Vista Innovation @ [H] Consumer

[nilepez]

While [H] hardware reviews are getting better and better, the software reviews are getting very subjective and weak. Sorry, to much personal belief. Find a benchmark and make sure that benchmark is considered valid by your viewers...then review the product.

I don't agree. You can't review the OS and not consider the UI, nor can you expect [H] to hire a bank of security experts to see which OS has more security holes.

The problem isn't that this subjective, it's that the writer clearly just had an ax to grind with MS and those who use the OS. Just like anything Ann Coulter writes, this article was a polemic, and was never intended to be persuasive. If this was a site that was driven by controversy, then it'd be fine, but that's not what [H]ardOCP is about.

I'd be just as dismayed if the writer had written that OSX is a total POS OS and only an idiot would buy one, though that article wouldn't have gotten nearly as much of a response, given the lac of Mac users here.

 

[nilepez]

Can't really blame him, how many in this thread actually agreed with the article as opposed to saying he was fulla crap (basically). He'd be walking into a lions den.

But he knew that when he wrote it. If he really believes what he said, and he really has facts to back up his polemic, then he should be more than willing to walk in and defend his position. His absence indicates he can't really back up his feelings (oh oh oh) with facts.

Surely there's someone better equipped to discuss macs willing to write for HardOCP. Macintosh users as well as PC users deserve better.

FYI to the post above, I never use windows key + r The windows key probably the most underutilized key. That said, if I had to use it in Vista, I could figure it out/look it up.

 

[Sabrewulf165]

FYI to the post above, I never use windows key + r The windows key probably the most underutilized key. That said, if I had to use it in Vista, I could figure it out/look it up.

Interesting. I would die without win+ shortcuts.

win+E = explorer window
win+R = run box
win+L = lock computer (or switch users if you have fast user switching on)
win+D = show desktop
win+pause/break = system properties
win+F = search window
win+M = minimize all (there is a subtle diff btw this and win+D)

I'm sure there are others, but these are the only ones I use often enough to remember. I agree that hiding the GUI "run" option by default is annoying, but considering the security emphasis in Vista (laugh if you want), it makes sense. Anything run from a run box automatically runs with elevated priveleges (a decision I personally disagree with since I habitually use the run box to launch all sorts of things from programs to URLs), so you wouldn't want it too easily accessible to someone who might not know what they're doing.

 

[nigerian_businessman]

I work as a sysadmin in education, at a University where a few of the faculty are of the same bent at the author of this post, and the whole "hate MS because they're MS and not Apple/Linux and not for any logical reason" has poisoned our campus, and from reading many other posts here it sounds like we're not in any way alone. I have no problem with people speaking out FOR Apple and *NIX - we run a mixed environment here, and they're good products. However, I DO have an issue with people who speak out AGAINST any of the OSes without having a valid, factual reason. It's no different to me than people hating a race or religion for no reason - it's bigotry, plain and simple.

He listed several logical reasons for not liking Vista. Comparing him to a bigot is pretty far fetched and really reduces the seriousness of bigotry and racism. I find it difficult to believe that you hold a position in any institution of higher learning with such irresponsible viewpoints.

 

[nigerian_businessman]

Anything run from a run box automatically runs with elevated priveleges (a decision I personally disagree with since I habitually use the run box to launch all sorts of things from programs to URLs), so you wouldn't want it too easily accessible to someone who might not know what they're doing.

Yeah, instead of making the operating system easier and more logical to use, we should just hide all the potentially difficult stuff from the stupid people. Wouldn't want them to actually learn something, it might cause them great pain and suffering.

 

[drlava]

we should just hide all the potentially difficult stuff from the stupid people. Wouldn't want them to actually learn something, it might cause them great pain and suffering.

Close to the Apple stance on networking and interfaces etc, no?

 

[cathodelysis]

This is a new account, but I've been a [H] reader from close to the start.

I am very disappointed by this "editorial" and by Kyle's defense of it. No one is suggesting that you gag your staff, but at the same time you don't have to post everyone's jackass opinions on the front page as an editorial. This item is the same biased, infactual BS you'll find on just about every Apple forum.

For the record, there isn't a single modern UI that is 100% original. Modern UI's all derive from other sources and build on each other. I really wish Apple users would let go of this. It's been like 20 years now.... same crap. The truth is that most UI "innovations" aren't from Apple or Microsoft, but free software/shareware authors or computer industry legends that most people have never and will never know about.

