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 12

post #441 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by buceta View Post

Everybody who really knows their computing agrees with me 100%. But to realize this you need to be above average intelligence, be knowledgeable, and have good analytical thinking.

That's quite snobbish of you. I game on my PC because of the bigger selection, and I use Office on my PC so I can guarantee compatibility of the output files. Everything else I do on my Mac.

The different platforms have their different strengths, it is not the case that PC users are sheeple.
post #442 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

That's quite snobbish of you. I game on my PC because of the bigger selection, and I use Office on my PC so I can guarantee compatibility of the output files. Everything else I do on my Mac.

The different platforms have their different strengths, it is not the case that PC users are sheeple.

Granted. PCs are better for gaming. But we weren't talking about playing games. For that you can buy a nintendo, playstation, heck even an ipod.

We are talking serious work here.
post #443 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post

What's really flawed is Microsoft's pricing. When OSX is compared with Windows, it's usually compared against the Ultimate version of Windows which costs $400 for the upgrade, and not the Home which is by far the most popular. The Home version is a feature crippled version with many pre-installed trial software which sometimes is impossible to un-install if you don't have the exact know how, one example of that is McAfee. Also the Home version does not include security features like the Professional or Ultimate.

I use both macs and PC's they both have strong and weak points. If you really want to compare os prices. Lets be realistic. Microsoft averages a new OS every 4 years for about $2-300. Apple comes out with a new OS every year for around $100.
So at the end of 4 years you would be $100 richer with a PC.
Also, a mac on less than a gig of ram is pretty useless. A PC will still be habitable at that low level.

OTOH, there is some truth to the relative security of Macs vs PCs.
You dont help your arguement any by inflating the price of ultimate by $80. First, most folks wont be using ultimate. Thats for geeks like me. A lot of people will do a cheap update at $1-200 a pop. Anyone that has bought a new PC in the last few months gets a free upgrade as well.
More to the point, Win 7 steals a lot from OS X (as did Vista).
And lots of computer dorks like me are playing with macs now because parallels, bootcamp, and VMware make it easy to have out cake... and our apple too.
post #444 of 465
I had to finally stop lurking (for 3 years) just to post a reply to this: Are you kidding me? You have only downloaded part of the file and it is reserving the name; the download is not finished. Note the .part file, and that the actual file is 0 KB in size?

For the second one, that "digging" you had to do should have been clicking on "Change when these notifications appear." You get asked on a Mac to confirm trust for all downloaded installers as well, before running them.

I own Snow Leopard, and Windows 7 RTM (from MSDN). Without a doubt, there are issues with Windows 7, but these two mentioned are absolutely not them.

Don't blame your incompetence on Windows as both "problems" are almost identical to what happens on Mac.
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.

Mossberg says Snow Leopard wasn't a "must-have" upgrade, even at $30. Well Windows 7 isn't a "must-have" upgrade at over $100 for people who already have Vista. I could see paying full price and upgrading from XP, but not from Vista. It would be a waste of money. If my school didn't offer Windows 7 to students for free, and Windows wasn't running the $30 offer for students on win741.com, I wouldn't even think of buying that operating system.

How the hell is an .exe file "not a valid win32 application?"


Fewer security warnings? I'm not a child. I shouldn't have to hunt for settings to turn this kind of crap off.
post #445 of 465
Since I created the account and read the last page, then I might as well respond to this as well:
Quote:
Originally Posted by buceta View Post

Granted. PCs are better for gaming. But we weren't talking about playing games. For that you can buy a nintendo, playstation, heck even an ipod.

We are talking serious work here.

I code on my PC for all types of development. The Java based applications, such as Netbeans and Eclipse, obviously run on a Mac, but Visual Studio does not. I run them all on Windows.

In my opinion, no development platform comes close to Visual Studio (Windows only) and I always use it when developing anything in C or C++, or .NET for that matter (over Mono based tools). I don't always use the compiler, but the code tools are simply, flat out, the best around. I don't even understand why people talk about XCode in comparison. (This discussion has nothing to do with Grand Central)

And that is certainly real work.

