or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Vista vs Leopard
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Vista vs Leopard - Page 2

post #41 of 79


The EPA has declared this to be a Toxic Waste Thread (TWT), and has added it to to their NPL;

Toxicity

Conversion, software version 10.5,
Looking at life through the eyes of a tire hub,
Eating seeds as a past time activity,
The toxicity of our OS X, of our OS X,

New, what do you own the world?
How do you own disorder, disorder,
Now, somewhere between the sacred silence,
Sacred silence and sleep,
Somewhere, between the sacred silence and sleep,
Disorder, disorder, disorder.

More wood for their fires, loud neighbors,
Flashlight reveries caught in the headlights of a truck,
Eating seeds as a past time activity,
The toxicity of our OS X, of our OS X,

New, what do you own the world?
How do you own disorder, disorder,
Now, somewhere between the sacred silence,
Sacred silence and sleep,
Somewhere, between the sacred silence and sleep,
Disorder, disorder, disorder.

New, what do you own the world?
How do you own disorder, disorder,
Now, somewhere between the sacred silence,
Sacred silence and sleep,
Somewhere, between the sacred silence and sleep,
Disorder, disorder, disorder.

When I became the sun,
I shone life into the man's hearts,
When I became the sun,
I shone life into the man's hearts.

Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #42 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker

Tiger already has almost every one of the features that are not currently present in windows.

I say that's exaggerated.

How about some file system features: transparent encryption, transparent compression, automatic versioning and archiving?
post #43 of 79
I am so glad that Apple are moving away from video game style eye candy, and I hope the trend continues.

Honestly, Vista has forged new levels of bad taste, with little thought to colour and shade in terms of usability.

Vista looks like a cheap whore on a Sunday night.
post #44 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucker

I say that's exaggerated.

How about some file system features: transparent encryption, transparent compression, automatic versioning and archiving?

Hardly. Why don't put up a list of what's new in Vista vs. windows, and see how much of it is already in tiger. It's like 80+% But who cares. Vista, Tiger, they are both going to be outdated after WWDC. But more so vista.
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
Reply
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
Reply
post #45 of 79
Can't someone move this PC vs Mac battle crap to another forum?
post #46 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker

Hardly. Why don't put up a list of what's new in Vista vs. windows

How about versioning? No, Tiger doesn't have it.
post #47 of 79
Give the kid a break.

Blind Apple partisanship poorly serves the platform.

Aesthetics notwithstanding, the bigger question about Vista is stability. Microsoft struggles mightily on that score.
post #48 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucker

How about versioning? No, Tiger doesn't have it.

Holy crap, I'm jumping ship.
post #49 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sybaritic

Give the kid a break.

Blind Apple partisanship poorly serves the platform.

Aesthetics notwithstanding, the bigger question about Vista is stability. Microsoft struggles mightily on that score.

Two things…

One:

It is still AppleInsider; if I wanted to read about Vista, I would do that within my Windows IT day job, and on a Windows-centric forum… (and Vista is far, far away from being used in our offices yet, gotta let others do M$s extended beta testing…)

Two:

Dude, the forum classification is Temp. Insanity, and it is now 52 hours until Stev-o hits the stage… If that doesen't inspire 'Blind Apple partisanship' I don't know what does…!

;^p
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #50 of 79
Speaking of Vista's user interface...the icon for a folder is standing on its side, which annoys me because it doesn't make practical sense. When you put a real life folder like this with files, all of the files would fall out. Just this lack of reality, or attention to detail on Microsoft's part, makes Windows Vista look so stupid.
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
post #51 of 79
I dunno, I think Vista's UI is pretty slick. Mac OS X's still loks kind of unprofessional.
post #52 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Placebo

I dunno, I think Vista's UI is pretty slick. Mac OS X's still loks kind of unprofessional.

Eh, definitely better than XP in the visuals department... not sure about usability.

I'll agree somewhat with the second point... the brushed metal needs to be eliminated, particularly in the Finder. Though I think brushed metal still works in Safari very well - IMO. Anyway, Leopard will surely bring a decisive end to brushed metal.
post #53 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan22t

Holy crap, I'm jumping ship.

I'm getting a Dell. With Ubuntu Linux.
post #54 of 79
Ok guys. I think I am going to settle this once and for all:

1) Tiger > XP
2) Vista = Tiger (mostly)
3) Vistas graphics look to cluttered and fragile.
4) We can't make comparisons about Vista and Leopard yet, we don't know a damn about Leopard.
5) The cost of a Mac has been proven equal to the cost of a PC if you factor in includded software and hardware add-ons for pcs in order to acomplish the same task.
6) Macs retain their value very well (for a computer at least).
7) Mac OS X is very stable. It does not crash often. It has no viruses in the wild (albeit there could be some -- but the point is... there aren't any now)
8) Mac OS X looks very good: Elegant yet solid.
9) Windows (in general) has better navigation than a Mac.

