch is the hardware. Sorry @all Windows folks but Macbooks are playing in another higher league for me. I would never ever switch away from Macbooks because of the build quality.
- seanp2k2 11y agoSurface Book and things like the Razer Blade are looking to change that. Honestly your money goes further with Windows hardware, and you can get stuff like the Lenovo mobile workstation with a mobile Xeon CPU and ECC RAM. However, they can't run a blessed OS X. IMO, if Apple really wanted to mess with Microsoft, they could make OS X installable (without EFI hacking and overriding the CPU identifier etc -- yes I've had my fun with OSX86 since 10.5 days) on normal PC hardware. Their hardware would still sell because of the premium build, and they could probably charge $400 for the OS. The Dell XPS stuff is also pretty nice from what I hear.
- scholia 11y ago> if Apple really wanted to mess with Microsoft, they could make OS X installable Microsoft once offered to help Apple to make Mac OS a widely-used industry standard. Apple decided it would rather sell $2,500 PCs than $50 software ;-) http://scripting.com/specials/gatesLetter/text.html http://scripting.com/specials/gatesLetter/text.html