or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Mossberg: Windows 7 narrows the gap with Apple's Mac OS X
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mossberg: Windows 7 narrows the gap with Apple's Mac OS X - Page 5

post #161 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by yuusharo View Post

First of all, *most* people will get upgraded to Windows 7 when they buy a new PC, so they'll have to reinstall their applications anyway. And what about if you want to reformat your computer from scratch? Don't you have to reinstall all your applications as well?

These factors are true of *ANY* PC, whether its Windows or Mac. The amount of people who upgrade from a disk is a very minimal amount of Windows users, around 1%, and of those, only XP users will have to reinstall - Vista users can do an in-place upgrade even if its not recommended.

So its a moot argument.

Your response has little to no truth in it.

I'm an avid PC user (as most in this room know and hate). If you are saying that 99% of Windows 7 users are going to get it with a new computer purchase you need to put down the pipe.

I've got 2 perfectly good PC's and have been testing Windows 7 RC in virtual mode on my laptop (Dell XPS). It has worked out great for me and I will upgrade both my desktop computer and notebook when 7 ships and has been used in the real world for a good month.

(As Snow Leapord Users should have done as well).

All of my PC friends are going to take the same path and none of us are currently in the market for a new PC (Netbook Yes) not a PC or notebook.

Yes, I think Win 7 is great but will only upgrade after it has been in the mainstream for a while and insure that I haven't overlooked anything in my testing.

Businesses will not make all new purchases in this economy, those that have been testing it (as the company I work for) will likely take the same path.

As for XP not being able to upgrade programs to Win 7. If you are running XP (as my desktop home computer is) a clean install is the smartest path to take. I may even do it for my laptop but I'll base that on user experience from reviews I read.
post #162 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon T View Post

"After months of testing Vista on multiple computers, new and old, I believe it is the best version of Windows that Microsoft has produced."

That was precisely what Walt Mossberg wrote in the WSJ on Jan 18th 2007.

If this is true this embarrassing for him. Personally I don't rate him much at all and find his video reviews mega-boring and he style quite pompous.

That said I don't think Vista 7 is that bad. But, it's no OS X.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #163 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by xwiredtva View Post

When all you've had to eat for the last 4 years were plain crackers, I stick a cheeseburger in front of you it's gonna be the best thing in the world, right? But what about the table next to you that's been dining on Lobster and Fillet for the last 10 years? They just got a new recipe, nothing drastic.

That doesn't make the cheeseburger any less delicious
Video editor, tech enthusiast, developer.

http://www.yuusharo.com
http://www.studioyuu.com
Reply
Video editor, tech enthusiast, developer.

http://www.yuusharo.com
http://www.studioyuu.com
Reply
post #164 of 465
Buahahaha... Omg! Has this user ever used the two of them and run into problems? Anything installed from the factory works well for a while. However, when Windows takes a dump, have fun! What a mess that childishly simplistic database they call a "registry" is... With Windows, you just have to reinstall it, spending countless hours reinstalling all your drivers and software. What a nightmare.
post #165 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by yuusharo View Post

You, however, failed to mention that "Intel" Macs only reach back three years, around the same time as Vista was released. Any computer that can run Vista will run Windows 7 just as beautifully, if not better. You *also* failed to mention that Windows 7 runs well on EXISTING Windows XP hardware. It runs fine on a 6-year-old Dell Dimension 2400, and with a mere $30 upgrade to the graphics processor, it has access to the entire Aero interface, along with all the preview and taskbar enhancements. ...

I think this is a bit misleading.

Windows 7 is precisely "Vista" underneath in that it is internally 6.1 and not 7.0 (Vista is 6.0). The underpinnings are the same as vista, but more importantly, the hardware requirement is the same as Vista.

It would be fair to say that Windows 7 runs a smidge faster on the same hardware, but to make out like it's different from Vista in that it may not require "modern" hardware is not accurate. Machines that can run XP, but were not "beefy" enough to upgrade to Vista are in the same situation with Windows 7 as they were with the Vista upgrade. The people that passed on Vista because their computer wasn't powerful enough are still going to have to buy a new computer to run Windows 7 (if they haven't already upgraded in the interim), and that's a fact.

