Because people will start moving their desk job applications to the iPhone, amirite? Call me when someone has written the first PhD thesis on a mobile phone.
In order to take his comment and move it to the iPhone I'll make the assumption you work for the GOP... Cause that's the kinda of talk they can do well.
Are you serious? You can't compare Mac OS X and Windows? BOTH ARE COMPUTER OPERATING SYSTEMS. They do the same things in different ways. Do you honestly believe you're somehow "better" than someone who uses Windows? Do you let your operating system define your life?
I find it funny that Mac OS X is constantly hailed as "better," etc. and yet has virtually no market share compared to Windows.
As I just posted earlier, some prefer Mac OS X and others prefer Windows. They both do the same things. I can write the exact same document on Mac OS X using Pages, or on Windows using Word. I would get the same output and thus would accomplish the same end goal.
Do research on both operating systems and you'll find they've had different histories, different release cycles, different philosophies and goals but at the end of the day, do the jobs they're supposed to do: operate your computer and let it work for you.
I basically agree with everything but the underlined portion. Market share does not reflect operating system preference, it more accurately reflects product availability. Apples low market share isn't due to consumer preference but due to the respective business models of Apple and Microsoft. Only Apple makes macs, so there are limited models available and virtually none are of the low cost variety, where most market share comes from.
Many people would like to buy a mac, but a) feel they are too expensive, b) can't find a mac that meets their needs (gaps in the product line), or c) need to use windows only software. Those people would get a Windows based computer not out of preference, but out of necessity.
I have a PC because I wanted to a) build my own PC again b) play windows only games c) have a Blu-ray media center and d) keep an eye on the competition so that I keep my views of OSX in check. I greatly prefer OSX, but built a Windows PC to meet some specific needs.
What is funny is that I now have a PS3 for most games and Blu-rays, which I prefer over my PC, I am considering a mini for a media center/server because I prefer OSX, and basically the only game I play on my PC is World of Warcraft, which is available for OSX (but my PC has far superior hardware). That didn't work out as planned.
Maybe I'll call you when the 1st PhD thesis is written on Google Office using Ubuntu, or OS X, or some other OS.!
Good thing I never claimed otherwise.. Although I have to commend a person writing a PhD thesis on a word processor without bibliography support. It's good to know that there are still people on this planet who value the traditional way of creating academic papers (and yes, I know about endnoteweb). Whether services like Google Docs will ever really take off remains to be seen. Compared to Microsoft's office dominance Docs is a drop in the barrel at the moment and Google has yet to present a business model for all their services other than harvesting information.
My comment about the iPhone stems from the fact that at the moment Apple disciples are projecting all their hopes into mobile devices which are supposed to accomplish all that OS X (the desktop system) has failed to do in the recent years: Kill Flash, kill Microsoft, finally bring Apple dominance to the world, etc. And since OS X as it seems can't compete on the desktop the propaganda tactic have switched to marginalizing every market where Apple fails to conquer (e.g. mobile phones are the future, desktop don't matter anymore despite billions of people using them in addition to phones, et cetera pp.).
Can't both operating systems just get along? They both work well for the crowds. It's like Ford vs. Chevy.
Not so sure I like that analogy. Remember the days when Ford and Chevy were so busy out-guzzling each-other they lost touch with the consumer & didn't notice (or want to notice) Toyota and Honda...
Apple cannot ever forget that they're in the business of rewarding their customers with great products, and NOT in the business of "beating" Microsoft.
At the risk of being snowed under with vitriol, can I ask a simple question:
What's wrong with the registry? Surely it's just a meta collection of .plist files in a single database, rather than scattered to the 4 winds?
...
(prelim: I've used both Macs and PCs since the 'olden days' of the 80's )
(this post is 'vitriol-free' )
Windows registry is a collection of files (from 6 to 11 or so - it varies) in several locations, databases with gobs of binary data stores. (on my win xp sp3 pc, it is about 43 MB in 11 'files')
Yes, in some ways it is like a collection of all the Mac system prefs and ~ prefs plist files. But also it kind of tracks about everything to do with how Windows and every application is setup and how it is supposed to interact with the pc hardware and software.
