Yes... because they require faster hardware.Bobdude161 said:
Except that Windows XP ran painfully slow on my 2003 PC - and still runs pretty slow on some of my friends newer PCs.clevin said:count years, not "how many generation of systems", apple isn't doing better than MS, who update their system almost every 5 years.
AvSRoCkCO1067 said:Except that Windows XP ran painfully slow on my 2003 PC - and still runs pretty slow on some of my friends newer PCs.
Couple that with XP's inability to handle the 20+ open apps that my iBook G4 could handle, and I'd say Apple does a decent job supporting and reasonably running new OSes on older hardware.
Like MicroLate™ doesn't? Just look at the Vista requirements!Bobdude161 said:
All I can say is, you are in for a big incompatible surprise when 10.6 comes out.Bobdude161 said:
Puma, Cheeta, Jaguar, Panther, Tiger, Leopard... I'd like Cougar next, but here's what we don't have - some I removed cause they're already an OS name.Mr. Dee said:All I can say is, you are in for a big incompatible surprise when 10.6 comes out.
Well, take into account that there won't necessarily be a 10.7, they could use Lynx as the link to the next generation of Mac OS operating systems starting with 11.0.josh.thomas said:I like Lynx and Cougar.