Additionally, since you can't actually upgrade from Windows XP, these people would have to do an "erase and install" to even be able to try it out on the old Windows XP machine. Most users of XP will not be upgrading without changing their machines, and most will likely not even be able to do so. There is also the fact that both Vista and Windows 7 are "different" UI's and more Mac-like than any windows has ever been before them. It's as big a change for the average XP user as switching to Mac would be and lots of the older folks just won't bother.

The only people that will have the "pop in the disk and click upgrade" experience that Snow Leopard gave to Mac users, are the current Vista users who are pretty much already sold on Windows anyway. For everyone else an upgrade will be a rather gruelling experience. Even if you recently bought a Vista capable PC and smartly had it downgraded to XP, you now have to erase the whole thing, change to Windows 7, and re-install all your programs.

It's worth mentioning that the vast majority of computer users in general (on all platforms), use the OS that came with their computer until the day they get a new one. Unlike the readers of this forum, most don't even do point upgrades or patches. Most users will be experiencing Windows 7 on the next brand new machine that they buy sometime next year.
post #166 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post

I suggest you downgrade to Windows XP. Apparently Win7 isn't your cup of tea.

Last time I used Mac OS X and installed something I downloaded, it asked me if I wanted to run it. That's the same thing here according to what you said.

Agreed. Thought the same thing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by camroidv27

The only reason SL was the "must-have" upgrade was because it was ONLY 30 bucks, so cheap, why not? If it were 150 like normal, it may not have been the "must have" but a "nice to have". Windows 7 isn't required either.

Snow Leopard is not a must have. And it's normally 129.

Windows 7, if you are on Vista, is not a must have as much as a must need. Need for speed.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #167 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by ediedi View Post


Whenever someone says "7 is a big change from Vista; I hated Vista but I love 7" I call bullshit. They are not that different. The big difference was between Vista and XP.
By the way, I think Vista was OK once you spent time setting it up a bit, and getting rid if the 'cancel or allow' madness.

So, 7 closer to OSX than Vista? only in the hype-machine.

If you would take the time to READ the full WSJ you would see the NUMEROUS reasons why it is different- a MAJOR difference. People only believe what they want to on here. JEESH!

Please READ it:
http://ptech.allthingsd.com/20091007...lp-you-forget/
post #168 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by doyourownthing View Post

nice to read reviews from people which are probably in microsoft's payroll

also how is this apple news?

people that compare snow leopard to windows 7 are angry pc users which have never owned / operated a mac and have no idea of what they're talking about, and were paid big amounts of money to write good reviews, like this mossberg character

Moss is definitely not in Microsoft's camp; very pro Apple. However, if I were working for Microsoft, I would make every effort to win him over. Let's face it, Windows 7 sounds like it's not just the 7th version, it's the number 7, itself: Microsoft is keeping it's fingers crossed: "Hey, maybe we'll get lucky this time".

When Windows 7 is released, IF it turns out to be a more user-friendly, stable, and efficient operating system, that's a good thing for all us. Serious competition will keep Apple on it's toes. However, I have no intention of ever switching back to Microsoft because of their poor customer service and business ethic. The OS is just a part of why I chose to purchase an Apple product; I have a 20" iMac 2009. Quality, design, customer service/support, software, security, ease of use, and peace of mind are among the other reasons that influenced my buying decision. No, Apple isn't perfect, but they are still better in more areas than just the OS alone. And yes, you pay a premium price for it, but "Once you go Mac, you never go back". Unless, of course, my ultimate nightmare comes true: The Microtosh by AppleSoft
http://forums.appleinsider.com/image...ies/1oyvey.gif
post #169 of 465
Can't both operating systems just get along? They both work well for the crowds. It's like Ford vs. Chevy.
post #170 of 465
I hate to stomp all over your moment of "genius", but OS X's Dock existed in NeXTSTEP long before Microsoft ever started working on Windows 95. NeXTSTEP also predates Linux altogether, even the first kernel release. That said, I don't think we need to hear any more "facts" that you feel the need to pull from your posterior. Thank you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Who stole the task bar from Microsoft and named it a DOCK?
Embrace your inner geek.
Reply
Embrace your inner geek.
Reply
post #171 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by NonVendorFan View Post

As for XP not being able to upgrade programs to Win 7. If you are running XP (as my desktop home computer is) a clean install is the smartest path to take. I may even do it for my laptop but I'll base that on user experience from reviews I read.