I find myself questioning HardOCP's integrity. It seems to me that this is just a cheap attempt to stir up controversy and page hits.

Personally, I think corporate and brand loyalty is assinine. Use what does the job best for you.

 

[mryerse]

Since you don't give any specific examples I can't comment, but I think you're underestimating the power of the Windows command prompt. While I won't pretend it's as powerful as a Unix terminal window, it's certainly not as useless as you seem to think.

Agreed. The Windows XP command prompt is a heavily used tool at my job, I'd even say a requirement. Yes, I prefer the Linux/Unix command environment, but when your company predominantly uses Windows desktops, you cope with it. The combination of the PSTOOLS suite and writing .Net C# apps for the command line are very valuable here.

 

[illrigger]

He listed several logical reasons for not liking Vista. Comparing him to a bigot is pretty far fetched and really reduces the seriousness of bigotry and racism. I find it difficult to believe that you hold a position in any institution of higher learning with such irresponsible viewpoints.

Go figure - I find if difficult to believe that some of our faculty do as well. You obviously haven't been on a liberal arts campus in the USA in a while if you think that highly of them.

We recently had several students walk out of their jobs as workstudy in IT because they belived that we were politically opposed to supporting Firefox on campus (mostly because several of our CS faculty are big opensource supporters and think we should be using nothing but). In truth, we were showing only 11% of hits on campus web sites were from FF, so we didn't see it as something to spend valuable training time to support. The only "political" aspect of the whole thing was the zealotry exhibited by the students in question and their support from the faculty.

I am still of the opinion that the 11% of people that want to use FF more than likely have the technical knowledge to answer their own support questions, but we now have had to spend more of our limited money and time to do training courses so that the one question a month that does get asked (by a staff member who is likely trying out FF because "their nephew who's really good with computers" said "it's what all the cool people use") can be answered within 2 hours rather that the normal "as time permits" (usually equating to - guess what? Within two hours!) that we grant to "unsupported" software. The ironic part? The people who quit were the ones who could have answered the questions without the training, so now we have nobody who knows how to left. Their protest made the situation worse all around - customers get worse support, we have less money for training to support products people DO use, and our remaining student staff get to waste more of their time learning stuff they'll end up forgetting and looking up on Google anyway.

My point? Sure we're not lynching people over this form of bigotry, or running pig races around their property to make them feel less comfortable about building a mosque there. But there's a lot of harm done by attitudes like this, in the big picture. We're a small school, with about 1000 graduates a year, of which maybe 20% are computer science majors, hoping to get jobs out there. That's 200 people a year who go out in the world with a poisoned attitude about a company that controls 90% of the computer market, and who will have a heck of a time finding work because all they know is how to write in Java and MySQL, and to bash anyone who is using MS products. That's NOT a "well rounded, liberal arts education", in my opinion. And that's just US. I know for a fact that there are dozens of schools, many of them much larger than us, who do the same thing. It's dangerous, and it's harmful to our youth and our economy. Don't underestimate the impact of it - it's a very real thing.

 

[illrigger]

Agreed. The Windows XP command prompt is a heavily used tool at my job, I'd even say a requirement. Yes, I prefer the Linux/Unix command environment, but when your company predominantly uses Windows desktops, you cope with it. The combination of the PSTOOLS suite and writing .Net C# apps for the command line are very valuable here.

Wait until you get to use PowerShell. The Windows shell under it becomes every bit as powerful as a UNIX shell environment. Even moreso, if you consider that every new MS product coming out will be required to have it's CLI fully support every function that the GUI can do, so you have a choice between two fully functional interfaces depending on your tastes and needs at the moment. In many cases the new shell can do it a LOT better than the GUI, as well. For example, to move all users whose names begin with "A" to another server in Exchange would take a few minutes at least on our clustered install with 6000+ user accounts; with PowerShell, you can simply query all names that start with "A", and pipe the results to a move command in a few seconds - just like *NIX

 

[Chris_B]

That guy really needs to come in here and try to defend his points as he's being totally shredded here. I was thinking he's maybe busy gaming but then i thought....nah.

 

[AaronP]

That guy really needs to come in here and try to defend his points as he's being totally shredded here. I was thinking he's maybe busy gaming but then i thought....nah.