So what should Apple improve in Leopard?
1) Navigation
2) Under-the-hood / Performance
3) Eye Candy
4) Features (think about WHY they call them features) -- they are distinctive attributes
5) Security
post #55 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by icfireball

9) Windows (in general) has better navigation than a Mac.

Which nether region of your ass did you pull this one from?
post #56 of 79
Yeah, I find that to be false. It just feels like to get to a given file there are so many steps more than in Mac OS X.

Actually, I think my main hate is not being able to open the Applications and Home folders with keyboard shortcuts (Command-Shift-A etc) like I can on the Mac.

In general, the concept of "making a new window" isn't really there in Windows.
post #57 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Placebo

I dunno, I think Vista's UI is pretty slick. Mac OS X's still loks kind of unprofessional.


I just took my first look at vistas UI, and it looks like old Aqua mixed with a couple shape shifter GUI replacements. The icons look like they came from the icon factory. I didn't see anything special, or beyond what we have now as I had expected after that post.
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
Reply
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
Reply
post #58 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker

The icons look like they came from the icon factory.

XP's icons did, as did Xbox 360's, so it's not a stretch to assume that Iconfactory is doing Vista's as well.
post #59 of 79
[QUOTE=Vox Barbara]You nailed it. I just can't remember *any* so called eye candy
UI finish in MacOs, that has no compelling practical reason, too.

Well.. I thing the ripple stuff when activating a dashboard widget is a little over the top, and it locks mechine.. not good.
post #60 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquatic

I bet Vista is going to have a massive amount of problems. .

Ding, Ding, Ding.

You got that right.
post #61 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRonin

Two things

One:

It is still AppleInsider; if I wanted to read about Vista, I would do that within my Windows IT day job, and on a Windows-centric forum (and Vista is far, far away from being used in our offices yet, gotta let others do M$s extended beta testing)

Two:

Dude, the forum classification is Temp. Insanity, and it is now 52 hours until Stev-o hits the stage If that doesen't inspire 'Blind Apple partisanship' I don't know what does!

;^p

although i agree that this is a forum to talk about apple products etc., this topic is not totally focused on vista and i think it is something that most people wouldn't mind talking about.

and the topic does clearly state "Vista VS Leopard" so it's not like anyone is forcing you to look at it..
post #62 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by icfireball

5) The cost of a Mac has been proven equal to the cost of a PC if you factor in includded software and hardware add-ons for pcs in order to acomplish the same task.

While perhaps this has been proven somewhere (though I doubt it), many users probably don't get much use out of the added pieces anyway. Hardware-wise, I imagine there are plenty of people who have only used those new build-in iSights and remote controls when they were playing around at first, and don't get any practical use out of them now. Though of course, I'm speculating as well.

However, with software, the value depends on what the user does. I've played around with GarageBand and use iTunes, but other than that, the iLife software, for example, is worthless to me, so what do I care if it costs a billion dollars for the same software on Windows. Besides, if you own expensive gadgets like digital cameras, DV camcorders, midi keyboards, and DVD burners, then you're probably more willing to throw down an extra $100 or two on a computer anyway.

Now, for me, the work I do on my Mac (aside from web browsing, email, instant messaging, and MS Office) is programming, so Xcode would typically save me a lot of money. (However, as a student, I get Visual Studio 6 and Visual Studio .NET free). But I suspect there are a lot out there who primarily do use their Macs just for surfing, communicating, and office work, and what they pay the premium for is a good UI and customer support.
post #63 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveGTA

…it's not like anyone is forcing you to look at it..

Dude, this guy showed up at my house and held a gun to my head screaming 'Look at this thread now!'…

Honest…
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #64 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Placebo

I dunno, I think Vista's UI is pretty slick. Mac OS X's still loks kind of unprofessional.

You have got to be kidding. Since when were translucent windows ever professional? Professionals need to get a job done not be distracted from that job. The very fact you can see windows through the one you are working on is distracting. Fancy effects mean diddly squat to professionals. Shake is probably the most professional app you can use and let me assure you, it's nothing like an aqua app. Do Weta care?

As already pointed out, the window switching feature is largely useless because you can't see what's in the window. I have to agree with the people that said that Vista is bringing nothing new to the table.

At the end of the day, they are still using their own proprietary system core whereas everyone else is using a unix core and open standards.

I don't care if Vista will be bad, I hope it will be awful so that people will give up on Microsoft once and for all. Even if they all switched to Ubuntu (not likely though) or whatever then it would be better for everyone.