A clean install is best to do even if you own Vista. Its much less about whether or not you have to reinstall software and more about having the cruft left behind from Vista coming into your new Windows 7 install.

Reinstalling can be trivial for a lot of people who only use the computer for web browsing and email. It can also be trivial for businesses, who can utilize deployment tools, network installation and disk images to get their systems up and running quickly.
Video editor, tech enthusiast, developer.

http://www.yuusharo.com
http://www.studioyuu.com
Reply
Video editor, tech enthusiast, developer.

http://www.yuusharo.com
http://www.studioyuu.com
Reply
post #172 of 465
geez, nobody seems to get it. Mac and Win are NOT in competition with each other. Have not been in 20+ years. MS were and still are a language/operating system vendor, Apple is a widget provider. MS delivered what the business space needed, SOFTWARE (along with IBM's rep). Apple tried and failed then went the route of a "creative" persons computer for which I'm thankful.

Bill Gates = Businessman extraordinare
Steve Jobs = Dreamer/Visionary

Is it any wonder Bill&Co took over the world? Sad fact is not everyone can be an artist thus dooming apple to a niche player on the desktop. Still I'm glad to be in that 1% vs. the other 99. IF apple were to get their enterprise act together (cause it does not work) then maybe, but I'm not holding my breath.

just to add a little cred, I'm an SE of 25+ years and is platform agnostic for my profession (mac, win, unix) I've worked with CPM and sniffed X-25 packets.

been testing win 7 since february and as far as it goes, pretty darn good (for windows).
post #173 of 465
Windows 7 hasn't been out long enough to know how well it holds up over time. For instance, will users feel compelled to reinstall every 6-12 months as the garbage collects?
post #174 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by ls1z28chris View Post

My school has Windows 7 Professional available right now for students under their student software program. I downloaded and installed the x64 version with VMWare Fusion 2 on my MacBook Pro. Honestly, I haven't had much time to play with the thing, but I don't find it very different than Vista. The start bar is redesigned, and they managed not to rename and re-hide administrative tools like network and display configuration (which is what pissed me off the most about the move from XP to Vista). But I just don't see how anyone can conclude that Windows 7 is a vast improvement over Vista, not to mention one that puts it almost shoulder to shoulder with OS X.

I put some screenshots up on my Flickr page. Those annoying warnings are still there. I got freaking stopped and asked if I was sure I wanted to trust Adobe when installing flash. I downloaded Packet Tracer from Cisco's website, and when I tried to install the program Windows 7, for some reason, won't recognized the .exe file as valid. If I can't run Packet Tracer, Windows 7 is freaking worthless. The only reason why I'm keeping it on my MacBook Pro is so that if someone I know calls me with an issue, I can research it on my end without having to drive to their house.

Take a look at your exe file size genius.. you have a 0 KB file and you want windows to recognize it properly :-)
post #175 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

I know this is the "common wisdom" (that Mossberg is pro-Apple), but I personally have never seen evidence of it.

I know most won't agree with me on this but IMO it's just not fair to refer to these guys as biased when they are among the few that are going out of their way not to be.

Ok fine then - if they are not biased, then Microsoft just hit a grand slam and you must personally kiss Steve Ballmer's @$$!
post #176 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelab View Post

In this case it's not a valid win32 application because it's a file which has 0 bytes. You can rename any file you like to have a ".exe" extension and that won't make it a valid Win32 application!

The problem in this case is that Firefox is still downloading your file. When Firefox is downloading a file and hasn't finished it creates a place-holder file of 0 bytes with the file name that will eventually be the downloaded file and creates a second file called <filename>.part where to store the partially downloaded file, until it's finished, at which point the .part file is copied to the real file name and the .part file is erased.

Your "problem" here has nothing to do with Windows7 and everything to do with how Firefox works and your failure to understand this.

That was well played. Zing!
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #177 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foo2 View Post

Windows 7 hasn't been out long enough to know how well it holds up over time. For instance, will users feel compelled to reinstall every 6-12 months as the garbage collects?