Conceptually, it was probably a good idea initially. In practice it is a huge mess of files and settings with most having cryptic hexadecimal names and string "key" values. It tends to get hugely bloated over time, with settings that are installed with apps but never removed. (as you may know, most windows uninstallers dont remove everything, usually leave lots of info behind in the registry.) Sometimes those settings conflict = problems.
If it was well implemented it would still be a challenge. But as it is, well, I use installer watchers, and some apps install hundreds or even thousands of settings into the registry.
If it was well implemented there'd be no need for the large and thriving 'registry cleaner' and optimizer utility market, or all the online 'clean your registry' web sites. (google it)
To change the whole NT Kernel and Registry paradigm would mean a ground-up rewrite of the Windows OS. Not a trivial task - and one they did not include in their 5 year Vista development (at least in the released version) and not in the 2 year Win 7 development.
OS X has since 2000 and before that Protected Memory. In windows you can open a JPG file that contains a virus or like and it can infect system files that are in memory because it doesn't "protect" the memory. Win 7 randomizes much like Vista but it's still not the correct way to go about protecting the memory environment.
Virtual PC rewrite I think was started 2 years ago to take advantage of the VT... But your correct in stating that capability wasn't available until 7... It was however capable in every other OS on the planet.
Correct me, but the XP VM system... Is that gonna be avail on 7 Home?
Although I have my suspicion that you're incorrect about Windows 7's protected memory features, I really don't know either way. However, Virtual PC *is* available on all versions of Windows 7, but the "XP Mode" package, which is essentially a free license for Windows XP, is only available for Professional, Enterprise, and Ultimate. You can still run a VM using that tool, however, but you have to supply the license and OS yourself if you're on Home Premium.
I am at least TWICE more productive in Leopard than I ever was with XP.
Even if Windows is "good" compared to Vista, it will be a piece of trash compared to Leopard because:
-virus/malware
-the daily update plague
-overall poor application design
-no viable backup solutions
-etc, etc
At this point my life with mac is so much better than it was with windows it is not even a question. The punditry can talk till they are blue in the face I won't care except for the comedic value of clowns like Mossberg. Suggesting that Mac OS is better but not by much versus Windows 7 is an ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS statement. Mac OS is at least 10 years ahead of Windows 7 in every way, from the file system to parallelization to virtualization to scripting to you name it. It is like comparing an OS made by a highschool student versus an OS made by a world-class scientist.
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
Rabid fanboy alert, rabid fanboy alert! Microsoft could cure cancer and give away the treatment for free and you'd still find a way to hate them.
Windows 7 is getting rave reviews. Perhaps it's actually, you know, GOOD?
They are closing the OS gap (on the desktop at least), but they are losing the overall war. The Mac-iPod-iPhone-iTunes ecosystem is way ahead of anything Microsoft has.
Have you heard of the Zune HD and Xbox 360? I'd say Microsoft are on the right track.
For fucks sake, Mossberg is one of Apple's biggest fans in print. Perhaps he gave Windows 7 a good review because its actually good? Posts like yours give websites like this a bad name.
I whole heartedly agree with your criticism. I know most of us here are rabid Mac fans but we all still need to appreciate the truth especially since it comes from such a reliable and creditable source as Walt Mossberg.
I too feel this is the best OS MicroCopyCat has released. However we all know that MicroCopyCat's real inspiration comes from Mac OS X. That's not fanboy talk that is a cold hard fact.
I hope Windows 7 is a success. I doubt personally that I will choose to us it myself because I don't see the need to change - though maybe if I was a PowerPC user I might check it out before choosing my next computer, just like XP users might mull over a new Mac.
The thing is that Windows 7 will be a difficult to avoid. Work will eventually convert from XP and I can't do anything about that. But at least I will have a better user experience.
Also, it will be a new opportunity for Apple because W7 will bring millions of people up to modern, current, GUI ideas and concepts that are closer to 2010 than 1995. That's a good thing yeah?
I hope Apple ditch the stupid Vista ads though and start showing OS X in detail and make so much more of iLife too.
Finally, I hope Apple sorts out the naming convention between Mac OS X and iPhone OS, just as MS has with Windows 7 and Windows Mobile 7.
I find it funny that Mac OS X is constantly hailed as "better," etc. and yet has virtually no market share compared to Windows.
Apple sells a closed system, with an OS that is NOT licensed to everyone and their dog - deliberately, and which is priced as a Premium product, effectively locking out a large portion of the market.