Not on a mac he's not.

 

[Proxy]

After bravely deleting the 3rd post in this thread, the article author or editor are nowhere to be seen.

SCARED?? BOO!

QFT .. Why can't he at least try to defend his point?


I like how he mentions that Windows CAN run on a Mac, but you can't put OSX on a PC ... Windows can see hard ware that is proprietary and not meant for it, yet can still use it. Hmmm I wonder what OS is more flexible.

 

[magoo]

I was going to re-read the article, but I had to go out and buy some more barbed wire.

I actually prefer bailing wire, it's more flexible and doesnt require gloves.

 

[mryerse]

Wait until you get to use PowerShell. The Windows shell under it becomes every bit as powerful as a UNIX shell environment. Even moreso, if you consider that every new MS product coming out will be required to have it's CLI fully support every function that the GUI can do, so you have a choice between two fully functional interfaces depending on your tastes and needs at the moment. In many cases the new shell can do it a LOT better than the GUI, as well. For example, to move all users whose names begin with "A" to another server in Exchange would take a few minutes at least on our clustered install with 6000+ user accounts; with PowerShell, you can simply query all names that start with "A", and pipe the results to a move command in a few seconds - just like *NIX

Good point, I had forgot about PowerShell. Yes, I am excited to start using it. I remember reading an article about PowerShell a few months ago. It definately sounds interesting, and something I'll be using. Right now I opt for writing C# .Net code over VBScript or VB .Net, although I still end up writing VBScript due to other parts of the company still using it. VB/VBScript syntax drives me nuts. I like my semi-colons and curly brackets!

 

[Jason_Wall]

After bravely deleting the 3rd post in this thread, the article author or editor are nowhere to be seen.

SCARED?? BOO!

I have been intently reading the thread. As Kyle said, these views do not represent my own. I'm a hardcore enthusiast, with a duct tape and barbed wire system of my own. As the editor, it's my job to make sure that the paper is presented in the best form it can be. It's not my job to make Scott's arguments for him. I have invited him to come and comment on the article, since they're his opinions.

And I suppose I should make that clear - this is an editorial, aka, someone's opinion. This isn't a CPU or system evaluation, much less an evaluation of either OS. We're not saying that the information contained in the article is to be interpreted as fact and that you, the reader, should just take our word for it. Scott wrote this because he had an opinion, you have responded because you have your own opinions. If you think Scott is wrong, well, that's just the type of thing we foster here at [H].

As to the comments that Kyle has defended the article - I haven't seen it. What I have seen him defend is Scott's opportunity to write the article, which is why I approved the article being published to begin with. In fact, we give a lot of respect to Kyle that he would allow such a dissenting opinion to be published here - it says a lot about his integrity and openness to differing ideas.

 

[HopePoisoned]

Stupid opinions.

Windows is standardized, if you're not an idiot then you've probably made great use out of it. OSX is such a slight compared to Windows and it has just the same amount of flaws, it does some things easier that Windows does not, but Windows does things that OSX does not.

The point is it's only Apple trying to slash at Windows to try and get whatever market share it can by getting people to "switch". The point is both companies have just about the same amount of "innovation" and if you still think of Apple as this big, creative, innovative, fresh, new thing than you probably have no idea what you're talking about. It's image, same with Microsoft. Microsoft tries to give the productive people image, the business standard image, the enterprise solution commercials with men in suits and the "people ready business". Apple is this young guy in jeans and a t-shirt who wants to make photo albums all the time apparently - sleek, skinny, and everything "just works" (PS that's a load of BS nothing "just works" any better than anything would work on Windows). The point is no one is better, if you prefer an Apple workflow and you use it professionally or you're just a fan of it and don't mind paying for the hardware then fine, if you're a gamer or you're just very used to Windows or need Windows for its application support or you use it professionally then fine, if you love software and have a passion for development and customization and game less but still want excellent system performance then you may love Linux and that's excellent, but the point is slashing at the other OSes is just dumb. Windows has had a lot of problems and that's no secret, that's why Linux is still plugging along and getting better and better all the time. Everything is fixable.

I use Windows XP. That's what everyone around me uses. I've been in situations where I need to use OSX. I used it and I had no real problems. I've used Linux and have been happy with the customization and performance and I loved the open source nature.

