Strictly speaking, yes. But if you include unlicensed games, special editions, limited runs, Famicom, NTSC and PAL variations, technician test carts, and known hacks, then you approach the 4.7GB of a DVD.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Developer Gets Apple Watch to Run Windows 95
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So you are saying you have a legit version of vista, and just after installing it, you found malware on your machine. Not buying it.
Enjoy your Mac.
The aluminum version will never see a sapphire screen. You mentioned you did not like the weight of the stainless steel, in which case I love the heft with mine. The sapphire screen is really worth the purchase, as my screen has zero scratches, even after all it's been through. Perhaps Apple might introduce additional casings, such as an titanium model, which is light and durable, with a sapphire screen.
This isn't about a 2016 OS, it's about Windows 95. Even Microsoft acknowledges that Windows 95 is an easy target for viruses, so much so in fact that they recommend it not be used for real-world tasks. Nothing about the post to which you replied suggests that the poster associates modern versions of Windows with viruses.
Someone went to the effort of putting a full OS on a watch, which is impressive, how is carrying on about viruses relevant? Viruses / 2016 is irrelevant .
"Within a few minutes" might be an exaggeration, but I can buy it. There are malicious bots, servers, and port scanners out there just waiting to find a unprotected computer to compromise. Try installing a virtualized copy of Vista or earlier, I think you might be surprised how quickly it gets infected with malware.
The Apple Watch's S1 has a 520MHz 32-bit CPU with 32KB L1 cache, 256KB L2 cache, 512MB RAM, a PowerVR SGX543 GPU (same GPU as the iPhone 4s or PS Vita with one core instead of two/four and a lower clock rate) with shared VRAM, and needs to push enough pixels to fill a 312×390 screen on the larger model.
The NES has a 1.8MHz 8-bit CPU with 2KB RAM and maybe a 1KB more in a cartridge and a 2D GPU with an effective 284 bytes of L1 cache and 2KB VRAM, which needs to push 256x240 pixels of screen, plus some possible coprocessors in cartridges.
The SNES has a 3.6MHz 16-bit CPU, 128KB RAM, 64K sound RAM, possibly some extra RAM in the cartridge, a 2D 3.6MHz 16-bit GPU, up to 32MB of rapidly accessible ROM data, and with outboard chips maybe a 21MHz 16-bit 3D GPU or a 10MHz CPU.
And that takes us through 1990. Even the PS1 only has a 34MHz 32-bit CPU, 2MB RAM, and a 3D GPU with 1MB VRAM capable of rendering way less polygons than the PowerVR SGX543.
Overhead of WatchOS itself (a very stripped down version of UNIX), or background tasks (networking, timekeeping, health input tracking, etc), or an inefficient method of drawing graphics, or inefficient game-specific APIs available to native apps, or any number of other reasons specific to software may and probably would prevent the S1 from actually running an emulated or native version of an NES or SNES game at full performance.
But in terms of the hardware itself--which is what I was talking about, since this is a purely hypothetical "look what computing can do now"--the Apple Watch is ridiculously more powerful than any game system available through the 16-bit and even the PS1/N64 era, so if your goal was to run every game made through 1990 on the hardware and you had the resources to program the thing at a low level, you most certainly could.
For that matter, if you were to be able to code a native version of Windows 95 for it (rather than one running in software emulation), to replace WatchOS, I'm quite sure you could get it to run as well as it did on a computer from 1995. Actually, since Windows NT4 could run on multiple CPU architectures including RISC ones, it'd be a better target for a port in this hypothetical world where Microsoft wanted to dust off an ancient OS and port it to ARM.
Maybe. But this video depicts how powerful of a Gen 1 Watch this truly is. Your talking a full PC in the palm of your hand. It some respects, the Apple Watch is under-rated. Processor and Watch OS updates can easily remedy lag issues in the future.
Not being a Watch Developer...I wonder if this cute hack will be possible after the next software update? Interesting and clever to say the least.
Nope. Doesn't need to. Over-rated.
[doublepost=1462059808][/doublepost]
I would not call 316L stainless steel luxury. More so an upgrade or refined piece of high polished stainless steel.
But, it is more luxurious and higher quality than light weight aluminum. Most luxury watches do not use aluminum materials.
Last edited:
Mate, running a PC, unprotected is daft, and not realistic, given Windows defender is excellent and free, and you don't even notice it running.
Look does not matter, when it comes to these matters, lot of people don't use common sense and are adamant that Windows is still awful and is 100% guaranteed a virus in 2016, ignorance is bliss.