Bunge, what's bad about it? The stability? The UI? Lots of things? Or just an overall sense of "this sucks"?
In all honesty, the stability has been worse than Win2K for me. I don't own one, but I've fixed several for clients and the damn things freeze. Sometimes, like is OS X, just an app crashes or freezes. But sometimes it's a Microsoft App, something tied into the system and it burps the whole system. I've seen this on several installations now so I finally feel like I can add my two cents into the XP conversations.
The UI is very bad too, if you're used to Win95-Win2K. It's very confusing to just find things since they try and steer you where they think you want to be. When you're there to fix something, the machine doesn't know where you want to go. It always wants to take you to a pictures folder or wherever. I've never met a newbie to the system that likes it either.
It's not easy, whatever they've done. Rather than teach users where things actually are or how they work, the menus add layers and disguise what's actually happening. They're trying to put things in human language terms but it's not always possible (or if it is, they're just doing a very very bad job of it.) In some cases this might make sense, but in the long run ends up reducing a user's understanding of the system. It's kind of like the old 'Simple Finder' option in the Mac OS, but taken to a new level and it's not optional.
The colors and use of movement is annoying. The rounded buttons are bloated and end up taking more space rather than being softly rounded or something like that. I can appreciate moving away from hard colors and edges, but it's overboard. Let's face it. They do look like a cheap whore's makeup. You can not like the Aqua colors, but they're not as pasty or disjointed as XP.
And the movement is ugly. Everytime the system moves something I feel like it's that damn annoying 'bouncing dock icon' that's trying to get your attention. It takes your attention away from what you're doing, like that bouncing dock icon. I hate that.
I've never gotten over how slow the desktop is to respond on boot either. That's a somewhat understandable holdover from Win2K.
This is all stuff I've noticed from the switch from 2K to XP. I'm sure there's more, but this is more than enough.
On the contrary, I hope that a juvenile "Whatever you can do I can do better" argument will spur development at both Apple and MS. It is called competition and it works wonders for innovation.
I just don't see a room full of riled up geeks hooting at a picture of a longhorn as competition. I do agree with most of your post though, and I don't think there's a conflict with what I said. Sadly enough, these days, the competition takes the form of a mud slinging contest, where both proclaim to hate the other with a vehemence that makes the sun's core look like a freezer. Just look around this place now and then: M$ (what's up with the dollar sign?) sucks, Windows is the buggiest POS ever written, security holes, crashes, ... whereas Apple is not interested in money at all (I've never seen the spelling App$e, or something), Apple's just about insulted whenever you try to pay for any purchase @ their store, and their OS NEVER crashes (?), ...
"On the contrary, I hope that a juvenile "Whatever you can do I can do better" argument will spur development at both Apple and MS. It is called competition and it works wonders for innovation. It is the same war, just different battles. Who does better user switching in the OS? Right now, Apple (once Jaguar ships). Hopefully MS comes back with something equally good."
Not from Mirosoft--they neither care nor pay much attention to anything coming out of Apple these days. It only becomes competition if groups start competing, and Microsoft knows it has a lock on the market. They fear Linux, and ignore the Mac.
"On the contrary, I hope that a juvenile "Whatever you can do I can do better" argument will spur development at both Apple and MS. It is called competition and it works wonders for innovation. It is the same war, just different battles. Who does better user switching in the OS? Right now, Apple (once Jaguar ships). Hopefully MS comes back with something equally good."
Not from Mirosoft--they neither care nor pay much attention to anything coming out of Apple these days. It only becomes competition if groups start competing, and Microsoft knows it has a lock on the market. They fear Linux, and ignore the Mac.
For a company that doesn't care about Apple they seem to make a lot of moves that appear to mimick Apple. Even today.
In all honesty, the stability has been worse than Win2K for me. I don't own one, but I've fixed several for clients and the damn things freeze. Sometimes, like is OS X, just an app crashes or freezes. But sometimes it's a Microsoft App, something tied into the system and it burps the whole system. I've seen this on several installations now so I finally feel like I can add my two cents into the XP conversations.
