or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Microsoft plans anti-Apple marketing blitz for Vista
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Microsoft plans anti-Apple marketing blitz for Vista - Page 3

post #81 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Right_said_fred View Post

MS best bet would be to show a video of loading a decent size excel document (with charts) in MS-office (on vista or xp) - (preferably emulated with VM-fusion ) and comparing it side by side with office 2008 latest on a macbook pro.
The Emulated version is so much faster (actions take a second or so) whereas the mac-office2008 takes tens of seconds to do many of the same actions. I think most people would shudder at the time it takes on a mac. Of course office 2008-mac is an MS product, but thay could utilize duct-tape over the name on the box......
I love macbook pro and apple Leopard - but office on the mac is awful awful awful.
If ever I get time, I wil do a youtube side by side

I agree, MS Office 2008 on a Mac is very slow. I somehow don't think it's the fault of the Mac, however. I run NeoOffice (which is free) on my MacBook Pro and it is very fast. 2008 is kludgy. I think part of the problem is that Microsoft has no real interest in writing good software for the Mac. The biggest problem overall(with Office for the Mac and with Vista) is that Microsoft is now so big, with such a clout in the marketplace, that they don't really have to put out really good software - companies and people will buy it anyway because they have no choice. There was a time in the past where Microsoft was a smaller company and was more concerned with Quality Control but they are now so large they seem to have forgotten this.

I think if Microsoft wants to get ahead of the game, they need to stop buying up companies to get their technology and adapting it to Microsoft's needs; instead, they need to invest heavily into R&D and create their own innovations. I also think Microsoft keeps trying to get it's hand into too many cookiejars - trying to go headon against Google and the iPod seems like corporate suicide to me. If Microsoft started coming up with new products that wowed everyone, instead of spending millions on marketing what seem like bad copies of existing products, we would all start buying more Microsoft stuff.
post #82 of 104
Maybe Redmond should call it a day and start working on a Linux distribution flavor with the ability to run previous Windows OSes virtually, and forget about what ever it is that they are planning next. You know, kindda what Apple did between OS9 and OS X.
post #83 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffharris View Post

The best navigational solution for dual monitors?
Get a trackball!

http://us.kensington.com/html/2200.html

Or learn shortcuts. In the least Ctrl+F2 (keyboard menu navigation).

I know the value in dual monitors but with Spaces I've moved away from dual monitors. The average user isn't going to need or want dual monitors, their use is primarily in development, video, & graphics (and that's mostly using secondary screen as a full screen preview space).
post #84 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

A whole class of apps? Why not just one app?

A individual app isn't going to be up to the task for business and a business level App is going to be too complex for consumers. You also need a variant or plug in for tax purposes.
post #85 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by OriginalMacRat View Post

An abusive monopoly isn't healthy competition.

This post is showing how it isn't a monopoly though, with all the people switching over.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gon View Post

Competition, sure. If Microsoft engaged in more genuine competition by providing a quality product with value, like they did with both versions of XBox, that would be great.

It's just that the way they compete is, more often than not, reinventing a worse wheel for no other reason than screwing with their competition or hanging onto a monopoly lockin. For concrete examples, you can look at pretty much any programming language, scripting language and file format Microsoft has ever developed or extended.

Microsoft, as an organization, has a systemic attitude and process problem about the way it does product design and development. It has had this problem for a long time. Ex-MS employees paint a very accurate picture of this.OS X could do with improvements. Vista needs a demolition crew in comparison. Unlike many other posters, I have little hate for Microsoft or, indeed, their OS. I have used every major MS OS version starting from DOS 5.0, IIRC. They have some good infrastructure in their later operating systems, from NT onwards. But it's also a fact that their codebase and interfaces are a mess, they are way behind on usability, standards and interoperation on multiple fronts, and these things are critical for productivity.Some new functionality on Leopard is not great, but if you ignore it and just use the rest, it's still clearly better than Tiger. Especially factoring in the stuff behind the scenes, resulting in performance improvements and a flow of better apps in the long term, what makes it too ambitious?What they need is risk-taking ability, and confidence in being able to compete on raw quality. They need to do, more or less, what Apple did when they originally came out with OS X. To have the nerve to throw a lot of crud away.

I'm really happy with what vista offers me, especially the extras like media center which I use with my 360. I think its a quality product, just their relationship with developers was poor and caused the driver issues which caused problems for people.