Like why is my Safari not a snappy now as when I installed SL?
post #178 of 465
This is a fascinating thread... and I, for one, am glad that (by the looks of it) Windows users might be getting something better, after years of pain.

My question is this. I'm a Mac user (doing a lot of multimedia development), and my wife is a Windows user (doing tons of data processing for medical research). In both cases, we find ourselves running up against the 32-bit RAM ceiling (which I believe is 4Gb per application space). When we're both crunching big numbers, both current O/S's (XP and SL) have real problems from a RAM allocation standpoint.

I know that SL is now 64-bit ready, but I'm still waiting for the app devs to catch up to the ridiculous capabilities of the MacPro, including its big RAM capacity. Same for her, over in Windows land.

So the question is -- which O/S is best positioned (with its dev community) to get over this 64-bit hump once and for all, and release all of the power our hardware has, but can't use?

... or am I missing something obvious?
post #179 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

The only people that will have the "pop in the disk and click upgrade" experience that Snow Leopard gave to Mac users, are the current Vista users who are pretty much already sold on Windows anyway. For everyone else an upgrade will be a rather gruelling experience. Even if you recently bought a Vista capable PC and smartly had it downgraded to XP, you now have to erase the whole thing, change to Windows 7, and re-install all your programs.

It's worth mentioning that the vast majority of computer users in general (on all platforms), use the OS that came with their computer until the day they get a new one. Unlike the readers of this forum, most don't even do point upgrades or patches. Most users will be experiencing Windows 7 on the next brand new machine that they buy sometime next year.

...that's exactly what I said. Most people are going to get Windows 7 when they buy a new PC, not by upgrading their existing one. That means, by definition, you're reinstalling all your applications. While the experience may not be as seamless as it should be, the end-result is a Windows machine that will run quite wonderfully for a long time.

Besides, I find its best to reformat the drive every so often if only to remove applications you don't need. Similar to a practice I do on the Mac, I'll reinstall the entire OS from scratch and only begin installing applications as I need them. You'd be amazed to find out how many apps one tends to use once or twice and never again.
Video editor, tech enthusiast, developer.

http://www.yuusharo.com
http://www.studioyuu.com
Reply
Video editor, tech enthusiast, developer.

http://www.yuusharo.com
http://www.studioyuu.com
Reply
post #180 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by UbiquitousGeek View Post

I hate to stomp all over your moment of "genius", but OS X's Dock existed in NeXTSTEP long before Microsoft ever started working on Windows 95. NeXTSTEP also predates Linux altogether, even the first kernel release. That said, I don't think we need to hear any more "facts" that you feel the need to pull from your posterior. Thank you.

Who cares where it originated - it who utilzed it first and for how long. Besides, Mossberg states in the review today, if you would READ it,

Quote:
In Windows 7, the familiar taskbar has been reinvented and made taller. Instead of mainly being a place where icons of open windows temporarily appear, it now is a place where you can permanently “pin” the icons of frequently used programs anywhere along its length, and in any arrangement you choose. This is a concept borrowed from Apple’s similar feature, the Dock. But Windows 7 takes the concept further.
post #181 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by UbiquitousGeek View Post

I hate to stomp all over your moment of "genius", but OS X's Dock existed in NeXTSTEP long before Microsoft ever started working on Windows 95. NeXTSTEP also predates Linux altogether, even the first kernel release. That said, I don't think we need to hear any more "facts" that you feel the need to pull from your posterior. Thank you.

How many years did Microsooft have a taskbar before Apple had its dock?
(you can pull your foot out of your posterior if you dare too)
post #182 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhb View Post

This is a fascinating thread... and I, for one, am glad that (by the looks of it) Windows users might be getting something better, after years of pain.

My question is this. I'm a Mac user (doing a lot of multimedia development), and my wife is a Windows user (doing tons of data processing for medical research). In both cases, we find ourselves running up against the 32-bit RAM ceiling (which I believe is 4Gb per application space). When we're both crunching big numbers, both current O/S's (XP and SL) have real problems from a RAM allocation standpoint.

I know that SL is now 64-bit ready, but I'm still waiting for the app devs to catch up to the ridiculous capabilities of the MacPro, including its big RAM capacity. Same for her, over in Windows land.