The UI is very bad too, if you're used to Win95-Win2K. It's very confusing to just find things since they try and steer you where they think you want to be. When you're there to fix something, the machine doesn't know where you want to go. It always wants to take you to a pictures folder or wherever. I've never met a newbie to the system that likes it either.
It's not easy, whatever they've done. Rather than teach users where things actually are or how they work, the menus add layers and disguise what's actually happening. They're trying to put things in human language terms but it's not always possible (or if it is, they're just doing a very very bad job of it.) In some cases this might make sense, but in the long run ends up reducing a user's understanding of the system. It's kind of like the old 'Simple Finder' option in the Mac OS, but taken to a new level and it's not optional.
The colors and use of movement is annoying. The rounded buttons are bloated and end up taking more space rather than being softly rounded or something like that. I can appreciate moving away from hard colors and edges, but it's overboard. Let's face it. They do look like a cheap whore's makeup. You can not like the Aqua colors, but they're not as pasty or disjointed as XP.
And the movement is ugly. Everytime the system moves something I feel like it's that damn annoying 'bouncing dock icon' that's trying to get your attention. It takes your attention away from what you're doing, like that bouncing dock icon. I hate that.
I've never gotten over how slow the desktop is to respond on boot either. That's a somewhat understandable holdover from Win2K.
This is all stuff I've noticed from the switch from 2K to XP. I'm sure there's more, but this is more than enough.
I think your all crazy. XP is the best OS MS has ever come out with, stability is the best and the UI is the best they've done. Sure it's different when moving from a 9x Windows but remember how OS X was? XP is also faster and the windows of choice by many...except for those still using 98SE saying it's more stable
The biggest problem with XP I'll agree is the fact that it hides where stuff it. It was said that stuff is being disguised earlier I'll agree and I dislike that...but that is KINDA what the new Finder for Panther seems to do...only it doesn't hide it as much as make it easily accessible I think.
Quote:
Originally posted by der Kopf
I just don't see a room full of riled up geeks hooting at a picture of a longhorn as competition. I do agree with most of your post though, and I don't think there's a conflict with what I said. Sadly enough, these days, the competition takes the form of a mud slinging contest, where both proclaim to hate the other with a vehemence that makes the sun's core look like a freezer. Just look around this place now and then: M$ (what's up with the dollar sign?) sucks, Windows is the buggiest POS ever written, security holes, crashes, ... whereas Apple is not interested in money at all (I've never seen the spelling App$e, or something), Apple's just about insulted whenever you try to pay for any purchase @ their store, and their OS NEVER crashes (?), ...
The world isn't that black and white.
BS. Apple cares just about money as MS. I don't know why people say this, the only reason Apple is innovating as much is because they NEED to! Heck one of the reasons they are a niche is because they innovate so much. It's a double edged sword.
I know that this post sounded pro windows, but it's more sticking up for XP then saying windows is better then OS X because...really who could say that and mean it?
I think the attitude at Apple is not like Microsoft. They obviously are in it to make money, but it's more than that. they genuinely want to make cool things and share it.
Every business is in business to make money. However, there are various ways to do so. You can do it ethically or unethically. That's the difference.
Huh? Apple is a niche because it's competing against a monopoly, M$. Where have you been?
Where have you been? Apple held the title and lost it for a reason. MS didn't start as a monopoly they worked their way up to that. Geez weird day when I'm standing up for MS.
I will agree that Apple enjoys making cool stuff, they are creative and enjoy showing off. I bet they are encouraged to come up with new ideas and directions instead of told how to do stuff.
And no, there was no way I was actually going to write to Thurrott..
It's amazing that people can actually hate something so much that they go to all the trouble of trying to make others hate it too. I'm sure they don't even understand the reason they hate it, it's (like I've said many many times) not like Apple is going to dominate the market tomorrow. Sheesh.. Bad childhoods, or maybe they're just jealous of iApps or something....
Where have you been? Apple held the title and lost it for a reason. MS didn't start as a monopoly they worked their way up to that. Geez weird day when I'm standing up for MS.