The market isn't one big market. It has segments to it. It's a pyramid. You've got bottom-end, mid-level, and Premium, if those terms help you to understand the principle that the market is made up of divisions. Apple functions and makes an absolute killing at the Premium end.
Apple, as a matter of course and by design, will have lower market share overall. As stated by Jobs, Cook et al, they choose to lock themselves out of certain segments of the market. A Premium product manufacturer doesn't target certain income brackets - there will be consumers that will be absent from target demographic demographic.
It's much more narrow at the top of the market pyramid, but the consumer approaches tech (and other products) from an entirely different perspective (often not on price), with difference epxectations that Apple happens to cater to. Ideally, you WANT to rule the Premium end. It's these customers that build your brand, that make it desirable, and that will pay top dollar for what you provide. This is what has Microsoft acting so defensive: Windows still has overwhelming unit sale market share, but it is now almost entirely at the low end of the market.
It's a coveted business model that others only wish they could emulate successfully. We're at the point now, where if the average user has $1000+ to spend (and apparently, plenty of them do!) a Mac will be near or at the very top of their list. That's quite an accomplishment. It's the reason Ballmer ends up looking stupid, flustered, and tongue-tied at press conferences, especially when he's in a room-full of Macs.
I whole heartedly agree with your criticism. I know most of us here are rabid Mac fans but we all still need to appreciate the truth especially since it comes from such a reliable and creditable source as Walt Mossberg.
I too feel this is the best OS MicroCopyCat has released. However we all know that MicroCopyCat's real inspiration comes from Mac OS X. That's not fanboy talk that is a cold hard fact.
Then you should be flaterred as the saying goes. Didn't the iPod copy the Walkman, Pixar's The Incredibles copied the Fanstastic 4? Everything copies everything . My iPhone emits light so it's copying the light bulb . Who cares about all this copy talk. Just make it better- get it done.
I am at least TWICE more productive in Leopard than I ever was with XP.
Even if Windows is "good" compared to Vista, it will be a piece of trash compared to Leopard because:
-virus/malware
-the daily update plague
-overall poor application design
-no viable backup solutions
-etc, etc
At this point my life with mac is so much better than it was with windows it is not even a question. The punditry can talk till they are blue in the face I won't care except for the comedic value of clowns like Mossberg. Suggesting that Mac OS is better but not by much versus Windows 7 is an ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS statement. Mac OS is at least 10 years ahead of Windows 7 in every way, from the file system to parallelization to virtualization to scripting to you name it. It is like comparing an OS made by a highschool student versus an OS made by a world-class scientist.
I am at least TWICE more productive in Leopard than I ever was with XP.
Even if Windows is "good" compared to Vista, it will be a piece of trash compared to Leopard because:
-virus/malware
-the daily update plague
-overall poor application design
-no viable backup solutions
-etc, etc
At this point my life with mac is so much better than it was with windows it is not even a question. The punditry can talk till they are blue in the face I won't care except for the comedic value of clowns like Mossberg. Suggesting that Mac OS is better but not by much versus Windows 7 is an ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS statement. Mac OS is at least 10 years ahead of Windows 7 in every way, from the file system to parallelization to virtualization to scripting to you name it. It is like comparing an OS made by a highschool student versus an OS made by a world-class scientist.
Calm down, have some dip...
First of all, virus/malware isn't an issue in Windows 7 as long as you have good behavior. Even a Mac can get infected with a bad QT plugin or a keystroke logger if the user does something dumb. Plus, Microsoft has released their own anti-malware program called "Security Essentials," which fills the role of any PC user who isn't using a paid solution from say Eset or Norton.
Second, Windows updates are released ONCE PER MONTH on the second Tuesday of every month. The only updates that are released outside that schedule are deemed highly critical, and that doesn't happen often. With Windows 7's new patch engine, you *RARELY* need to restart after a Windows update. In fact, I don't believe I've ever had to restart after an update and have been using it since beta. Not even for video drivers!
Third, poor application design? Have you even looked at the Media Center functionality? Even the most hardcore Apple fans have said that a Media Center PC trounces anything the Apple TV is capable of. Not to mention the plethora of free software, like Zune and Live Essentials, that function just as well an elegantly as their Mac counterparts. They lack certain features, but they're 100% free.