I'm building soon and plan to put XP on first and transfer my old profile on there, then I plan to put Vista on alongside and play with that a while, make up my mind about it, then I plan to put some sort of Linux on alongside those (maybe Ubuntu, maybe SuSE, maybe Slackware, maybe FC, I don't know yet).

The point is everythings good and everythings bad. Do whatever you want. Everyone's got an opinion and it's probably a stupid one.

 

[Proxy]

I have been intently reading the thread. As Kyle said, these views do not represent my own. I'm a hardcore enthusiast, with a duct tape and barbed wire system of my own. As the editor, it's my job to make sure that the paper is presented in the best form it can be. It's not my job to make Scott's arguments for him. I have invited him to come and comment on the article, since they're his opinions.

And I suppose I should make that clear - this is an editorial, aka, someone's opinion. This isn't a CPU or system evaluation, much less an evaluation of either OS. We're not saying that the information contained in the article is to be interpreted as fact and that you, the reader, should just take our word for it. Scott wrote this because he had an opinion, you have responded because you have your own opinions. If you think Scott is wrong, well, that's just the type of thing we foster here at [H].

As to the comments that Kyle has defended the article - I haven't seen it. What I have seen him defend is Scott's opportunity to write the article, which is why I approved the article being published to begin with. In fact, we give a lot of respect to Kyle that he would allow such a dissenting opinion to be published here - it says a lot about his integrity and openness to differing ideas.

I think the main thing here is, that the article in question is not up to [H]ard standards. It seemed like some fan-boyish rant/attack about Macs. Now, by reading the thread, and posting myself a few times, it seems as if this is the way everyone is interpreting it (correct me if I'm wrong). Just go back and have another look at most of the posts here.

 

[Chris_B]

The duck tape and barb wire pc was the most retarded comment ever, unlike mac's pc's aren't something you toss away when you want to upgrade a main component. Macs are just standardised, you buy one and its the same as any other one with the exception of cpu speed ram amount and hard drive space. With pc's you have a large degree in versitility in how it looks, how upgradable it is etc.

Sorry but everything that comes out of Jobs gaping hole is not the word of god even though most mac zealots are sad enough to see it that way. Whatever happened to his speech " the era of competition betwen MS and apple is over". Funny how he could change his tune (kiss some major ass) when apple were practically bust and it took MS to buy $150,000.000 of their stock to keep them afloat. Then apple finally get back on their feet and the same old Steve Jobs returns (pompus asshole). Theyre also the only computer company i know off that are more well known for their mp3 player than their dinky litle pc's, not a bit of wonder they dropped the "computer" from their name.

Maybe they can actually go and create some kind of proper platform for games and machines that are upgradable instead of their big new imac innovation year in year out being "zomg this screen is microscopically thinner, who wants to blow me"?



Do the new intel macs actually have an form of upgradability or is it the same sad case of near everything being hardwired into the motherboard?

 

[psylencer2003]

I work as a graphic designer for a small local newspaper and at work I use Macs for all my design work. I can be very productive on my mac here, mostly because there isnt really anything fun that can distract me. I see many people writing in about how stable OSX is, and others writing in about how it crashes all the time. For my part, an os is only as stable as the applications that are running within it. If you have poorly coded software, it doesnt matter if your OS has a foundation of concrete or swamp mud, its still going to crumble.

Mac's (namely imac's) are an appliance. You purchase them basically as-is, with very few options. Much like a toaster. Apple makes great toasters. There are also lots of posts here and in other forums about how impressive the OSX gui is. I just dont see it. Lots of blah grey bars, and really, there isnt a whole lot of consistance throughout the OS.

Now when I am on my own time, and I want to be entertained, I use my PC. An MS based pc in the home has much more to do with entertainment than anything else IMHO. Gaming and HTPC applications seem to be the order of the day. How many hours have been burnt up around the world playing various versions of MS's solitare throughout the years?

From my point of view, if you want a no-nonesense computer that lets you get work done, buy a Mac. If you want a computer that is endlessly upgradable, and provides countless ways to bring merriment to your life, stick with PC's.

 

[Hurdler]

I have been intently reading the thread. As Kyle said, these views do not represent my own. I'm a hardcore enthusiast, with a duct tape and barbed wire system of my own. As the editor, it's my job to make sure that the paper is presented in the best form it can be. It's not my job to make Scott's arguments for him. I have invited him to come and comment on the article, since they're his opinions.

