The big difference between Vista and Lepard is the Mac 10.5 and Vista 1.0
Vista is notoriously bad at windows XP programs and worse win98 programs. So much stuff(some security, some not) are so radically changed, it will make most Vista earily adopters(and even some future late ones) hair pull.
And I doubt corporate would touch that thing with a long handled, sterilized stick. Reprograming internal programs is bad enough, but paying for certain upgrades = managers sitting on it till the problem goes away or can't be avoided.
Vista has a long trek up(not as long as macosx, but long) road up.
Lepoard is relatively short growing pains, and Intel users would like it as anything that crunches Rosetta/code optimization better = need.
They may be pinned together in the hype, but they are very different senerio's.
Microsoft looks at Vista as a long term(burn roads to pave new), while Apple with Leopard is another stepping stone.
Vista at intro = risk taking (will you burn if you install)
Leopard at intro = value assessment (Is it worth the price)
No, you go back to yours. I'm here on Earth where flash is slower than HDDs.
Hmmm....
Thinking about it... Flash has much lower latencies, but I'm not sure how much that matters when it comes to Virtual Memory, and I'm not sure how true that actually is when you compare an HDD on a SATA bus to a USB stick connected to a USB port. What happens if you've another USB device sucking up all the bandwidth?
I still fail to see what's so great about this feature. RAM is cheaper than a USB stick.
Hm. Spaces. "Innovative?" Are you JOKING? Linux has had that for HOW many years....?
Automatic file backups is another idea that is HARDLY new.. Perhaps Apple's approach is slightly different from what other people are doing, but not hugely. And Windows DOES have "Previous Versions."
Wait, I thought we were comparing OS X to Windows, not various flavors of Linux...? Windows does not have virtual desktops, Leopard will. Besides, as always, the devil is in the details, and Apple's implementation w/ Spaces looks really cool. (Check out some of Spaces + Exposé videos on YouTube to get a taste of what it's like.)
Same goes for Time Machine. Basic tech, basic idea... but just a brilliant, fun, drop-dead easy-to-use implementation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by turnwrite
It is stuff like this that I am talking about: "Actually, you don't understand much about Vista's feature's either. Oops! They had to remove all of them." COME ON, PEOPLE! Admit it, Vista has some really cool things about it. SO DOES OS X. BUT SO DOES VISTA. I'm not saying Vista is better. I LIKE OS X BETTER. I just think it is cleaner. System Preferences vs Control Panels would be a good example. But I am pointing out how disgusted I was with WWDC, where Apple was just being so stuck up it ended up being FUNNY. Because they are acting like they own the world, when HOW MUCH MORE MARKET SHARE DOES MICROSOFT HAVE? It just makes me mad when they completely diss Microsoft, who is actually doing a STELLAR job of improving from XP...
The knee-jerk "Vista sucks" comments bug me too, and I also found Apple's attitude at WWDC rather childish. (And super-ironic, since all the stuff they were announcing was stuff basically in Vista. All the stuff that's *not* in Vista they're keeping under wraps. )
That said, I can't really agree that MS is doing a "stellar" job. Yes, it's a major step from XP, but huge chunks of Vista are frankly uninspired. I mean, 5 years, and they've got "Windows Mail", an iPhoto-like app, a iCal-like app, a Konfabulator/Dashboard-like app that looks a little like the Dock, a compositing engine that renders graphics to the video card, and glass-like, 3-D, pulsing blue buttons in dialogs? (cough) lame (cough). C'mon, guys.
Of course there's good stuff too. Nice type. The breadcrumb bar. The ability to upgrade the OS online (very cool). A much-improved alt-tab with previews. (Don't get me started on "Flip 3D".) And so on.
But that's small stuff. I want to see *great* things in Windows -- things that make me want to switch. Nothing I've seen in Vista makes me come even close. Though I'm sure it'll all be great for Windows users... eventually.
I note that you requested for people to name "one single little" feature that Leopard will have over Vista, and now that people have named several, you have conveniently (for you) ignored it.
But I would agree that Apple and Apple users would do well not to be so cocky about Vista. It is nowhere near as bad as they like to think it is.
You;re right, there is nothing in Vista making me want to switch from a Mac. But there is DEFINITELY stuff that makes me want to go to the store on OPENING DAY and upgrade my XP.
And so Hobbes: while we're talking about implementation, here: Vista's implementation of many of these OSXish features is different than Apple's.
Windows Explorer now has many of the features that the Finder does. But it is still very different. The "look" is pretty OSXish. But totally different.
Well I'm just pointing out that all this "new" and "innovative" stuff isn't as new as you guys seem to think.
But as I have said MANY times, I LIKE OSX BETTER. So no need to convice me of that: I agree.
What has to be remembered in these reviews, is that they are SUPPOSED to wring out problems and bugs. Any review that doesn't, isn't useful, or even a full review.
Some reviewers put the OS on their machine, look at it for a while, and pronounce it good.
That's a waste of time.
The problems that were mentioned are real problems. And the lack of any new major features has been gone over so many times in the PC press, that we should all know it by heart by now.
You;re right, there is nothing in Vista making me want to switch from a Mac. But there is DEFINITELY stuff that makes me want to go to the store on OPENING DAY and upgrade my XP.
Oh, absolutely. The people trying to make Vista = XP + transparent windows are either ill-informed or full of it. Vista is a big upgrade for Windows users, with lots and lots of features. It will sell well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by turnwrite
And so Hobbes: while we're talking about implementation, here: Vista's implementation of many of these OSXish features is different than Apple's.