Fourth, what are you talking about "viable backup solutions?" Microsoft has had decent backup software since Vista, and have improved it in Windows 7. You can make incremental snapshots, boot from virtual drives, and full disk images directly in the operating system. Not to mention the slew of third party backup software that comes bundled with nearly any hard drive you buy retail these days.
If you want to argue the merits of OS X, argue the things that make it work better for yourself: media applications, scripting and automation, virtual desktops, etc. But don't spew crap about something you know nothing about. I've USED both Leopard and Windows 7, and at this point, I have to concur with Mossberg (for once). Justifying the cost of a Mac is going to be a bit tougher once Windows 7 hits mainstream.
I whole heartedly agree with your criticism. I know most of us here are rabid Mac fans but we all still need to appreciate the truth especially since it comes from such a reliable and creditable source as Walt Mossberg.
I too feel this is the best OS MicroCopyCat has released. However we all know that MicroCopyCat's real inspiration comes from Mac OS X. That's not fanboy talk that is a cold hard fact.
If its cold hard fact, prove it xD. Seriously, though, you could easily point to features from Windows and Zune that look like Apple copied from Microsoft.
But really, is it true that someone copied someone else? Or could it be that these operating systems are maturing to a point where they are just designed the way we think they should be? Microsoft added indexed searching after Apple released spotlight in Tiger. Did they really do it just to copy Apple, or did they do it because ITS A DAMN GOOD IDEA?
There's one area I promise you they didn't copy Apple - Zune. Because the Zune software goes far and above anything iTunes has ever had. iTunes on Windows is slow, bloated, and glitchy. Its always been that way, probably from the ported carbon legacy code still present in the application. Meanwhile, the Zune software is fantastic! Took me a while to "deprogram" my iTunes thinking, but after a while, I got it and understood how much better it is.
Same with media center. I can promise you Microsoft didn't copy Apple there, because the functionality of a Media PC far exceeds what you can get with an Apple TV.
Comments
Because people will start moving their desk job applications to the iPhone, amirite? Call me when someone has written the first PhD thesis on a mobile phone.
In order to take his comment and move it to the iPhone I'll make the assumption you work for the GOP... Cause that's the kinda of talk they can do well.
Don't forget the all too important part... 9% market share vs 83%... Cash flow is close but market share is way off. Imagine when it's 20%!
Actually it's 92.77 vs. 5.12 percent.
What are we discussing here?
Are you serious? You can't compare Mac OS X and Windows? BOTH ARE COMPUTER OPERATING SYSTEMS. They do the same things in different ways. Do you honestly believe you're somehow "better" than someone who uses Windows? Do you let your operating system define your life?
I find it funny that Mac OS X is constantly hailed as "better," etc. and yet has virtually no market share compared to Windows.
As I just posted earlier, some prefer Mac OS X and others prefer Windows. They both do the same things. I can write the exact same document on Mac OS X using Pages, or on Windows using Word. I would get the same output and thus would accomplish the same end goal.
Do research on both operating systems and you'll find they've had different histories, different release cycles, different philosophies and goals but at the end of the day, do the jobs they're supposed to do: operate your computer and let it work for you.
I basically agree with everything but the underlined portion. Market share does not reflect operating system preference, it more accurately reflects product availability. Apples low market share isn't due to consumer preference but due to the respective business models of Apple and Microsoft. Only Apple makes macs, so there are limited models available and virtually none are of the low cost variety, where most market share comes from.
Many people would like to buy a mac, but a) feel they are too expensive, b) can't find a mac that meets their needs (gaps in the product line), or c) need to use windows only software. Those people would get a Windows based computer not out of preference, but out of necessity.
I have a PC because I wanted to a) build my own PC again b) play windows only games c) have a Blu-ray media center and d) keep an eye on the competition so that I keep my views of OSX in check. I greatly prefer OSX, but built a Windows PC to meet some specific needs.
What is funny is that I now have a PS3 for most games and Blu-rays, which I prefer over my PC, I am considering a mini for a media center/server because I prefer OSX, and basically the only game I play on my PC is World of Warcraft, which is available for OSX (but my PC has far superior hardware). That didn't work out as planned.
Maybe I'll call you when the 1st PhD thesis is written on Google Office using Ubuntu, or OS X, or some other OS.!
