The surface laptops have ended up being good laptops and mediocre/bad tablets IMO. While technically the same on the surface, there is something about the dedicated UX of an iPad that makes it a completely different experience in reality.
If you replace an iPad you bought for $350 a year ago with a $600 surface, it will be a markedly worse experience as a tablet. Nothing has yet combined the two without comprimise - you either get a device which is a bad laptop and a good tablet, or a bad tablet and a good laptop.
Considering you can pick up both a new Macbook Neo AND an iPad from Apple for $200 less than the price of the cheapest (non refurbished) Microsoft Surface you can get from Microsoft,
I'm not fully sure the 'apple tax' still exists when comparing to a surface.
I'm sure there are much cheaper places you can get a surface - but comparing MSRP to MSRP for the new models is a much plainer comparison, particularly as it's often difficult to see if you are looking at an older model with Windows PCs.
Indeed, except for GW-BASIC and MS-DOS, for me it was Borland all the way.
Turbo BASIC, Turbo Pascal, Turbo C++ for MS-DOS and Windows 3.x, Turbo Vision and OWL.
Got into VC+ on version 5, and MFC always felt so lame compared with Borland offerings.
To this day, they don't have anything that can match C++ Builder RAD capabilities, and even with the historic background, it has taken a few years for .NET to get the low level coding and AOT story straight, Delphi like.
We should give Go, C++ and Rust folks a few copies of Turbo Pascal 7 for MS-DOS, and Delphi current.
The original version came with Turbo Pascal 6, the C++ port came later.
So this is a modern port of the port. :)
Borland did the same with other frameworks OWL came first in Turbo Pascal for Windows 1.5, and many of C++ Builder tools are actually written in Delphi.
Anyway, Turbo Pascal 5.5 adoption of Object Pascal, followed by Turbo Vision on version 6, was my introduction to OOP, and it I was lucky have gone that path.
Got to learn OOP, and all the goodies that Turbo Vision offered as a framework in an environment like MS-DOS.
Amusingly, Free Vision (the Free Pascal version of Turbo Vision) is based on a manual translation of the C++ version because that was released on public domain at some point and someone ported it back from C++ to Object/Free Pascal.
Interesting. If I remember correctly the source code was available (need to check my old disks), however most likely the licence would forbid that anyway.
IIRC Borland released the C++ version specifically as PD later on their FTP server, it isn't based on the version from Turbo C++ physical releases. The history is (very briefly) mentioned in the Free Vision wiki page at the FPC wiki[0] (note that the wiki needs cleanup, e.g. it mentions 64bit clean support as a todo item but FV has been 64bit clean for a very long time now). It also mentions that somewhere between the C++ version and the Pascal conversion, TV/FV was converted to use graphics instead of text mode and it was ported back to text mode -- considering all the conversions, i'm surprised the API remained largely the same so that even now the best way to learn Free Vision is to read Turbo Vision docs/tutorials/books :-P.
Yeah, besides the current offerings from VCL and FireMonkey, only Qt compares to it in terms of existing C++ frameworks.
History rumor hill goes that originally MFC was just as high level, the origin of Afx prefix, however internal teams were opposed to it and hence how MFC became a very thin layer over Win32.
History repeated itself with C++/CX, finally Microsoft had something comparable to C++ Builder, and internal teams weren't happy until they sabotaged the whole effort with C++/WinRT. Now outside Windows team no one cares.
The development experience with OWL, on Windows 3.1 was great, I never bothered with raw Win16 or Win32 other that learning the foundations, or adding support for missing capabilities, at the TP, Delphi, C++ frameworks.
Welcome to Amiga games, in many cases the floppy would contain the boot loader that would directly jump into the game.
At least on the Amiga 500 you would not go through the trouble to start Workbench, only to load the game, unless you were a lucky owner of an external hard drive.
Your comment said "welcome to Amiga games", as if it were unique to Amiga. The context of the thread is PC, where they had their own booter/bare-metal games.
So you don't have to go to "Amiga games world", you're already in the proper world.
I recall many IBM-PC games are bootable games. I inserted a floppy , resets the computer, and then it directly boots into the game. The disk must contain a boot sector and drivers and such.
As well, although I think in the Amiga this was more common, to buy games that were already prepared like this.
At least on my circle for doing the same with PC games, we built the floppies ourselves, then again, it could be a side effect that you could hardly buy any legal games in Portugal during those days, even regular shops would sell pirated games as originals.
This should be seen in another perspective, we will eventually reach the point where LLMs can vomit the formal specification in whatever language we feel like.
The revenge of Rational Unified Process, Enterprise Architect and many other tools.
reply