All big companies have the problem Microsoft, one of a lack of innovation. Smaller companies can innovate a lot more because they have to to survive. I also disagree with Leopard being better. I had a lot less spinning balls and other issues with Tiger. My current fun issue is after a few days Java loses its mind, causes huge graphical issues and then I have to restart to get a GUI again.
post #86 of 104
Microsoft should spend their magabucks on improving their software. They could start with improving the customer experience instead of becoming the traffic cop for the media industry. Users buy software and the user experience is the only thing that matters.

I really do not think that they get it. I think that they are incapable of making the kind of changes that would be necessary to produce a quality product. Copying someone else work only takes you so far.
post #87 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer View Post

Visual Studio Express is a free version of the IDE..and it works, but really, if you are doing development to make money, you will have MSDN anyhow so you will be default have the best version of VS.net and all related tools dor other related technology like silver light

Powershell is comparable to BaSH

Yes, you can install all kinds of tools - I already have Cygwin and Vim on my Vista machine - but the point stands: Windows does not *ship* with tools even reminiscent of the baseline on competing operating systems. When you sit down on a Windows computer, you aren't assured of being able to do much of anything directly. With any other OS on a networked computer, at the very least I can SSH somewhere else, have an usable environment on the remote computer and transfer files around.

With OS X, right after install you have a choice of good shells, text editors, and tools for a huge amount of mainstream scripting and programming languages. You have a heavy-duty version control system. You have all sorts of networking, a web server and so on. Most of them are sitting there ready for the non-admin user. You just sit down and start working. Even if you don't need the tools, there is no downside to having them - they aren't in your face.

Vista is what, 7-12 gigs? (System requirements prescribe 15GB for installation.) And yet, they don't include a decent text editor. It's absolutely ridiculous. A nice assortment of tools would fit in ~100MB or so.

Saying that all developers would have or want Visual Studio is not quite right. It's a good IDE to be sure, but not the only game in town by a long shot. Even those developing in Microsoft's own languages are not 100% VS (see Mono). I prefer another editor and another build system to VS' builtins, so when I last used VS many years ago, my motivation was access to the debugger. But this goes far off the subject of basic OS facilities. I'm asking for broad scripting support and assortment of power tools installed, not an IDE. This is for admins, regular users, as well as apps/scripts that can then be made light and used flexibly instead of including the kitchen sink just to guarantee operation on another Windows machine.
Quote:
I do agree that SSH is lacking, but the default recomended remote administration method is remote desktop connection

I wasn't thinking about remote administration as much as miscellaneous user level stuff. Uploading some files on my home machine via SFTP while I'm somewhere else, SSHing from a friend's place onto a project server to do some coding, tunneling some X11 apps. These are not something remote desktop connection would help me with.
Quote:
As to video drivers, I agree that Nvidia is supremely incompetent, cant speak to ATI, we are a quadro fx shop, and the vista 4500 driver circa june 2008 is still shit next to xp.

But how much fault really lies with nVidia, and how much with Microsoft? They are going to ridiculous lengths to protect a few pixels of Blu-Ray (while the people making *real money* with piracy can surely either get their hands on an unprotected copy, afford to buy equipment to bypass the whole thing, or grab a good enough lossy capture from the end of the pipe).

If you are not faint of heart, take your own look at what kinds of things the Vista driver model mandates for the hardware and the driver.
post #88 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by StuBeck View Post

..... I also disagree with Leopard being better. I had a lot less spinning balls and other issues with Tiger......

My experience is exactly the opposite. While Tiger was nice and steady for me, Leopard has been just as reliable but more responsive. I rarely get the beachball with Leopard. I saw it much more with Tiger.

In addition I find that the new Finder is *way* better and Quick Look is a great feature. I would be pretty bummed not to have it. I'm not as crazy about TM or spaces, but I'm sure there are others that love those features.
post #89 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

iPhone news IS Mac news. The iPhone and iPod touch are running mobile versions of OS X that are probably very similar to what Snow Leopard will be when it's released next year - signed apps, resolution independence, etc.

Sorry, but that's quite a bit of a stretch. I still want a MacMiniTower. I want PCI expandability and my own display. I shouldn't having to break my bank account adding memory or break my back moving a huge tower.
Why do so many Sys Admins hate the Mac? . A q u a M a c .
Reply
Why do so many Sys Admins hate the Mac? . A q u a M a c .
Reply
post #90 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

Leopard on the other hand has been a pain from day one. At least Vista can keep a stable network connection and doesn't get hacked everytime Apple puts out a patch.

Leopard gets hacked every time Apple puts out a patch?
Quote:
Leopard is just as bloated as Vista and at least in my opinion has not be an improvement over Tiger except for eye candy that has never really worked all that well anyways.