I hate to go off topic, but man, let's not promote M$ propaganda! Read a little history before stating the above. They got where they are by thievery, black mailing, lying, deceiving, manipulation, propaganda, and on and on... M$ is a convicted criminal out on the loose.
BS. Apple cares just about money as MS. I don't know why people say this, the only reason Apple is innovating as much is because they NEED to! Heck one of the reasons they are a niche is because they innovate so much. It's a double edged sword.
You should reread my post. Well, you shouldn't, probably, but I just wanted to let you know that you have misunderstood it: I was heckling some of the opinions, the fallacies, that spring up at AI every so often. One of these being that Microsoft is only in it for the money, and Apple doesn't care about money at all. You see that: not my opinion, on the contrary, an opinion with which I disagree very much.
In all honesty, the stability has been worse than Win2K for me. I don't own one, but I've fixed several for clients and the damn things freeze. Sometimes, like is OS X, just an app crashes or freezes. But sometimes it's a Microsoft App, something tied into the system and it burps the whole system. I've seen this on several installations now so I finally feel like I can add my two cents into the XP conversations.
XP has been rather reliable for me. For my roomate, it has been nothing but problems. I think it is because he has a built it yourself Athlon desktop and I have a Pre fab Dell laptop. Overall, XP seems to be more stable that 2k. I have only bluescreened XP once.
Quote:
The UI is very bad too, if you're used to Win95-Win2K. It's very confusing to just find things since they try and steer you where they think you want to be. When you're there to fix something, the machine doesn't know where you want to go. It always wants to take you to a pictures folder or wherever. I've never met a newbie to the system that likes it either.
I HATED Win 2k's UI. Why did it always hide my menu options? I could never remember where things were at because of that. Why was the windows explorer buried under five mouse clicks? It was all I wanted to use form the OS. Why couldn't start tabs be grouped together? Win 2k was a step backwards from win 95 in my mind. I think that Xp is better than 2k, but it still has its issues.
Quote:
It's not easy, whatever they've done. Rather than teach users where things actually are or how they work, the menus add layers and disguise what's actually happening. They're trying to put things in human language terms but it's not always possible (or if it is, they're just doing a very very bad job of it.) In some cases this might make sense, but in the long run ends up reducing a user's understanding of the system. It's kind of like the old 'Simple Finder' option in the Mac OS, but taken to a new level and it's not optional.
I agree that XP hides what is going on at the OS level too much. BOB is back.
Quote:
The colors and use of movement is annoying. The rounded buttons are bloated and end up taking more space rather than being softly rounded or something like that. I can appreciate moving away from hard colors and edges, but it's overboard. Let's face it. They do look like a cheap whore's makeup. You can not like the Aqua colors, but they're not as pasty or disjointed as XP.
The default colors are DISGUSTING. The deep blue really is too much to handle. I have changed all my tabs to silver (much better). Of course my Start button is still green which really makes it quite repulsive.
On the plus side, MS's clear type font smoothing technology is actually quite good. It is very useful on a 1600x1200 resolution 15 inch LCD that I have. I give MS kudos for adding something so useful to the OS.
Quote:
I've never gotten over how slow the desktop is to respond on boot either. That's a somewhat understandable holdover from Win2K.
It is awfully slow to respond on boot. This irritates me to no end because you can't really launch programs until the OS is fully there, which is not when the GUI shell is fully there. Bad UI interaction here.
Quote:
This is all stuff I've noticed from the switch from 2K to XP. I'm sure there's more, but this is more than enough.
XP isn't OS X. It isn't as clean a GUI, and I don't think that it is as stable an OS.
Comments
Originally posted by pscates
Bunge, what's bad about it? The stability? The UI? Lots of things? Or just an overall sense of "this sucks"?
In all honesty, the stability has been worse than Win2K for me. I don't own one, but I've fixed several for clients and the damn things freeze. Sometimes, like is OS X, just an app crashes or freezes. But sometimes it's a Microsoft App, something tied into the system and it burps the whole system. I've seen this on several installations now so I finally feel like I can add my two cents into the XP conversations.