For just about everything else, I use my Mac.
post #446 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Who stole the task bar from Microsoft and named it a DOCK?

Ummm, the Dock came directly from NEXTSTEP which had this in 1989 or so.

What I was wondering is this. I use WIndows XP at work (and indeed, most companies will skip Vista and go to Windows 7 from XP). What I find one of the most fundamental differences between Windows and Mac is that for Windows, failure is the default expected outcome while at the Mac it is success. Let me explain: when I do something in WIndows XP i am bombarded with panels and messages telling me (reassuring me) everything went well. On the Mac, I get panels when things go wrong. If I plug in a USB stick, I do not get panels, messages and such, it just appears where it is supposed to appear. On the Mac, success of an action is the norm. Has this changed in Windows 7 or is it still that you get all these messages which are in fact reassuring you that things work as they should?
post #447 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Ok then - who uses NEXT?

Do you actually know what NeXT was?

Anyway I have a still working NeXTdimension Turbo Cube, which I got out of storage a few months back. Still works (though slow) and the web browser (OmniWeb) can only display the simplest of sites. But NeXT was my workhorse from 1990 until 2000/2001 when I moved to Mac OS X.

One thing they were unable to move from NeXTSTEP to Mac was vertical menus where you could tear off submenu's which then became floating menus you could have everywhere on screen. Very nice if your app required a lot of menu use.

The fact that in 1990 NeXT users had an OS GUI which in elegance was something that Windows is now approaching almost 20 years later is a testament to the brilliance of the original NeXTSTEP designers. NEXTSTEP's portability (even between little and big endian architectures) made the move from PPC to x86 and the use of OS X in iPhone and iPod possible as well. Microsoft has never been able to do that well and they really wanted it (remember the start of Windows NT as 'portable OS/2'?).
post #448 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by newbee View Post

If you're happy with M$, good for you. All I know is that I'm VERY happy with my choice to be a Mac user since the beginning and I have had more of my friends switch to Mac when they see and use my setup but I have ZERO knowledge of ANYBODY switching from Mac to Windoze!

That switch happened a few decades ago. Even graphics programs were being ported to Windows because most people thought Apple was in a certain death spiral. Mac OS was a POS that bombed its way through the day comparably to the Windows of those days.

The original iMac (before OS X) saved the day by turning Apple from 'expensive and elitist' to 'cool' in the hearts of prospective customers.

Ten years ago, if more people would have switched to Windows from Macs, Apple would have died. They definitely came close to the point where the only way was up (well, that or no way at all).
post #449 of 465
Mac to Windows?
I am one of those guys. I used to run several power macs back in the 90's. 8100, 8500 I forget all the models and such. The last mac I had a long time ago was a G3 AIO. The precursor to the iMac. Look it up, its and iMac with card slots that weighs 80 lbs!
Igot off mac for about 10 years because the upgrades were just killing me. While Apple stuff was going up in price, windows stuff broke the $1000 barrier, then there was a race for the sub $500 machine.
Since then I have owned a lot of computers and recently come back to Mac. not because I saw the light or gotfed up with PC's. But because I can afford it now. And its a write off for me anyway.
All of this platform bashing is silly to me, it speaks of an insecurity about the choices you make. I really dont care about apple/microsoft, ford/chevy, AK47/M16. Whatever gets the job done.

Either way platforms will be obsolete in the next few years. Everything is going to be virtualized and/or up in a cloud. The underlying os of your device will be unimportant.
. Saw a demo of a windows 7 desktop running on an apple last week. an apple iPhone. Then they jumped from teh phone to an HP laptop. With the applications open. then the moved to a WinXP desktop as well, same app, same documents. No problems.
Google is way out ahead on this

the Nextstep stuff was amazing. I had a freind that had acces to one at his school. I didnt know much about what was going on but it sure had the aura of future all over it!
post #450 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post

What's really flawed is Microsoft's pricing. When OSX is compared with Windows, it's usually compared against the Ultimate version of Windows which costs $400 for the upgrade, and not the Home which is by far the most popular. The Home version is a feature crippled version with many pre-installed trial software which sometimes is impossible to un-install if you don't have the exact know how, one example of that is McAfee. Also the Home version does not include security features like the Professional or Ultimate.