So the question is -- which O/S is best positioned (with its dev community) to get over this 64-bit hump once and for all, and release all of the power our hardware has, but can't use?

... or am I missing something obvious?

It all depends on which platform developers decide to take seriously regarding 64-bit. I would say Macs might be the way to go, only because they've been shipping 64-bit compatible operating systems for a few years now, while Microsoft's 64-bit versions only started selling regularly since last year.

Keep in mind that there are RAM limitations in the various versions of Windows. For example, Home Premium might only allow up to 16 or 32 gigs of ram, while Professional and upwards will support the theoretical 16tb. I don't know if my numbers are accurate, so please research that while making future decisions.
Video editor, tech enthusiast, developer.

http://www.yuusharo.com
http://www.studioyuu.com
Reply
Video editor, tech enthusiast, developer.

http://www.yuusharo.com
http://www.studioyuu.com
Reply
post #183 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foo2 View Post

Windows 7 hasn't been out long enough to know how well it holds up over time. For instance, will users feel compelled to reinstall every 6-12 months as the garbage collects?

Some people have been using Windows 7 since January of this year. Yes, they would have had to upgrade or reinstall by now because of the beta expiration, but the RC and RTM have many enhancements made to them that make them superior to the beta, and the beta was already performing like a finished product.

Time will tell, for sure, but there's no doubt in my mind that you'll be better off 6-12 months from now with Windows 7 than Vista or XP.
Video editor, tech enthusiast, developer.

http://www.yuusharo.com
http://www.studioyuu.com
Reply
Video editor, tech enthusiast, developer.

http://www.yuusharo.com
http://www.studioyuu.com
Reply
post #184 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Who cares where it originated - it who utilzed it first and for how long. Besides, Mossberg states in the review today, if you would READ it,

I'm sorry, did I miss something? Did you not state that OS X's Dock was taken from Windows? I believe you did, and I corrected you. Jobs & Co. have been using the Dock far longer than anyone else.

As for the taskbar in Windows 7, it now provides the same funtionality as the Dock, only instead of Expose, it shows previews as thumbnails on the taskbar.
Embrace your inner geek.
Reply
Embrace your inner geek.
Reply
post #185 of 465
Yuusharo:

I acknowledge the MSRP for Windows 7 Ultimate is incorrectly stated in the article, and confirm the price is $320 and not $400.

If you re-read my message, I did mention "Intel based Macs" on a number of occasions and fully appreciate the fact Snow Leopard does not work with older PowerPC based Macs.

We will simply have different perspectives on what "runs well" on a given vintage PC, as we did not declare what application is being used on the system as a reference (e.g. office vs more graphic intensive applications).

As to "value", I maintain the opinion that Apple is still the better value-for-money proposition, as I failed to mention the "Apple Experience", for me, is much better than with Microsoft and a given PC manufacturer.

Lemon Bon Bon:

If the rumored polycarbonate based MacBooks (and new iMacs) are everything we hope for, then I think there is a good possibility it will give consumers more reason to pause and consider going Mac. Again, I'm all about value-for-money, but need to mention the "Apple Experience" is high on my priority list.

-YipYipYipee
post #186 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by NonVendorFan View Post

Your response has little to no truth in it.

I'm an avid PC user (as most in this room know and hate). If you are saying that 99% of Windows 7 users are going to get it with a new computer purchase you need to put down the pipe.

I've got 2 perfectly good PC's and have been testing Windows 7 RC in virtual mode on my laptop (Dell XPS). It has worked out great for me and I will upgrade both my desktop computer and notebook when 7 ships and has been used in the real world for a good month.

(As Snow Leapord Users should have done as well).

All of my PC friends are going to take the same path and none of us are currently in the market for a new PC (Netbook Yes) not a PC or notebook.

Yes, I think Win 7 is great but will only upgrade after it has been in the mainstream for a while and insure that I haven't overlooked anything in my testing.

Businesses will not make all new purchases in this economy, those that have been testing it (as the company I work for) will likely take the same path.

As for XP not being able to upgrade programs to Win 7. If you are running XP (as my desktop home computer is) a clean install is the smartest path to take. I may even do it for my laptop but I'll base that on user experience from reviews I read.

definitely not 99%, but this is where most of their sales come from.
post #187 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

If this is true this embarrassing for him. Personally I don't rate him much at all and find his video reviews mega-boring and he style quite pompous.