Good thing I never claimed otherwise.. Although I have to commend a person writing a PhD thesis on a word processor without bibliography support. It's good to know that there are still people on this planet who value the traditional way of creating academic papers (and yes, I know about endnoteweb). Whether services like Google Docs will ever really take off remains to be seen. Compared to Microsoft's office dominance Docs is a drop in the barrel at the moment and Google has yet to present a business model for all their services other than harvesting information.
My comment about the iPhone stems from the fact that at the moment Apple disciples are projecting all their hopes into mobile devices which are supposed to accomplish all that OS X (the desktop system) has failed to do in the recent years: Kill Flash, kill Microsoft, finally bring Apple dominance to the world, etc. And since OS X as it seems can't compete on the desktop the propaganda tactic have switched to marginalizing every market where Apple fails to conquer (e.g. mobile phones are the future, desktop don't matter anymore despite billions of people using them in addition to phones, et cetera pp.).
Can't both operating systems just get along? They both work well for the crowds. It's like Ford vs. Chevy.
Not so sure I like that analogy. Remember the days when Ford and Chevy were so busy out-guzzling each-other they lost touch with the consumer & didn't notice (or want to notice) Toyota and Honda...
Apple cannot ever forget that they're in the business of rewarding their customers with great products, and NOT in the business of "beating" Microsoft.
Wow... what was all that hurling and slinging and back-and-forth in the last few pages!?
What are we discussing here?
Some heretics have dared to enter the hallowed halls of his Jobness' disciples and those infidels have to be purged quickly and mercilessly.
At the risk of being snowed under with vitriol, can I ask a simple question:
What's wrong with the registry? Surely it's just a meta collection of .plist files in a single database, rather than scattered to the 4 winds?
...
(prelim: I've used both Macs and PCs since the 'olden days' of the 80's )
(this post is 'vitriol-free'
Windows registry is a collection of files (from 6 to 11 or so - it varies) in several locations, databases with gobs of binary data stores. (on my win xp sp3 pc, it is about 43 MB in 11 'files')
Yes, in some ways it is like a collection of all the Mac system prefs and ~ prefs plist files. But also it kind of tracks about everything to do with how Windows and every application is setup and how it is supposed to interact with the pc hardware and software.
Conceptually, it was probably a good idea initially. In practice it is a huge mess of files and settings with most having cryptic hexadecimal names and string "key" values. It tends to get hugely bloated over time, with settings that are installed with apps but never removed. (as you may know, most windows uninstallers dont remove everything, usually leave lots of info behind in the registry.) Sometimes those settings conflict = problems.
If it was well implemented it would still be a challenge. But as it is, well, I use installer watchers, and some apps install hundreds or even thousands of settings into the registry.
If it was well implemented there'd be no need for the large and thriving 'registry cleaner' and optimizer utility market, or all the online 'clean your registry' web sites. (google it)
To change the whole NT Kernel and Registry paradigm would mean a ground-up rewrite of the Windows OS. Not a trivial task - and one they did not include in their 5 year Vista development (at least in the released version) and not in the 2 year Win 7 development.
OS X has since 2000 and before that Protected Memory. In windows you can open a JPG file that contains a virus or like and it can infect system files that are in memory because it doesn't "protect" the memory. Win 7 randomizes much like Vista but it's still not the correct way to go about protecting the memory environment.
Virtual PC rewrite I think was started 2 years ago to take advantage of the VT... But your correct in stating that capability wasn't available until 7... It was however capable in every other OS on the planet.
Correct me, but the XP VM system... Is that gonna be avail on 7 Home?
Although I have my suspicion that you're incorrect about Windows 7's protected memory features, I really don't know either way. However, Virtual PC *is* available on all versions of Windows 7, but the "XP Mode" package, which is essentially a free license for Windows XP, is only available for Professional, Enterprise, and Ultimate. You can still run a VM using that tool, however, but you have to supply the license and OS yourself if you're on Home Premium.
I am at least TWICE more productive in Leopard than I ever was with XP.
Even if Windows is "good" compared to Vista, it will be a piece of trash compared to Leopard because:
-virus/malware
-the daily update plague
-overall poor application design
-no viable backup solutions
-etc, etc
At this point my life with mac is so much better than it was with windows it is not even a question. The punditry can talk till they are blue in the face I won't care except for the comedic value of clowns like Mossberg. Suggesting that Mac OS is better but not by much versus Windows 7 is an ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS statement. Mac OS is at least 10 years ahead of Windows 7 in every way, from the file system to parallelization to virtualization to scripting to you name it. It is like comparing an OS made by a highschool student versus an OS made by a world-class scientist.