The UI is very bad too, if you're used to Win95-Win2K. It's very confusing to just find things since they try and steer you where they think you want to be. When you're there to fix something, the machine doesn't know where you want to go. It always wants to take you to a pictures folder or wherever. I've never met a newbie to the system that likes it either.
It's not easy, whatever they've done. Rather than teach users where things actually are or how they work, the menus add layers and disguise what's actually happening. They're trying to put things in human language terms but it's not always possible (or if it is, they're just doing a very very bad job of it.) In some cases this might make sense, but in the long run ends up reducing a user's understanding of the system. It's kind of like the old 'Simple Finder' option in the Mac OS, but taken to a new level and it's not optional.
The colors and use of movement is annoying. The rounded buttons are bloated and end up taking more space rather than being softly rounded or something like that. I can appreciate moving away from hard colors and edges, but it's overboard. Let's face it. They do look like a cheap whore's makeup. You can not like the Aqua colors, but they're not as pasty or disjointed as XP.
And the movement is ugly. Everytime the system moves something I feel like it's that damn annoying 'bouncing dock icon' that's trying to get your attention. It takes your attention away from what you're doing, like that bouncing dock icon. I hate that.
I've never gotten over how slow the desktop is to respond on boot either. That's a somewhat understandable holdover from Win2K.
This is all stuff I've noticed from the switch from 2K to XP. I'm sure there's more, but this is more than enough.
Originally posted by Yevgeny
On the contrary, I hope that a juvenile "Whatever you can do I can do better" argument will spur development at both Apple and MS. It is called competition and it works wonders for innovation.
I just don't see a room full of riled up geeks hooting at a picture of a longhorn as competition. I do agree with most of your post though, and I don't think there's a conflict with what I said. Sadly enough, these days, the competition takes the form of a mud slinging contest, where both proclaim to hate the other with a vehemence that makes the sun's core look like a freezer. Just look around this place now and then: M$ (what's up with the dollar sign?) sucks, Windows is the buggiest POS ever written, security holes, crashes, ... whereas Apple is not interested in money at all (I've never seen the spelling App$e, or something), Apple's just about insulted whenever you try to pay for any purchase @ their store, and their OS NEVER crashes (?), ...
The world isn't that black and white.
Not from Mirosoft--they neither care nor pay much attention to anything coming out of Apple these days. It only becomes competition if groups start competing, and Microsoft knows it has a lock on the market. They fear Linux, and ignore the Mac.
Originally posted by mrmister
"On the contrary, I hope that a juvenile "Whatever you can do I can do better" argument will spur development at both Apple and MS. It is called competition and it works wonders for innovation. It is the same war, just different battles. Who does better user switching in the OS? Right now, Apple (once Jaguar ships). Hopefully MS comes back with something equally good."
Not from Mirosoft--they neither care nor pay much attention to anything coming out of Apple these days. It only becomes competition if groups start competing, and Microsoft knows it has a lock on the market. They fear Linux, and ignore the Mac.
For a company that doesn't care about Apple they seem to make a lot of moves that appear to mimick Apple. Even today.
Originally posted by bunge
In all honesty, the stability has been worse than Win2K for me. I don't own one, but I've fixed several for clients and the damn things freeze. Sometimes, like is OS X, just an app crashes or freezes. But sometimes it's a Microsoft App, something tied into the system and it burps the whole system. I've seen this on several installations now so I finally feel like I can add my two cents into the XP conversations.
The UI is very bad too, if you're used to Win95-Win2K. It's very confusing to just find things since they try and steer you where they think you want to be. When you're there to fix something, the machine doesn't know where you want to go. It always wants to take you to a pictures folder or wherever. I've never met a newbie to the system that likes it either.
It's not easy, whatever they've done. Rather than teach users where things actually are or how they work, the menus add layers and disguise what's actually happening. They're trying to put things in human language terms but it's not always possible (or if it is, they're just doing a very very bad job of it.) In some cases this might make sense, but in the long run ends up reducing a user's understanding of the system. It's kind of like the old 'Simple Finder' option in the Mac OS, but taken to a new level and it's not optional.