All I want in Leopard is speed and if they can show that Leopard can run similarly fancy graphical effects on an old G3 well whereas Vista struggles on a mid-high end machine then I don't see how people could possibly see Vista as better.

I mean what is that crap about it loading libraries when it thinks I'm going to need the program? Just another example of the system thinking it can do better than the user. What if I regularly use Maya but one day I decide to start my machine rendering in Renderman, it's going to load all the Maya libraries in the middle and cut out some of the memory? It's one of the stupidest features I've ever heard of.
post #65 of 79
Resolution independent display

Leopard better have it, or I'll be fucking pissed.
post #66 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by icfireball

Ok guys. I think I am going to settle this once and for all:

1) Tiger > XP
2) Vista = Tiger (mostly)
3) Vistas graphics look to cluttered and fragile.
4) We can't make comparisons about Vista and Leopard yet, we don't know a damn about Leopard.
5) The cost of a Mac has been proven equal to the cost of a PC if you factor in includded software and hardware add-ons for pcs in order to acomplish the same task.
6) Macs retain their value very well (for a computer at least).
7) Mac OS X is very stable. It does not crash often. It has no viruses in the wild (albeit there could be some -- but the point is... there aren't any now)
8) Mac OS X looks very good: Elegant yet solid.
9) Windows (in general) has better navigation than a Mac.

about nubmer 5
not true for same price you pay for a Mac with a pc you get more ram, video and other things and the of new Intel Macs so far have no slots for add-ons.

about nubmer 6
That is not likey to happen with x86 hardware.
post #67 of 79
Joe - it depends on how you stack it up. OS X is less resource-intensive than Vista. Also, it comes with a lot of software and hardware (iSight, IR, BT, wireless) that most PC desktops don't have.

Additionally, aside from gamers or professionals, most people don't upgrade their systems much. Joe and Jane Average buy a computer, use it until it can't run X, Y, and Z, or until it needs serious repairs that are very expensive, and then buy another computer. Even as you move into the mid-range, people tend not to upgrade, because it costs a hundred dollars or more to buy the pieces, and then they would have to pay someone $40 or more to install it. Generally, 90% of the consumers out there buy a computer and never upgrade the hardware. Apple recognizes this, and so doesn't have upgradability that doesn't matter much.
post #68 of 79
I dunno, a few of my Windows using relatives buy new computers quite often, and all they do is surf the internet and write email.

Here's the standard scenario: computer slows to a crawl, or stops working entirely. They take it into Best Buy, and the tech tells them it needs a full reinstall, and tells them they may as well buy the latest version of Windows while they're at it. So they look at the cost for Windows + tech service, and just buy a new computer for $800.

I tried explaining to them once about Norton Antivirus but their eyes just glazed over. Too complicated. Easier to buy a new one and pitch the old in the landfill. I don't know how representative this is, but it sure seems common.

You're right about the upgrading, though. Problem is, people want to have the OPTION to upgrade. They purposely buy a computer that they can upgrade, but most never do. It's strange, but I've seen this behavior in several people I tried to talk into buying a Mac.
post #69 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Junkyard Dawg

Resolution independent display

Leopard better have it, or I'll be fucking pissed.

Quoted for truth. =)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_the_dragon

about nubmer 5
not true for same price you pay for a Mac with a pc you get more ram, video and other things and the of new Intel Macs so far have no slots for add-ons.

With an Intel mac, you gain the ability to run OSX though. I'd say that more than covers the price gap.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_the_dragon

about nubmer 6
That is not likey to happen with x86 hardware.

Not true. People are paying for the operating system. Not the hardware.

- Xidius
post #70 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by rasnet

Now, for me, the work I do on my Mac (aside from web browsing, email, instant messaging, and MS Office) is programming, so Xcode would typically save me a lot of money. (However, as a student, I get Visual Studio 6 and Visual Studio .NET free).

Might want to take a better look at your user agreement for that "free" Visual Studio software... You're not allowed to sell any software you make with those free copies of VS. I was in that program as well while I was a software engineer student... you can use it all you want for school, but when it comes to production use... you gotta buy copies... where as xcode is 100% absolutely free. We can also compare MSDN vs. ADC... but I won't.

There are other factors as well for a mac and pc costing the same... like a mac will outlast a pc as far as usage. A Macs average life is 2-4 years, where as a PC's running windows is a shade over a year.

True the software argument doesn't hold up as well as some hope, but you gotta admit... you get a ton of software for paying a bit more for hardware.

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply
post #71 of 79
I'm sorry, but the mentioning of x86 makes my blood boil. F**k x86.

