Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mesa Looks To Take Use Of C11 Threading

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by dee. View Post
    Why care about XP users, the OS is EOL next year...
    I'm not sure of Chrome's exact usage statistics, but I wouldn't be surprised if Windows XP usage was still their #1 operating system.

    It's got to at least be #2.

    And I'm sure it's way, way ahead of the combined Linux and OSX market share.

    So would you also be in favor of making a change that is incompatible with Linux and OSX, and dropping support for those OS's? I mean, according to your logic, who cares about those users, right?

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
      I'm not sure of Chrome's exact usage statistics, but I wouldn't be surprised if Windows XP usage was still their #1 operating system.

      It's got to at least be #2.

      And I'm sure it's way, way ahead of the combined Linux and OSX market share.

      So would you also be in favor of making a change that is incompatible with Linux and OSX, and dropping support for those OS's? I mean, according to your logic, who cares about those users, right?
      #1 is Windows 7, without a doubt. WinXP is probably #2, yes, but in a year the trend is that it will drop below Vista, and far below Windows 8 as well.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
        #1 is Windows 7, without a doubt. WinXP is probably #2, yes, but in a year the trend is that it will drop below Vista, and far below Windows 8 as well.
        The numbers I've seen for overall OS share across all browsers have Win 7 at 45%, and XP at 39%. Vista is under 10%. It's never going to reach XP levels, those people will leave for 7/8 before the last XP users do.

        Anyway, I think IE is more popular on the newer windows than it is on the older ones. Probably because XP is still stuck with IE8, and incredibly insecure, and Chrome or Firefox are about the only options to use there.

        Even if XP falls to 5% usage next year (and it won't) and the only people using it are those with old machines who just don't want to upgrade, that's still more users than linux has.

        It's easy to just say that other people should change their operating system to a newer better supported one. Until it's you that would have to do the changing - then all of sudden it's the software company that has an obligation to support your very valid reasons for choosing the OS that you have.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
          I'm not sure of Chrome's exact usage statistics, but I wouldn't be surprised if Windows XP usage was still their #1 operating system.

          It's got to at least be #2.

          And I'm sure it's way, way ahead of the combined Linux and OSX market share.

          So would you also be in favor of making a change that is incompatible with Linux and OSX, and dropping support for those OS's? I mean, according to your logic, who cares about those users, right?
          Logic fail. Linux and OSX are not going EOL (that means "end of line") next year. It's pointless to focus on XP users since the OS will stop being supported next year.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
            The numbers I've seen for overall OS share across all browsers have Win 7 at 45%, and XP at 39%. Vista is under 10%. It's never going to reach XP levels, those people will leave for 7/8 before the last XP users do.

            Anyway, I think IE is more popular on the newer windows than it is on the older ones. Probably because XP is still stuck with IE8, and incredibly insecure, and Chrome or Firefox are about the only options to use there.

            Even if XP falls to 5% usage next year (and it won't) and the only people using it are those with old machines who just don't want to upgrade, that's still more users than linux has.

            It's easy to just say that other people should change their operating system to a newer better supported one. Until it's you that would have to do the changing - then all of sudden it's the software company that has an obligation to support your very valid reasons for choosing the OS that you have.
            Looks like numbers from last year. I'm seeing Win7 at 52%, WinXP at 24%, Vista at 6%. XP is declining rapidly, Win7 and Vista are declining slowly. But yes, next year there will still be more XP users than Linux users, that's true.

            And nope, I'm the one who is maintaining a bunch of PCs for one company, so it's me who is going to do all the changing. That said, one of the PCs there will stay on XP, since it's not connected to the net to begin with, and cannot support anything newer than that anyway. But the others will have to go, there is no reason for them to stay on an EOL OS.

            Comment


            • #21
              First, its like 99% of people doesnt know and gives zero faks about "hardware acceleration in web browsers" and stuff like that, so yeah, but from other side, everything is perfect without that sh1t, its not like this world is full of retards, who have celeron 100 mhz processors with geforce 9999gtx turbo, that someone must have stuff like that in browsers
              Second, windows xp is very old os, there was vista, win 7, win 8 released after it, so people with at least one eye must see, that ms is actively doing everything only for newest os. But windows still gets very long support compared to most linux distributions that i know, like ubuntu, which when released new version, then at the same time it becomes old, because everything in it is old, and with updater you can only gets a few security updates and stuff like that.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by startzz View Post
                Its not like this world is full of retards, who have celeron 100 mhz processors with geforce 9999gtx turbo
                I looked down at my Pentium D/HD7770 combination, and cringed.

                *Hopefully I can get hold of an i5 sometime this year, and have a balanced system again

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by elanthis View Post
                  It also unfortunately requires the multi-process architecture (good for PC, non-starter for consoles)
                  Require? I thought that Chrome could put everything in the same process if you changed its command line option.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by renox View Post
                    Require? I thought that Chrome could put everything in the same process if you changed its command line option.
                    Yep, it even starts doing it automatically if you open enough tabs. I think by default it limits it to 30 some processes max. Although it's probably fair to say Chrome doesn't optimize for such a scenario, so other browsers are probably better options if that's what you want to do.
                    Last edited by smitty3268; 03-19-2013, 02:36 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by dee. View Post
                      Logic fail. Linux and OSX are not going EOL (that means "end of line") next year. It's pointless to focus on XP users since the OS will stop being supported next year.
                      Logic fail. Why should Chrome care at all about whether the underlying operating system is supported or not. The only thing they (should) care about is whether users want to run their program there or not.

                      Also, EOL means "end of life", not line.
                      Last edited by smitty3268; 03-19-2013, 02:41 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Any news on this?

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X