<snip>

Why is it that Jason and Kyle are posting in here more than Scott? Or does he just not have a username that's his real name?

 

[Obi_Kwiet]

I think all the Apple rip-offs are just external reasons to get users to get users to upgrade to what is hopefully a better OS. Only time will tell if it actually is better, but we can at least hope.

And really you have to remember, if MS didn't include the Apple rips offs, Mac fans would bash MS on the basis that it didn't have those features.

 

[Sabrewulf165]

if MS didn't include the Apple rips offs, Mac fans would bash MS on the basis that it didn't have those features.

Amen to that.

 

[metamorphosis]

You folk need to screen these articles more before posting - I mean, come on. Macs are more resistant to virii? Um, no, Macs are less attractive to write virii for (only a 3% worldwide marketshare). The guy's a fruitloop-

 

[metamorphosis]

I work as a graphic designer for a small local newspaper and at work I use Macs for all my design work. I can be very productive on my mac here, mostly because there isnt really anything fun that can distract me. I see many people writing in about how stable OSX is, and others writing in about how it crashes all the time. For my part, an os is only as stable as the applications that are running within it. If you have poorly coded software, it doesnt matter if your OS has a foundation of concrete or swamp mud, its still going to crumble.

Mac's (namely imac's) are an appliance. You purchase them basically as-is, with very few options. Much like a toaster. Apple makes great toasters. There are also lots of posts here and in other forums about how impressive the OSX gui is. I just dont see it. Lots of blah grey bars, and really, there isnt a whole lot of consistance throughout the OS.

Now when I am on my own time, and I want to be entertained, I use my PC. An MS based pc in the home has much more to do with entertainment than anything else IMHO. Gaming and HTPC applications seem to be the order of the day. How many hours have been burnt up around the world playing various versions of MS's solitare throughout the years?

From my point of view, if you want a no-nonesense computer that lets you get work done, buy a Mac. If you want a computer that is endlessly upgradable, and provides countless ways to bring merriment to your life, stick with PC's.

I'm the opposite - nothing I do could get done on a Mac, simply because the software isn't available for it- in freeware form or otherwise (and that's another issue - the lack of freeware opposed to Window's glut of it).
I think what you've got there is a case of associational computer thinking - this one's for work, this one's for home - etc. Same principle applies with people with work PC's and a playstation/Xbox for games -
WinXP is very stable. Vista will take a couple of years- just like Mac OS X did-
but by all means work with whatever feels right, in all cases- it's just that PC works for me, work and play-wise.
m@

 

[opus13]

In fact, we give a lot of respect to Kyle that he would allow such a dissenting opinion to be published here - it says a lot about his integrity and openness to differing ideas.

just to belabor the obvious: no one cares that it is dissenting. dissent is good if done for the right reasons. Unfortunately, there are far too many fallacies of logic that make the article crap.

 

[InorganicMatter]

Maybe they can actually go and create some kind of proper platform for games and machines that are upgradable instead of their big new imac innovation year in year out being "zomg this screen is microscopically thinner, who wants to blow me"?

Why do people think Apple will ever do this? The chance of them opening up to upgradability are about as slim as sharing (un)Fairplay technology, and for the same reason: it keeps their market solidly cornered. If Apple opened their systems for upgrades, they wouldn't be able to sell you a horrendously overpriced $2500 system every other years, with the main reason to buy it being gimmicks such as thinner screens (who cares?) or Core 2s (I thought the PowerPC was the greatest thing ever ). Being closed keeps Apple's market cornered, and they will never, ever, ever open it up, same as they will never allow OSX on anything but Apple hardware or (un)Fairplay on anything buy iPods.

 

[HopePoisoned]

Yeah don't get too knit-picky about what Jobs says (talking about the end of PC time thingy), business is a wild thing

It's just business as usual. In Microsoft's case: Hype, Hype, Hype, Hype, Hype, Promise, Promise, Hype, Promise, Hype, Promise that can't be kept, promise that can't be kept, promise that can't be kept, try and hype some more, break some promises, delay, break another promise...delay, not much hype left, package and sell!