I can't disagree with you on that there is little visible, usable improvement in Leopard over Tiger. I upgraded for app compatibility and it's been very much like another Tiger so far.

But bloated? Tiger was not bloated - I could tell back when I had a much slower Mac. Now that I have only recent (C2D) machines and light use, I can't really tell if either Leo or Vista is bloated. I take it you either run on slow computers or do heavy (media?) work since you can see the difference?
Quote:
I am not saying one is great or one is the best thing since the wheel but Leopard certainly isn't all that much better then Vista.

Productivity-wise, yes it is. Both seem stabile, but Vista's UI is horrible, not much improved over XP's. On UI, OS X was way in front by 10.3.
post #91 of 104
Ok, here is the bottom line of vista versus leopard. What we really should call MS versus MAC!!! If you use a computer at work then you are using windows. If you play hard hitting graphic phenoms than your using MS!!!! If you are into music, graphic design, and no viruses then go MAC!!! Pick a side and live with it!!!!

The real bottom line is people are buying a pc with vista installed to turn around and have it downgraded to xp .....hello houston there there is a problem. Were not talking about a 5 yr old computer with obsolete hardware and software. Were talking about a brand new pre-approved built pc to the OS min requirments. Let us not forget the optional jump drive to boost performance!!! What are you kidding me!!! Now after I spent close to a 1000 to buy whats supposed to be a superior OS and run like the wind your telling me to buy an optional drive to boost what's supposed to be there after 5yrs of testing OMG!!!!

Now vista costs 599 (ultimate) and leopard costs 129. But a halfway decent comp for windows is roughly 800 bucks. while you will spend double that for a MAC!!! Huh? Somwhere the math is working but if Mac will get off there high horse and make it so there not so overpriced and in some ways overrated comps are more economically friendly and I don't mean the little white box they came out with 2yrs ago (what a joke). And get gamers and the biz world in on it they may just rule the world....
post #92 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by forgotto View Post

Ok, here is the bottom line of vista versus leopard. What we really should call MS versus MAC!!! If you use a computer at work then you are using windows. If you play hard hitting graphic phenoms than your using MS!!!! If you are into music, graphic design, and no viruses then go MAC!!! Pick a side and live with it!!!!

You lost me at "If you use a computer at work then you are using windows."

Most people in my workplace use windows, but there are those of us in IT who prefer macs and we use Leopard so I don't know what your point is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by forgotto View Post

The real bottom line is people are buying a pc with vista installed to turn around and have it downgraded to xp .....hello houston there there is a problem.

Most PCs sold today come with a license for Vista and it's pre-installed on the hard drive. That people want to downgrade to XP is understandable. I, for one, prefer XP over Vista mostly because I know that XP does what I need it to do, and I don't have to waste my time with those endless user account protection warnings. Plus I know what to expect from XP. I've spent the last 7 years using it. If something goes wrong I don't want to have to guess whether it's "just vista" or if something else is genuinely broken.

Quote:
Originally Posted by forgotto View Post

Now vista costs 599 (ultimate) and leopard costs 129. But a halfway decent comp for windows is roughly 800 bucks. while you will spend double that for a MAC!!! Huh?

You said it, man; "halfway decent." For a good PC prepare to spend as much as a comparable mac, in terms of specifications. PC manufacturers can get away with throwing every cheap crap component from the orient in their case and if it passes WHQL they can slap a "Made for Vista" logo on it and sell it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by forgotto View Post

Somwhere the math is working but if Mac will get off there high horse and make it so there not so overpriced and in some ways overrated comps are more economically friendly and I don't mean the little white box they came out with 2yrs ago (what a joke). And get gamers and the biz world in on it they may just rule the world....

First of all, Apple can charge slightly more for their computers because they do more than a PC can. The biggest difference being the ability to run OS X. I happen to use a Mac Mini as my main computer, and have for the last two years. It's a great little machine. I have three USB2.0 Hubs coming off of it and as many as 13 USB peripherals connected at any one time. It handles everything I can throw at it, all the way up to h.264 @ 720P.

Right now I'm using a Macbook Pro 17" which has the Geforce 8600M GT GPU. I can play games with it if I want. Probably not Crysis at 60FPS, but I'm 30 years old and probably not what you'd consider the average "gamer" anyway. I find that the older I get the less time I have to do anything but infrequent, casual gaming. CatanOnline rules! First-person shooters and the like just don't appeal to me as much anymore. I consider a Macbook Pro to be the most versatile computer available if you are looking for a good business tool. I use mine for both work and play.
post #93 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by forgotto View Post

If you use a computer at work then you are using windows.