Home Premium has NO trial software pre-installed. MS has never shipped an OS with an anti-virus. That would have serious anti-trust consequences... Also, Home Premium only lacks the business features of Professional (and Enterprise if you're eligible to buy it). Which really only means you can't join secure Domains.

Get your facts straight.
post #451 of 465
The problem with one version is it adds alot of crap that users don't need. the current release system is tiered to users needs.

Home Basic/Premium -> cheap and moderate cost solutions for home computers not using a Domain to connect to the network. Premium is the only one you really need, Basic is just for OEMs basically.

Professional/Enterprise -> Pro is the only business version purchaseable by we the people, enterprise is sold only in large lots to corporate users. Same thing, essentially, just one has some features for corporate systems that small business users don't need.

Ultimate -> Enough feature to keep you busy for a year, or two.
post #452 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by dahlenu View Post

So, has Microsoft got rid of the registry in Windows 7? If not, Windows is still a piece of shit, IMHO.

You saying OSX doesn't have a registry? Nuff sed.
post #453 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.

Mossberg says Snow Leopard wasn't a "must-have" upgrade, even at $30. Well Windows 7 isn't a "must-have" upgrade at over $100 for people who already have Vista. I could see paying full price and upgrading from XP, but not from Vista. It would be a waste of money. If my school didn't offer Windows 7 to students for free, and Windows wasn't running the $30 offer for students on win741.com, I wouldn't even think of buying that operating system.

How the hell is an .exe file "not a valid win32 application?"


Fewer security warnings? I'm not a child. I shouldn't have to hunt for settings to turn this kind of crap off.

It doesnt run cuz ur retarded and didnt let the file download. Nuff sed.
post #454 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by villageindian View Post

Simply because Windows has a whole bunch of internal problems that get cancelled out by the problems of Flash

In Mac's case, the OS doesnt have any problems. Hence, only Flash poses the problem!

In Mac's case the OS can only run on specially engineered systems, smoothly, Hence, Mac OS poses the problem.
post #455 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by doyourownthing View Post

yes i do think they're paying for good reviews, don't you know what kind of corporation they are?

have you used windows 7? it's pathetic, slow, bloated, still has a registry, no spaces-like feature (which they'll steal from apple in their next version)...

Have you ever used OSX to play Crysis at High + AA + Playable FPS for under 700USD? Or maybe you want to plug it into your projector with the standard DVI plug for that power point presentation at the office. Or hell, what if you need to change the battery fast like with no power jack nearby.

I run W7 and guess what, smoother, faster, and no bloatware in sight. Sorry, don't say shit till you have ur facts straight.
post #456 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.

Mossberg says Snow Leopard wasn't a "must-have" upgrade, even at $30. Well Windows 7 isn't a "must-have" upgrade at over $100 for people who already have Vista. I could see paying full price and upgrading from XP, but not from Vista. It would be a waste of money. If my school didn't offer Windows 7 to students for free, and Windows wasn't running the $30 offer for students on win741.com, I wouldn't even think of buying that operating system.

How the hell is an .exe file "not a valid win32 application?"


Fewer security warnings? I'm not a child. I shouldn't have to hunt for settings to turn this kind of crap off.

One more thing, hit the start menu, go to getting started and oh, what?!??? UAC settings right there??? Hell, my 8yr old cousin found that on her own.
post #457 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

Aero peak and expose can't be compared. He said dock expose, which refers to clicking and holding on a programs icon to show all open windows of that program. Personally that is a feature I have never used. I use aero peak all the time though and it is quite useful and much more intuitive as it just requires you to hover over a program icon and all other programs become transparent. Document Flip or whatever it's called is the Windows version of Expose and it is vastly inferior.

No, flip is a fancy alt+tab, peek is expose. Nuff Sed
post #458 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario View Post

Because it's the one platform where Adobe spends most of its resources on, and others are just an after thought, tick on the compatibility list.

This is why flash on Windows is optimized and probably even uses GPU to render its content, whereas in OS X it's a mess that needs all the system resources to render even the SD video (whereas quicktime will play 1080p video using 0.1% of CPU that flash does when playing standard def).