The colors and use of movement is annoying. The rounded buttons are bloated and end up taking more space rather than being softly rounded or something like that. I can appreciate moving away from hard colors and edges, but it's overboard. Let's face it. They do look like a cheap whore's makeup. You can not like the Aqua colors, but they're not as pasty or disjointed as XP.
And the movement is ugly. Everytime the system moves something I feel like it's that damn annoying 'bouncing dock icon' that's trying to get your attention. It takes your attention away from what you're doing, like that bouncing dock icon. I hate that.
I've never gotten over how slow the desktop is to respond on boot either. That's a somewhat understandable holdover from Win2K.
This is all stuff I've noticed from the switch from 2K to XP. I'm sure there's more, but this is more than enough.
I think your all crazy. XP is the best OS MS has ever come out with, stability is the best and the UI is the best they've done. Sure it's different when moving from a 9x Windows but remember how OS X was? XP is also faster and the windows of choice by many...except for those still using 98SE saying it's more stable
The biggest problem with XP I'll agree is the fact that it hides where stuff it. It was said that stuff is being disguised earlier I'll agree and I dislike that...but that is KINDA what the new Finder for Panther seems to do...only it doesn't hide it as much as make it easily accessible I think.
Originally posted by der Kopf
I just don't see a room full of riled up geeks hooting at a picture of a longhorn as competition. I do agree with most of your post though, and I don't think there's a conflict with what I said. Sadly enough, these days, the competition takes the form of a mud slinging contest, where both proclaim to hate the other with a vehemence that makes the sun's core look like a freezer. Just look around this place now and then: M$ (what's up with the dollar sign?) sucks, Windows is the buggiest POS ever written, security holes, crashes, ... whereas Apple is not interested in money at all (I've never seen the spelling App$e, or something), Apple's just about insulted whenever you try to pay for any purchase @ their store, and their OS NEVER crashes (?), ...
The world isn't that black and white.
BS. Apple cares just about money as MS. I don't know why people say this, the only reason Apple is innovating as much is because they NEED to! Heck one of the reasons they are a niche is because they innovate so much. It's a double edged sword.
I know that this post sounded pro windows, but it's more sticking up for XP then saying windows is better then OS X because...really who could say that and mean it?
Originally posted by ast3r3x
BS. Apple cares just about money as MS. I don't know why people say this, the only reason Apple is innovating as much is because they NEED to!
Every business is in business to make money. However, there are various ways to do so. You can do it ethically or unethically. That's the difference.
Heck one of the reasons they are a niche is because they innovate so much. It's a double edged sword.
Huh?
Originally posted by iPeon
Every business is in business to make money. However, there are various ways to do so. You can do it ethically or unethically. That's the difference.
Huh?
Where have you been? Apple held the title and lost it for a reason. MS didn't start as a monopoly they worked their way up to that. Geez weird day when I'm standing up for MS.
I will agree that Apple enjoys making cool stuff, they are creative and enjoy showing off. I bet they are encouraged to come up with new ideas and directions instead of told how to do stuff.
Originally posted by murbot
Yes, you do not want to be going in there and looking like this.
Or this.
Or this.
Or this.
Whoa.. There are actually people like this?
That's kind of sad..
And no, there was no way I was actually going to write to Thurrott..
It's amazing that people can actually hate something so much that they go to all the trouble of trying to make others hate it too. I'm sure they don't even understand the reason they hate it, it's (like I've said many many times) not like Apple is going to dominate the market tomorrow. Sheesh.. Bad childhoods, or maybe they're just jealous of iApps or something....
Jimzip
It doesn't cover Longhorn or Panther, but a fair comparision between XP and Mac OS X v10.2 can be found at XvsXP.com
Originally posted by ryaxnb
Warning! Off topic...
It doesn't cover Longhorn or Panther, but a fair comparision between XP and Mac OS X v10.2 can be found at XvsXP.com
Arg!! Curse you ryaxnb!!