Nope. I've never used Windows. Especially not at work.

Mac, Solaris, VMS, but never Windows.
post #94 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by amerist View Post

Right now I'm using a Macbook Pro 17" which has the Geforce 8600M GT GPU. I can play games with it if I want. Probably not Crysis at 60FPS, but I'm 30 years old and probably not what you'd consider the average "gamer" anyway.

The industry claims average gamer in the US is 35, so you seem like average to me, if a little short on age still.

http://www.theesa.com/facts/index.asp
Quote:
CatanOnline rules!

Definitely on my list of things to do. The cardboard version rocks with a bunch of friends. It's too bad the original designers and Microsoft have only seen fit to offer the online game inside the US, putting it out of my reach (and only with a subscription model to boot - I hate subscriptions) but a Google search turned up very polished-looking free clones.
post #95 of 104
They have tried this before.... and FAILED! and are STILL FAILING!!

Windows 7 with its "copied" Multi-touch!! HA HA HA... Apple very PROBABLY has bet them to it. The new Cinema displays and New Macs will definitely have MULTI-TOUCH... All they have to do is compile the iPhone's Cocoa Touch for the desktop, and BANG! beaten again Microsoft!
post #96 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_jerome View Post

They have tried this before.... and FAILED! and are STILL FAILING!!

Windows 7 with its "copied" Multi-touch!! HA HA HA... Apple very PROBABLY has bet them to it. The new Cinema displays and New Macs will definitely have MULTI-TOUCH... All they have to do is compile the iPhone's Cocoa Touch for the desktop, and BANG! beaten again Microsoft!

Apple didn't invent multitouch.
post #97 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Apple didn't invent multitouch.

I know they Didn't do. Its an OLD concept.
post #98 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by iVlad View Post

Sounds something like, Sprint tried to run some sort of ads which really didn't say anything bad about iPhone. Can't remember the Phone that they were showing next to that shiny, pretty iPhone.


Hmmm... I think Micro$oft wants some of that too now. They would have to hire the same Ad agency that did commercials for VW and APPLE.

Can't wait to see first ad against Apple. I wonder what they gonna pick on. Hmmmm
Maybe that OS costs $129.....Too cheap to be real maybe because Vista is $599.

I like the iWay!


thats very disingenious, the software is 'cheap' because the hardware is overpriced.

If someone gave me base mac mini model money I could build them a tremendous rig (including Vista ultimate) that would be at 'least' as stable as OS X...and give them some change.!

trust me I've done it.

the people who have problems with Vista are those doing it on $300 pc's.

anyhow..my experience with Leopard (compared to Tiger) is that its a step back stability wise.
post #99 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by wheelhot View Post

Wow, MS is really funny these days. First was Vista, then Zune, then ZunePhone (I read it somewhere, in development), and now its MS Ad!

I mean after how many years, only now they want to fire back Apple Get a Mac ad?. This would be fun, watching 2 commercials compete against each other .

But honestly, what do MS have to say bout Vista?
Its better then OS X because of.....none? but in a negative way, Vista is wayyy better then OS X because it gives you lots of stupid bugs, incompatibilities and it forces you to upgrade your hardware! yeah...X for Vista baby!.

I mean that isn't it too late to clear Vista bad image? you can conduct a research to anyone comparing OSX, Win XP and Windows Vista and Vista will come out last in the preferred OS.

Im getting popcorns! Anyone want some?

The zune is actually a better product than Ipod classic, sound quality etc. Its just not 'cool' to have one.

You can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time..... never was truer with many Apple products.
post #100 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gon View Post

Competition, sure. If Microsoft engaged in more genuine competition by providing a quality product with value, like they did with both versions of XBox, that would be great.

It's just that the way they compete is, more often than not, reinventing a worse wheel for no other reason than screwing with their competition or hanging onto a monopoly lockin. For concrete examples, you can look at pretty much any programming language, scripting language and file format Microsoft has ever developed or extended.

Microsoft, as an organization, has a systemic attitude and process problem about the way it does product design and development. It has had this problem for a long time. Ex-MS employees paint a very accurate picture of this.OS X could do with improvements. Vista needs a demolition crew in comparison. Unlike many other posters, I have little hate for Microsoft or, indeed, their OS. I have used every major MS OS version starting from DOS 5.0, IIRC. They have some good infrastructure in their later operating systems, from NT onwards. But it's also a fact that their codebase and interfaces are a mess, they are way behind on usability, standards and interoperation on multiple fronts, and these things are critical for productivity.Some new functionality on Leopard is not great, but if you ignore it and just use the rest, it's still clearly better than Tiger. Especially factoring in the stuff behind the scenes, resulting in performance improvements and a flow of better apps in the long term, what makes it too ambitious?What they need is risk-taking ability, and confidence in being able to compete on raw quality. They need to do, more or less, what Apple did when they originally came out with OS X. To have the nerve to throw a lot of crud away.