In Apple's case: secret, secret, secret, secret, hype, hype, hype, SLASH SLASH SLASH SLASH AND BURN MICROSOFT hype hype hype hype SLASH SLASH release product, please note: scratches easily

If Apple says it's the end of the PC era....well...that's going to happen atleast a couple more times, right? And iPod killer? Failure. I'd rather own an 80g ipod than a zune POS, and yes I will sync it with Winamp because I'm very used to and into winamp and I have no reason to switch to itunes and give up my precious memory thank you very much

 

[markt435]

just to belabor the obvious: no one cares that it is dissenting. dissent is good if done for the right reasons. Unfortunately, there are far too many fallacies of logic that make the article crap.

QFT...that is the main reason a lot of us (actually it seems everyone who has posted in this thread) don't like it. Its not that we don't like dissent. But I seem to remember the way to present an argument, whether its opinion or not, you need to have facts backing up your arguments. Its just all out attack MS and hold Apple as the sacred of all, with nothing backing it up and what seems to be an attack on what this website stands for. I felt nothing that was trying to sway me away from upgrading which is prolly what the article was intended for. If anything, Scott was trying to make me feel stupid for owning a PC and paying (technically I didn't as I got it thru the PowerTogether deal) for Vista.

Where are you Scott? Time to come defend your position....

 

[HopePoisoned]

Yeah I just really read this article now and it is not a quality editorial - all oppinions aside no great points are made and all it is is a slash at microsoft

it's a fabrication of logic, if it were a decently written article slashing MS then whatever it's been done so much before but this sounds like an angry kid wrote it, could I just write an article complaining about how Asus plans to take over the world with it's okay stock performance, good overclocking but how overclocking is evil and the slight premium you pay is a corporate monster eating your money as a great satan on earth?

bashing is fine but atleast present it with some sort of professionalism, this article lacks the integrity that I've known [H] to have

does it have any sort of supporting facts or any sort of relevant-to-life explanation of why Vista is just a big copy cat?

 

[markt435]

Yeah don't get too knit-picky about what Jobs says (talking about the end of PC time thingy), business is a wild thing

It's just business as usual. In Microsoft's case: Hype, Hype, Hype, Hype, Hype, Promise, Promise, Hype, Promise, Hype, Promise that can't be kept, promise that can't be kept, promise that can't be kept, try and hype some more, break some promises, delay, break another promise...delay, not much hype left, package and sell!

In Apple's case: secret, secret, secret, secret, hype, hype, hype, SLASH SLASH SLASH SLASH AND BURN MICROSOFT hype hype hype hype SLASH SLASH release product, please note: scratches easily

If Apple says it's the end of the PC era....well...that's going to happen atleast a couple more times, right? And iPod killer? Failure. I'd rather own an 80g ipod than a zune POS, and yes I will sync it with Winamp because I'm very used to and into winamp and I have no reason to switch to itunes and give up my precious memory thank you very much

i'd rather own a cheaper mp3 player than either one of those. they're hyped and overpriced. although zune could be soooo much better if the wifi capabilities weren't held down by drm. gee...if you wanna see innovation look at the zune...lol . has wifi AND a FM tuner which the ipod doesn't have. how many more years is it gonna take to get a simple FM tuner in that ipod and not charge WAY too much for some stupid attachment? more froo froo hardware...

 

[LightningCrash]

The point is everythings good and everythings bad. Do whatever you want. Everyone's got an opinion and it's probably a stupid one.

Quote of the year!
I'm printing that out and posting it on my cubicle wall at work.

But really, you just about summed up what I thought. Except I would haved dropped several f-bombs in the process. That's just me, though.

 

[HopePoisoned]

ie:

Why is the Mac OS so secure? In short, when the core of your OS is open source (FreeBSD, for the most part), one can achieve a level of security and maturity unattainable to one written by cloistered, myopic bean counters, drunk and delusional from the stale, fermented laurels of past successes.

This is nothing short of an absolute fabrication. 1) Open Source has nothing to do at all with technical security, the reason there are more viruses for windows, BECAUSE PEOPLE USE WINDOWS, what's the share of OSX users? and open source has no relationship to the word maturity last time I checked
2)that second part, I don't even know how that makes sense or is relevant to any of this it just seems like a personal vendetta to me "cloistered, myopic bean counters"....what? that makes no sense we're talking computers here not women there is a very simple way to say everything, "drunk and delusional" - implications? this statement is extremely inappropriate and senseless "the stale, fermented laurels of past successes" that could be the business strategy, yes that would be a more acceptable rant - but we're talking code here, and someone needs to realize, "wait a minute...every company improves on past products by adding, revising, or replacing downfalls of prior generations" - and i'm not even sure that's what he was trying to say - his wording is horrible and unclear of intent it just seems like a blender of negetive descriptions thrown together. congratulations you have a thesaurus! now we have to work on expressing yourself with words that...well, fit together to form a logical thought!