I spent two hours reading all that stuff and following links! I was meant to be at my friend's house half an hour ago!!
(Damned internet.. Grumble grumble..)
Jimzip
Originally posted by ast3r3x
Where have you been? Apple held the title and lost it for a reason. MS didn't start as a monopoly they worked their way up to that. Geez weird day when I'm standing up for MS.
I hate to go off topic, but man, let's not promote M$ propaganda! Read a little history before stating the above. They got where they are by thievery, black mailing, lying, deceiving, manipulation, propaganda, and on and on... M$ is a convicted criminal out on the loose.
Jimzip
Originally posted by ast3r3x
BS. Apple cares just about money as MS. I don't know why people say this, the only reason Apple is innovating as much is because they NEED to! Heck one of the reasons they are a niche is because they innovate so much. It's a double edged sword.
You should reread my post. Well, you shouldn't, probably, but I just wanted to let you know that you have misunderstood it: I was heckling some of the opinions, the fallacies, that spring up at AI every so often. One of these being that Microsoft is only in it for the money, and Apple doesn't care about money at all. You see that: not my opinion, on the contrary, an opinion with which I disagree very much.
Originally posted by bunge
In all honesty, the stability has been worse than Win2K for me. I don't own one, but I've fixed several for clients and the damn things freeze. Sometimes, like is OS X, just an app crashes or freezes. But sometimes it's a Microsoft App, something tied into the system and it burps the whole system. I've seen this on several installations now so I finally feel like I can add my two cents into the XP conversations.
XP has been rather reliable for me. For my roomate, it has been nothing but problems. I think it is because he has a built it yourself Athlon desktop and I have a Pre fab Dell laptop. Overall, XP seems to be more stable that 2k. I have only bluescreened XP once.
The UI is very bad too, if you're used to Win95-Win2K. It's very confusing to just find things since they try and steer you where they think you want to be. When you're there to fix something, the machine doesn't know where you want to go. It always wants to take you to a pictures folder or wherever. I've never met a newbie to the system that likes it either.
I HATED Win 2k's UI. Why did it always hide my menu options? I could never remember where things were at because of that. Why was the windows explorer buried under five mouse clicks? It was all I wanted to use form the OS. Why couldn't start tabs be grouped together? Win 2k was a step backwards from win 95 in my mind. I think that Xp is better than 2k, but it still has its issues.
It's not easy, whatever they've done. Rather than teach users where things actually are or how they work, the menus add layers and disguise what's actually happening. They're trying to put things in human language terms but it's not always possible (or if it is, they're just doing a very very bad job of it.) In some cases this might make sense, but in the long run ends up reducing a user's understanding of the system. It's kind of like the old 'Simple Finder' option in the Mac OS, but taken to a new level and it's not optional.
I agree that XP hides what is going on at the OS level too much. BOB is back.
The colors and use of movement is annoying. The rounded buttons are bloated and end up taking more space rather than being softly rounded or something like that. I can appreciate moving away from hard colors and edges, but it's overboard. Let's face it. They do look like a cheap whore's makeup. You can not like the Aqua colors, but they're not as pasty or disjointed as XP.
The default colors are DISGUSTING. The deep blue really is too much to handle. I have changed all my tabs to silver (much better). Of course my Start button is still green which really makes it quite repulsive.
On the plus side, MS's clear type font smoothing technology is actually quite good. It is very useful on a 1600x1200 resolution 15 inch LCD that I have. I give MS kudos for adding something so useful to the OS.
I've never gotten over how slow the desktop is to respond on boot either. That's a somewhat understandable holdover from Win2K.
It is awfully slow to respond on boot. This irritates me to no end because you can't really launch programs until the OS is fully there, which is not when the GUI shell is fully there. Bad UI interaction here.
This is all stuff I've noticed from the switch from 2K to XP. I'm sure there's more, but this is more than enough.
XP isn't OS X. It isn't as clean a GUI, and I don't think that it is as stable an OS.