http://www.onmac.net/

Please, please please tell me you were saying this as a joke. I know it's early, I haven't had caffeine yet, and it's the start of a long day and possibly a long weekend, but I can very easily imagine people believing that. Please put my bootable install of XP on my MacBook Pro at ease, please put the install of XP on my girlfriend's Mac Mini at ease, and please put the Vista Ultimate 64bit install on the Mac Pro at the shop I frequent down the street at ease.

If you tell me where I can purchase 1/2-bit CPUs, I'll say it was a joke. Deal?

James

A half bit CPU? A HALF BIT processor? What in blazes is a HALF-BIT processor? Is that like it can process a On or a Zer but not a One or a Zero? You have no idea what you're talking about. Macs all run 64 bit, X86-64 chips. They run Windows. I can reboot into my Windows partition on my Macintosh laptop here and post again if you like.

I never actually worked at Microsoft. If I HAD worked there, though, my guess is that my posts could have been serious - that's the joke. My apologies for the posts, they were made in jest.

James

James, don't apologize. I was amused. And I'm not sure even now whether your respondents actually fell for it, or were just trolling back at you. Either way, it's funny as all get out.

_________________
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the world.
-- seen on the net

i fell for it... i read it before finishing coffee consumption...

zunzun: bastard

I still say that Windows won't run on a 1/2-bit CPU.

James

P.S. on 1/2-bit CPUs, all data are represented by unary - as opposed to binary - numbers. Instead of ones and zeros, or yes and no, it's all maybe. Unary 1/2 bit CPUs appear to run infinitely fast, since the output of every program - no matter how complicated - is always 0.5.

That sure sounds like windows compatibility to me.

Assuming, of course, the program halts. Of course, since the data store of a 1/2 bit computer has only one state, we can trivially determine if the program halts by running it until it reaches an earlier point in its program (this assumes its program is something actually useful; ie, it's not a von neumann architecture and program is not data). Therfore, this 1/2 bit computer is not turing complete, and therefore, I submit, not truly deserving of the name 'computer' at all.

Once again, I stand corrected. My hat is off to you, sir.

James

i had my coffee this morning before reading this thread...