So CS4 is totally crap on Mac you say, hmm, i smell BS...
post #459 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by mswift801 View Post

the registry and dll's are still in win 7. guess that means its still a pos.

So what do you propose they do, be like apple and not tell everyone that... it exactly the same for them as well?
post #460 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by alansky View Post

As Philip Elmer-DeWitt writes in Fortune:

The system for upgrading is complicated, but Vista owners can upgrade to the exactly comparable edition of Windows 7 while keeping all files, settings and programs in place. Unfortunately, XP owners, the biggest body of Windows users, wont be able to do that.

This is obviously the key piece of information that every Windows XP user should know before purchasing Windows 7. Sounds like a potential nightmare to me.

Not really:
Back Up documents.
Insert disk upon reboot.
Install.
Put documents in my documents.

Done.
post #461 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by starnyc View Post

People will prefer to suffer under XP until their machines break rather than upgrade to Windows 7, unless they are PROSUMERs. Prosumers are being lost to the mac platform.

In the astounding rate so high in the negative percentages. Only ppl i know moving to mac are ppl who suck at computers and buy blackberrys and iphones cuz they think they are somehow better at making phone calls.
post #462 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrstep View Post

Yeah, I think the taskbar management for launching/running apps has improved, but it doesn't fix the rest of the user experience. Other apps still are just awful to use and what's underneath the OS covers haven't really improved either.


Like? show me the failures of the kernel and essential runtimes, im sure some of the brightest minds on earth never noticed the truths you have unearthed.
post #463 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Mossberg seems to be completely missing the point of SL. No, maybe it's not a, "typical Apple lust-provoking product," because it isn't packed full of fun new user features, but it is packed full of fun new developer features, and lays a very strong foundation for Mac OS X to continue to develop as a platform. Windows 7, although apparently a huge improvement in user experience over Vista (from all reports, no hands on myself), is, by all accounts, no great technological advancement, but a minor evolution built on the same old crufty code base.

That and his reported comments on Vista at its introduction cast some doubt on his authority in these matters, even if he is generally fairly pro-apple.

Yeah, SL is no new release... its a Service Pack that mindless minions were willing to pay for. Yay for ppl with scrotophilia.
post #464 of 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by gbyrne View Post

Nobody switches 'back' to Win from Mac. I know 16 people who went Win -> Mac, know of nobody going the other way. What Win 7 might do is stem the tide of new switchers which is a major contribution to new mac sales.

Win 7 looks good, by comparison with where it's coming from (i.e. Vista). Indeed, were it not for OS X, we might think Win 7 was very good indeed. Apple have been very clever with Snow Leopard - 10.6 was used as an opportunity to trim the code base, address deficiencies and legacy issues and lay architectural groundwork for 10.7 and beyond. GCD, 64 bit and other improvements in the core make the next great leap forward much easier for Apple. What is most impressive is the shared core between all the device platforms Mac desktop, laptop, server, aTV, iPhone and iPod Touch.

That's where the relentless progress of Apple and OS X is coming from.

And Microsoft's lack of a credible unified platform will continue to allow Apple to grow for the next decade.

I know, lemme count.. 9 people that have moved to Windows + 3 PPL that went OSX -> Linux -> Windows, I know 1 person that went Linux OSX Win, and 1 person that went win - mac - win.

2 people i know went mac and have been there for 4 years now.
post #465 of 465
I have to say that, all anti pc hysteria and pro-pc hype aside.
It really does crash better than XP.
I worked on a domain migration last weekend.
After soldiering hip deep through dozens of XP machines I was happy to get to a 7 machine (yeah its deployed in the enterprise already)
It just plain does networking right, and when it crashes it recovers fast. None of the bsod stuff!
It is a little different how the networking stuff works, but IPV6 is in there, and the ability to bundle connections together for faster access is very cool. Try that on your mac.
As far as snow leopard, I think apple should have held that one back until it had some gee whiz features. As it is I think it's a sleeper. I dont know anyone rushing to upgrade. The folks I do know that have, had issues.

I may get it just to stay current however.
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