That said I don't think Vista 7 is that bad. But, it's no OS X.

Can you Touch on your computer with OSX like you can with W7?
post #188 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by UbiquitousGeek View Post

I'm sorry, did I miss something? Did you not state that OS X's Dock was taken from Windows? I believe you did, and I corrected you. Jobs & Co. have been using the Dock far longer than anyone else.
.

SHow me when /where. Somehow I missed that feature in OS9.
Who used it first?
post #189 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

How many years did Microsooft have a taskbar before Apple had its dock?
(you can pull your foot out of your posterior if you dare too)


OS X is NeXSTEP, therefore, the Dock has been there since 1988.
Embrace your inner geek.
Reply
Embrace your inner geek.
Reply
post #190 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foo2 View Post

Windows 7 hasn't been out long enough to know how well it holds up over time. For instance, will users feel compelled to reinstall every 6-12 months as the garbage collects?

Windows 7 also means no iLife.
post #191 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

SHow me when /where. Somehow I missed that feature in OS9.
Who used it first?

You're looking in the wrong place.
Embrace your inner geek.
Reply
Embrace your inner geek.
Reply
post #192 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Don't encourage him when he's purposely trying to derail a thread.

Your paranoia is extremely laughable.
post #193 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Who cares where it originated - it who utilzed it first and for how long. Besides, Mossberg states in the review today, if you would READ it,

Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

How many years did Microsooft have a taskbar before Apple had its dock? (you can pull your foot out of your posterior if you dare too)

WTF?

You make a post that says Apple didn't originate the dock, then when you are corrected (by several people), you say it doesn't matter who originated it? Are you crazy? Your just filling up the air with nonsense. There is even a posted link in this thread leading to a detailed history of the dock, where it originated and when, but you didn't chose to reply to that one.

You don't know what you're talking about, and almost no one cares what you think about this stuff. You can't even spell or write whole sentences for cripes sake.
post #194 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Can you Touch on your computer with OSX like you can with W7?

Yes, it's called the iPhone. Maybe you've heard of it.
Embrace your inner geek.
Reply
Embrace your inner geek.
Reply
post #195 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by yuusharo View Post

It all depends on which platform developers decide to take seriously regarding 64-bit. <snip.

Well, that's the rub. I'm a firm Mac convert, and she's agnostic about O/S as long as she can get her work done. But either way, it's deeply irritating that in both environments, the machine is capable of so much more than the O/S / app architecture allows. Apart from all of the other valid issues in this thread, THIS is the one that makes me crazy. It's basic, people -- if you're going to build me a Ferrari, for God's sake give me the gas to run it.

sigh.
post #196 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

Let's. They're all 'Macs'...all 'Jobs' creatures...great and small.

All flavours of 'X' will be counted...tablet too...as, when, if it arrives. The numbers speak for themselves.

'Halo'.

Lemon Bon Bon.

Put the OS X kernel on an SD card and we'll call that a Mac too then.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #197 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by UbiquitousGeek View Post

OS X is NeXSTEP, therefore, the Dock has been there since 1988.

WRONG- Apple has not had a dock since 1988 in its OS. No more wasting my time.
post #198 of 465
Quote:
Two things - One, I don't think you'll ever see an Apple tablet. I think you'll see a Macbook with a turn-around screen with multitouch, but I doubt you'll see a dedicated device.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

Ireland?

Lemon Bon Bon.

Ha!
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #199 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by UbiquitousGeek View Post

Yes, it's called the iPhone. Maybe you've heard of it.

Oh that iPod I own where I can't run more than one App at a time ( unless you call listtening to music muiti-tasking)

I was talking about a laptop/ desktop- haven't you READ MOSSBERG?
post #200 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

WTF?

You make a post that says Apple didn't originate the dock, then when you are corrected (by several people), you say it doesn't matter who originated it? Are you crazy? Your just filling up the air with nonsense. There is even a posted link in this thread leading to a detailed history of the dock, where it originated and when, but you didn't chose to reply to that one.

L-WTF?
Apple didn't- NEXTSTEP did.
Cannot you READ?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Mossberg: Windows 7 narrows the gap with Apple's Mac OS X