Please, carry on as usual..
Resident Furry, Animation student, and Steve Jobs fan.
Reply
Resident Furry, Animation student, and Steve Jobs fan.
Reply
post #72 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac_Doll

I'm sorry, but the mentioning of x86 makes my blood boil. F**k x86.

Please, carry on as usual..

Yeah, nothing worse than a processor architecture endorsed by Steve Jobs, constantly improving, and faster than anything the PPC architecture would be doing right now.
post #73 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Placebo

Yeah, nothing worse than a processor architecture endorsed by Steve Jobs, constantly improving, and faster than anything the PPC architecture would be doing right now.

I'll go further than that. Jobs saved Apple by transitioning to Intel. Apple seems to also have a fair amount of influence into what directions Intel takes if all parties are to be believed.

The PowerPC was going nowhere, and going there far too slowly. They just weren't doing the numbers to pay for sufficient rapid development and deployment.

Intel is the way forward, and Jobs was inspired when he made the leap. Already Apple's sales reflect the wisdom of the decision, and the transition is nowhere near complete, both in that some machines are still on PowerPC (until today perhaps) and we are still using the transitional 32-bit architecture that won't really be addressed until Santa Rosa.
post #74 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by emig647

Might want to take a better look at your user agreement for that "free" Visual Studio software... You're not allowed to sell any software you make with those free copies of VS. I was in that program as well while I was a software engineer student... you can use it all you want for school, but when it comes to production use... you gotta buy copies... where as xcode is 100% absolutely free. We can also compare MSDN vs. ADC... but I won't.

There are other factors as well for a mac and pc costing the same... like a mac will outlast a pc as far as usage. A Macs average life is 2-4 years, where as a PC's running windows is a shade over a year.

True the software argument doesn't hold up as well as some hope, but you gotta admit... you get a ton of software for paying a bit more for hardware.

No, I didn't mean to imply that I had a full license on VS. The license for Visual Studio doesn't allow us to produce software we intend to use for purposes other than educational (nor does my free version of Windows 2003 Server legally allow me to set up a corporate network, for example). When I'm working on my home machine, I do use the edu VS for coding and debugging other material, which I doubt MS would approve of, but I have access to a fully licensed version for building and distributing code in cases where it would be an issue.

I've never had a Windows PC die on me that early, although I do confess that when I'm dealing with other people's computers, I am more inclined to solve their registry/spyware/driver/etc problems by reinstalling the OS and setting up whatever is needed from there. I've rarely suggested a reinstall on a Mac unless the user was planning on upgrading anyway. Otherwise, I don't see any reason why a well maintained PC would last any shorter than a Mac. If anything, you might feel a bit less obsolete because major OS updates are sold less frequently.
post #75 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by >_>

Quoted for truth. =)



With an Intel mac, you gain the ability to run OSX though. I'd say that more than covers the price gap.

Being locked in to geting a AIO for mid-rage is not good + gma 950 is not for gameing. $2000 for a laptop with good video and only 512 ram is a rip off.
post #76 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by turnwrite

Well no when I say student I mean I'm thirteen.

So I can't just "work at Wal-mart." If I could I would, believe me.

Yup Windows ALWAYS has problems. Just thirty seconds ago someone in the pooter lab with me here got a Blue Screen of Death. Case in point.

I bought a 2000 computer when I was thirteen. It worked great except for being windows...
post #77 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZachPruckowski

Joe - it depends on how you stack it up. OS X is less resource-intensive than Vista. Also, it comes with a lot of software and hardware (iSight, IR, BT, wireless) that most PC desktops don't have.

Additionally, aside from gamers or professionals, most people don't upgrade their systems much. Joe and Jane Average buy a computer, use it until it can't run X, Y, and Z, or until it needs serious repairs that are very expensive, and then buy another computer. Even as you move into the mid-range, people tend not to upgrade, because it costs a hundred dollars or more to buy the pieces, and then they would have to pay someone $40 or more to install it. Generally, 90% of the consumers out there buy a computer and never upgrade the hardware. Apple recognizes this, and so doesn't have upgradability that doesn't matter much.

But apple should not only have AIO for the mid-rage. Joe and Jane Average may want to buy a bigger monter and haveing the head-less mac with only gma 950 sucks.
post #78 of 79
For me, it seems like if you're sensible, stability is not a problem with XP pro at least. Wanting to slit your wrists every time you use it, now that is...

David
_ ________________________ _

I have no signature - Doh!
Reply
_ ________________________ _

I have no signature - Doh!
Reply
post #79 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_the_dragon

But apple should not only have AIO for the mid-rage. Joe and Jane Average may want to buy a bigger monter and haveing the head-less mac with only gma 950 sucks.

That changes today. Of course, Joe and Jane should be ready to pay for it.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Vista vs Leopard