 

[illrigger]

This is nothing short of an absolute fabrication. 1) Open Source has nothing to do at all with technical security, the reason there are more viruses for windows, BECAUSE PEOPLE USE WINDOWS, what's the share of OSX users?

Last official numbers showed that Apple was "expected" to rise to a whopping 3% share of the PC market. Bear in mind, not everyone who buys a Mac runs OSX (many businesses buy them and Run XP on them either dual booted or virtualized simply because they look cool in the office), so the share will be under that for actual OSX users. By comparison, Dell and HP split about 90% of the PC market evenly between them, with the remainder belonging to your small OEMs, Toshiba, Acer, and the rest. Apple may be number three, but it's a LOOOOOONG way from moving up a notch.

 

[Mr.MadMac]

And I suppose I should make that clear - this is an editorial, aka, someone's opinion. This isn't a CPU or system evaluation, much less an evaluation of either OS. We're not saying that the information contained in the article is to be interpreted as fact and that you, the reader, should just take our word for it. Scott wrote this because he had an opinion, you have responded because you have your own opinions. If you think Scott is wrong, well, that's just the type of thing we foster here at [H].

When I read the editorial, it was pretty clear that it was his opinion. What fired me up was the fact that, while well written, the article seemed to be based more in emotion and trying to say that Apple's stuff is the best (so Nahhh you stupid PC users). After I got done reading it, I felt like I was in the schoolyard in the 5th grade arguning over whos dad could kick whos dads ass.

I'll read an opinion and file it for further use later, but I won't take some emotional statment that barely scratches the surface of the truth very seriously.

That being said, how can you take Scott's editorial seriously? State your opinion, and back it up with concrete, unarguable, facts.

IMO, and I'm not going to research his points, it looks to me as if he just found information to back up his point of view, not even considering that there may be more to the story than he wanted to admit.

 

[jldavid]

Example: You assail Microsoft for copying Apple's widgets, yet you completely ignore, or simply do not know that Apple's widgets are essentially a clone of several solutions that have existed on other platforms for years.

Stardock released the first ever implementation of "widgets" with DesktopX on the Windows platform that was released in 2000, before the first version of OS X was even available.

In fact, Stardock had created essentially the same capability in 1996 in a product for OS/2 called Object Desktop Professional. I was using OS/2 Warp 4 at the time and was a happy owner of the product. (I still have the CD!) I'm more than interested to see how this type of capability works for the user in Vista.

 

[CaptRingold]

I'm still waiting for Scott to show up.

The other day I came in a bit early to a Canadian History class, sat down, got out my stuff, and started reading the news paper while I waited. Pretty quickly, though, the sound of uneducated prattle assaulted my ears, and I tuned in, and lo and behold, some girl behind me was essentially giving a recap of every form of liberal conspiracy theory ever hatched; Bush made a deal with the Saudi's to make 9-11 happen or was somehow complicit in terrorism due to family business connections, Bush this, Bush that, on and on. Things even educated Democrats wouldn't get caught saying (but of course a class full of college junior's doesnt necessarily mean educated these days). I was fine to let it go, but almost lost my cool when she suddenly time-warped back and started picking on Roosevelt, suggesting he was complicit in Pearl Harbor.

But I held my tongue, and kept myself planted in my news paper, because I knew who the audience in that particular class was; 90% blue-team. Being surrounded by a group of people nodding their heads at every comment, I knew it'd throw up a hornets nest to point out any of a hundred fallacies.

Discretion is the better part of valor in my book, in that situation. Live to fight another day. If I said something like that, I'd of had to account for my self, in a painful, arduous manner.

Just like Scott should be in here. He can't call the systems we all labor over lovingly collections of barbed wire and duct tape (not to mention all the other issues) and then not come to account for himself before his readers. He knew the audience of [H], surely he must've. Kicking out a rant and heading for the hills is cowardice, and that's what he seems to me to be until his arrives to try to clear some of this up.