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
Rabid fanboy alert, rabid fanboy alert! Microsoft could cure cancer and give away the treatment for free and you'd still find a way to hate them.
Windows 7 is getting rave reviews. Perhaps it's actually, you know, GOOD?
They are closing the OS gap (on the desktop at least), but they are losing the overall war. The Mac-iPod-iPhone-iTunes ecosystem is way ahead of anything Microsoft has.
Have you heard of the Zune HD and Xbox 360? I'd say Microsoft are on the right track.
For fucks sake, Mossberg is one of Apple's biggest fans in print. Perhaps he gave Windows 7 a good review because its actually good? Posts like yours give websites like this a bad name.
I whole heartedly agree with your criticism. I know most of us here are rabid Mac fans but we all still need to appreciate the truth especially since it comes from such a reliable and creditable source as Walt Mossberg.
I too feel this is the best OS MicroCopyCat has released. However we all know that MicroCopyCat's real inspiration comes from Mac OS X. That's not fanboy talk that is a cold hard fact.
Wow... what was all that hurling and slinging and back-and-forth in the last few pages!?
What are we discussing here?
Dunno, I was asking myself the same thing Anan.
The thing is that Windows 7 will be a difficult to avoid. Work will eventually convert from XP and I can't do anything about that. But at least I will have a better user experience.
Also, it will be a new opportunity for Apple because W7 will bring millions of people up to modern, current, GUI ideas and concepts that are closer to 2010 than 1995. That's a good thing yeah?
I hope Apple ditch the stupid Vista ads though and start showing OS X in detail and make so much more of iLife too.
Finally, I hope Apple sorts out the naming convention between Mac OS X and iPhone OS, just as MS has with Windows 7 and Windows Mobile 7.
I find it funny that Mac OS X is constantly hailed as "better," etc. and yet has virtually no market share compared to Windows.
Apple sells a closed system, with an OS that is NOT licensed to everyone and their dog - deliberately, and which is priced as a Premium product, effectively locking out a large portion of the market.
The market isn't one big market. It has segments to it. It's a pyramid. You've got bottom-end, mid-level, and Premium, if those terms help you to understand the principle that the market is made up of divisions. Apple functions and makes an absolute killing at the Premium end.
Apple, as a matter of course and by design, will have lower market share overall. As stated by Jobs, Cook et al, they choose to lock themselves out of certain segments of the market. A Premium product manufacturer doesn't target certain income brackets - there will be consumers that will be absent from target demographic demographic.
It's much more narrow at the top of the market pyramid, but the consumer approaches tech (and other products) from an entirely different perspective (often not on price), with difference epxectations that Apple happens to cater to. Ideally, you WANT to rule the Premium end. It's these customers that build your brand, that make it desirable, and that will pay top dollar for what you provide. This is what has Microsoft acting so defensive: Windows still has overwhelming unit sale market share, but it is now almost entirely at the low end of the market.
It's a coveted business model that others only wish they could emulate successfully. We're at the point now, where if the average user has $1000+ to spend (and apparently, plenty of them do!) a Mac will be near or at the very top of their list. That's quite an accomplishment. It's the reason Ballmer ends up looking stupid, flustered, and tongue-tied at press conferences, especially when he's in a room-full of Macs.
I whole heartedly agree with your criticism. I know most of us here are rabid Mac fans but we all still need to appreciate the truth especially since it comes from such a reliable and creditable source as Walt Mossberg.
I too feel this is the best OS MicroCopyCat has released. However we all know that MicroCopyCat's real inspiration comes from Mac OS X. That's not fanboy talk that is a cold hard fact.
Then you should be flaterred as the saying goes. Didn't the iPod copy the Walkman, Pixar's The Incredibles copied the Fanstastic 4? Everything copies everything . My iPhone emits light so it's copying the light bulb . Who cares about all this copy talk. Just make it better- get it done.
I mean what is original anymore? Really?
Look to me it boils down to this:
I am at least TWICE more productive in Leopard than I ever was with XP.