Apple had nothing to lose though!

MS still has a 90%+ marketshare with revenue streams Apple can only dream about. Don't think the shareholders would be too happy with a rip it up and start again attitude.

Said it before. If you spend the same amount of money on a Vista rig as would do on a basic Mac Mini then you will have no problems.

Apple has proved with OS X that you do get what you pay for.
post #101 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archipellago View Post

thats very disingenious, the software is 'cheap' because the hardware is overpriced.

If someone gave me base mac mini model money I could build them a tremendous rig (including Vista ultimate) that would be at 'least' as stable as OS X...and give them some change.!

trust me I've done it.

the people who have problems with Vista are those doing it on $300 pc's.

anyhow..my experience with Leopard (compared to Tiger) is that its a step back stability wise.


Man you took the "post" right off my keyboard. Apple is smart at how they package their hardware configurations. That is one of the main reasons why it is a more stable system than windows. I build powerful game systems and linux server customs all the time. Want to sell my first x-serve but most folks up here in VT have offices full of pc's.
post #102 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpguru21 View Post

Man you took the "post" right off my keyboard. Apple is smart at how they package their hardware configurations. That is one of the main reasons why it is a more stable system than windows. I build powerful game systems and linux server customs all the time. Want to sell my first x-serve but most folks up here in VT have offices full of pc's.

lol ook i fell right into it. By the apple term pc i meant windows. both, of course, can be pc's.
post #103 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme View Post

So.... a Mac that can run OS X, Win XP, Vista, Linux, Microsoft Office and more is not about "choice" and "compatibility," but a Vista-only PC from Microsoft's monopoly is That will be tough to pass off.

"There's a conversation going on in the marketplace today and it's just plain awful. We've got to get back on the front foot."

I fear that says it all. (Attempt to) change the conversation, instead of changing their products.

One rule of advertising is that a dominant company should not even acknowledge its smaller competition--that only legitimizes the smaller options. If Microsoft really does make anti-Apple ads, and those ads are truly well done (doubtful) then it will STILL help Apple sell more Macs than if Microsoft had just advertised Vista with no Mac comparison at all. Microsoft should be keeping Macs OFF the consumer's radar as long as they can, if it's not already too late. (See also: iPod and iPhone halo effect.)

Microsoft would be sending the message, "Nobody really used to use Macs, but they do now and we're worried! Here's why you should switch to our new thing, Vista, instead of their new thing: Vista's not as bad as it was before, honest!"

A smarter message would be Apple-free: "Nothing but Windows exists. You love that! Shiny happy flying freedom!"

That sounds a bit retarded... probably because it is.

Every (reasonably configured) PC can run pretty much any OS... except Mac OS, because Apple is pathologically forbidding people to run it on anything that does not come from Apple.

On the other side, Microsoft does not care what sticker is on your hardware box; if hardware is compatible, you're OK.

At the end of the day, Apple is happy to "borrow" other OS-es in order to make their platform a bit more desirable and sell some more, but they are not happy to provide same courtesy to other hardware manufacturers.

Much as I am considered, that is LAME.

Vista and Mac OS comparison looks bad only in Apple ads; mostly because most of them are shameless lies... like the one trying to insinuate Windows can not communicate with digital cameras (wtf?!? I still have digital camera that came with Windows software & connectivity only, and being camera enthusiast, have never seen camera with exclusive or at least better support for Mac OS).
post #104 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post

At the end of the day, Apple is happy to "borrow" other OS-es in order to make their platform a bit more desirable and sell some more, but they are not happy to provide same courtesy to other hardware manufacturers.

Those are two different sets. No other consumer computer hardware maker of significance makes their own OS. Apple doesn't "borrow" anything from Dell, so why should Apple "give back" to Dell?

Quote:
Much as I am considered, that is LAME.

I think you'll have to deal with it, at least for a while. Every company that has tried to compete head-on with Windows for commodity consumer PCs is dead (BeOS, OS/2) or irrelevant (Linux, BSD, OpenSolaris). The inertia of the incumbent OS (Windows) is just too great to be able to compete on the same turf.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Microsoft plans anti-Apple marketing blitz for Vista