It also doesn't help clear any notion of Mac elitism, either; what, we enthusiasts, covered in our own blood from tooling around with barbed wire all day, too unclean to bother confronting with the almighty Jobsian Truth?

C'mon, Scott; I know popular culture tries to get guy's wear man-purses, but show some spine and step up, either to defend your points or fall on your sword.

 

[jldavid]

That's what Bill Clinton would say if he saw this thread...

I am a long-time home computer user. I bought an Apple II+ for myself in 1980. I had a lot of fun with the thing. Even taught myself 6502 assembly language and wrote a few programs using it. I abandoned Apple for IBM (and Microsoft, sort-of) in 1986 and have never looked back. Why? It was simple. By 1986, in order to use the applications I needed to use (mainly financial) I had to use an IBM-compatible. I thought Microsoft DOS sucked (I was an experienced UNIX user at Bell Labs) and even bought DR DOS to run on my machine. I really was unimpressed with every Windows version until XP and ran OS/2 instead of Windows for many years since it could run my 16 bit windows applications and didn't totally crash if an application misbehaved. It was much more stable than Windows.

Since OS/2 "died" I've used machines running Windows 2000 and Windows XP. Why? Three reasons: Applications, applications and applications. I'm like most users. I really don't give a rat's behind what OS I'm running as long as it is stable and runs my applications. Many of the applications I use on a daily basis only run on Windows. It matters not if Mac OS X is "better" in some ways because it isn't even possible for my applications to run on the thing. Let's face it, Mac OS X should be better since it is basically a proprietary UNIX hack with a GUI on top.

There are things I dislike about Windows XP - mainly the fact that "winrot" is still a major problem which forces me to reboot at least once per week whether it needs it or not. However, even Macs are subject to "rot" even though the MacHeads don't want to admit it. I'm about to get a new machine from VM with Vista Home Premium on it (arriving Tuesday!) and I'm excited not about Aero, but about some of the "under the hood" improvements that seem to have been made. Early reviews suggest that Vista has eliminated (or at least slowed considerably) the "winrot" problem. I love the ReadyBoost feature (if it works) and have bought a flash drive just to use for it. The SuperFetch feature looks promising especially since I am a heavy multitasker. I like the new search features. If the self-healing feature works, it will be a big step forward. The only thing that is really annoying is that for some unknown reason, fax and scan did not make it into the Home Premium edition. However, I've been using 3rd party applications to do those functions in XP, so it shouldn't be a big deal.

My main problem with the original article wasn't that it was a typical Mac-user-bashes-Windows screed, but that the author completely missed the point. It does not matter whether Vista is better or worse than (or copied features from) Mac OS X. What matters is whether Vista is better than XP. Personally, I'm getting Vista on any new machines and leaving XP on all the old ones. Given that all my old machines have "only" 512 MB of RAM I think that is a prudent path (ReadyBoost notwithstanding). There's plenty of room in this world for Windows users, Mac users and Linux users. These are operating systems, not religions. Find whatever works for however you use your system and be happy.

 

[jldavid]

I work as a graphic designer for a small local newspaper and at work I use Macs for all my design work. I can be very productive on my mac here, mostly because there isnt really anything fun that can distract me. I see many people writing in about how stable OSX is, and others writing in about how it crashes all the time. For my part, an os is only as stable as the applications that are running within it. If you have poorly coded software, it doesnt matter if your OS has a foundation of concrete or swamp mud, its still going to crumble.

Sorry, but this is false. A well-designed OS runs each app in its own protected "sandbox." OS/2 was especially good at this. A misbehaving Win 3.1 app that would freeze Windows could be easily killed in OS/2 without having to reboot. UNIX is also excellent for this. I used to use Sun workstations at work running Solaris and I never had to reboot my workstation because of a badly written application (often written by me ). In the worst case, I could go to another workstation, log into my workstation and kill the offending process.

When it comes to poorly coded software, how the OS is designed can make a big difference.

 

[MrGuvernment]

Now that the gauntlet has been thrown down, let me tell you how Microsoft has, once again, stood on the shoulders of others, and ripped off Apple for the umpteenth time. I&#8217;m not bitter, I&#8217;m just right.

And apple has never copied other ideas? get your head out of your ass please.

Everything else i would want to say has been said.