Even if Windows is "good" compared to Vista, it will be a piece of trash compared to Leopard because:
-virus/malware
-the daily update plague
-overall poor application design
-no viable backup solutions
-etc, etc
At this point my life with mac is so much better than it was with windows it is not even a question. The punditry can talk till they are blue in the face I won't care except for the comedic value of clowns like Mossberg. Suggesting that Mac OS is better but not by much versus Windows 7 is an ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS statement. Mac OS is at least 10 years ahead of Windows 7 in every way, from the file system to parallelization to virtualization to scripting to you name it. It is like comparing an OS made by a highschool student versus an OS made by a world-class scientist.
these posts today are hysterical
Look to me it boils down to this:
I am at least TWICE more productive in Leopard than I ever was with XP.
Even if Windows is "good" compared to Vista, it will be a piece of trash compared to Leopard because:
-virus/malware
-the daily update plague
-overall poor application design
-no viable backup solutions
-etc, etc
At this point my life with mac is so much better than it was with windows it is not even a question. The punditry can talk till they are blue in the face I won't care except for the comedic value of clowns like Mossberg. Suggesting that Mac OS is better but not by much versus Windows 7 is an ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS statement. Mac OS is at least 10 years ahead of Windows 7 in every way, from the file system to parallelization to virtualization to scripting to you name it. It is like comparing an OS made by a highschool student versus an OS made by a world-class scientist.
Calm down, have some dip...
First of all, virus/malware isn't an issue in Windows 7 as long as you have good behavior. Even a Mac can get infected with a bad QT plugin or a keystroke logger if the user does something dumb. Plus, Microsoft has released their own anti-malware program called "Security Essentials," which fills the role of any PC user who isn't using a paid solution from say Eset or Norton.
Second, Windows updates are released ONCE PER MONTH on the second Tuesday of every month. The only updates that are released outside that schedule are deemed highly critical, and that doesn't happen often. With Windows 7's new patch engine, you *RARELY* need to restart after a Windows update. In fact, I don't believe I've ever had to restart after an update and have been using it since beta. Not even for video drivers!
Third, poor application design? Have you even looked at the Media Center functionality? Even the most hardcore Apple fans have said that a Media Center PC trounces anything the Apple TV is capable of. Not to mention the plethora of free software, like Zune and Live Essentials, that function just as well an elegantly as their Mac counterparts. They lack certain features, but they're 100% free.
Fourth, what are you talking about "viable backup solutions?" Microsoft has had decent backup software since Vista, and have improved it in Windows 7. You can make incremental snapshots, boot from virtual drives, and full disk images directly in the operating system. Not to mention the slew of third party backup software that comes bundled with nearly any hard drive you buy retail these days.
If you want to argue the merits of OS X, argue the things that make it work better for yourself: media applications, scripting and automation, virtual desktops, etc. But don't spew crap about something you know nothing about. I've USED both Leopard and Windows 7, and at this point, I have to concur with Mossberg (for once). Justifying the cost of a Mac is going to be a bit tougher once Windows 7 hits mainstream.
I whole heartedly agree with your criticism. I know most of us here are rabid Mac fans but we all still need to appreciate the truth especially since it comes from such a reliable and creditable source as Walt Mossberg.
I too feel this is the best OS MicroCopyCat has released. However we all know that MicroCopyCat's real inspiration comes from Mac OS X. That's not fanboy talk that is a cold hard fact.
If its cold hard fact, prove it xD. Seriously, though, you could easily point to features from Windows and Zune that look like Apple copied from Microsoft.
But really, is it true that someone copied someone else? Or could it be that these operating systems are maturing to a point where they are just designed the way we think they should be? Microsoft added indexed searching after Apple released spotlight in Tiger. Did they really do it just to copy Apple, or did they do it because ITS A DAMN GOOD IDEA?
There's one area I promise you they didn't copy Apple - Zune. Because the Zune software goes far and above anything iTunes has ever had. iTunes on Windows is slow, bloated, and glitchy. Its always been that way, probably from the ported carbon legacy code still present in the application. Meanwhile, the Zune software is fantastic! Took me a while to "deprogram" my iTunes thinking, but after a while, I got it and understood how much better it is.
Same with media center. I can promise you Microsoft didn't copy Apple there, because the functionality of a Media PC far exceeds what you can get with an Apple TV.