Yeah, it's the surface details (right down the trash can!) that feel to me most shamelessly ripped-off. And just to be clear, I'm not saying that Vista is copying the Mac UI philosophy; I'm sure Vista is still Windows, and acts like Windows (for good and bad). But I mean, compare the Sidebar to Dashboard, or "Flip 3D" to Exposé, and I think you'll have a good idea of how "different" in Vista's case ain't necessarily better.
Well I think Flip 3D is pretty different than Expose, after all 3D has been a part of "Longhorn" for a LOOOONG time, and I wouldn't consider it a ripoff.
Sidebar is, I think, similar to Dashboard, but a) was in older builds of Vista, BEFORE Dashboard, and b) Dashboard = Konfabulator, which is a WIndows app too. If Apple can rip off a Mac app, Windows can rip off the same app for Windows.
Mr. H: The "features" that people have named are not so much "features Vista doesn't have" as "Apple's is prettier."
Er... Well, the features I listed in this post are not in Vista, in any shape or form, to the best of my knowledge.
FW target disk mode, as someone else mentioned is a very useful feature. I guess that's sort of covered under EFI/OpenFirmware, but just supporting those boot firmware systems doesn't give you FW target mode for free, you still have to implement it. Also, it's debatable as to whether target disk mode is a OS X feature or a Mac platform feature.
Someone else mentioned Automator, I'm not aware of a GUI-based automation system as part of Vista.
What has to be remembered in these reviews, is that they are SUPPOSED to wring out problems and bugs. Any review that doesn't, isn't useful, or even a full review.
Some reviewers put the OS on their machine, look at it for a while, and pronounce it good.
That's a waste of time.
The problems that were mentioned are real problems. And the lack of any new major features has been gone over so many times in the PC press, that we should all know it by heart by now.
Huh? What are you talking about? It's not a final product, it's RC1 (aka Beta 3).
The sum of reports I've seen say: looks good, not 100% sure about UAC, and not quite yet ready for prime time.
As for the lack of new major features, we're not in disagreement exactly. There's plenty of new features for loyal XP users, so if MS can sell 'em Vista without them looking at the other side of the lawn, they're in OK shape. For anyone who's used a Mac, of course... not so much.
Huh? What are you talking about? It's not a final product, it's RC1 (aka Beta 3).
The sum of reports I've say: looks good, but not yet ready for prime time.
As for the lack of new major features, we're not in disagreement exactly. There's plenty of new features for loyal XP users, so if MS can sell 'em Vista without them looking at the other side of the lawn, they're in OK shape. For anyone who's used a Mac, of course... not so much.
The entire point of RC is that it is feature complete, and has only very minor bugs that can be eliminated quickly. It is not an aka Beta 3. But this SHOULD have been called beta 3, as many PC users have noted. I'm sure you've read plenty of that. Oh, and why would a final release candidate have a 1 after it? If it is final release, it should be going to Golden Master, shortly after the bugs are gone.
And what about all of the calls to delay it from weeks to months?
No, this is still a mess.
The main feature, other than the fact that is makes the first release of OS 10 seem like a speedy bit of software, is that it seems to be more intelligently thought out, except for the Start menu, which I'm reading a lot of negativity about, and is confusing to me as well.
Well I think Flip 3D is pretty different than Expose, after all 3D has been a part of "Longhorn" for a LOOOONG time, and I wouldn't consider it a ripoff.
Sidebar is, I think, similar to Dashboard, but a) was in older builds of Vista, BEFORE Dashboard, and b) Dashboard = Konfabulator, which is a WIndows app too. If Apple can rip off a Mac app, Windows can rip off the same app for Windows.
Actually, the scuttlebutt is that MS was working on an Exposé-like solution internally when Apple released Panther. So, to avoid the appearance of flat-out copying, they released the sort of nifty-looking but low-utility Flip 3D. (Tip to MS: if you can't see the full contents of your windows all at once, it ain't so useful.)
That's one of the problems inherent in working on something for years and years without releasing to the public.
As for Sidebar... yeah, yeah, Sidebar had been floating around for ages, but it took a decidedly Konfabulator/Dashboard-like look-and-feel exactly after Tiger's release. (shrug) Apple did the same thing, really, so whatever.
The entire point of RC is that it is feature complete, and has only very minor bugs that can be eliminated quickly. It is not an aka Beta 3. Bur this SHOULD have been called beta 3, as many PC users have noted. I'm sure you've read plenty of that.
And what about all of the calls to delay it from weeks to months?
No, this is still a mess.
The main feature, other than the fact that is makes the first release of OS 10 seem like a speedy bit of software, is that it seems to be more intelligently thought out, except for the Start menu, which I'm reading a lot of negativity about, and is confusing to me as well.
Vista makes OS 10.0 seem speedy? Um.... yeah, right.
I've heard (and believe it) that MS is pulling a PR stunt with RC1. Basically, it's Beta 3, but they're calling it RC1 in an effort to show development is moving just fine and who knows maybe in a mad effort to actually make their ship date.
I don't know if it's still a mess or not. I suspect it's shaping up and will be a decent OS, but we'll see.
BTW, the Vista Start panel looks sensible to me. It's basically like Quicksilver for launching apps (a smart addition), plus the fiddly, cluttered hierarchical Programs menu (ugh) if you want it. What's the problem?
Comments
"USB sticks are slower ... than Hard Drives."[/I] Super. Now go back to your home planet.
No, you go back to yours. I'm here on Earth where flash is slower than HDDs.
Vista is notoriously bad at windows XP programs and worse win98 programs. So much stuff(some security, some not) are so radically changed, it will make most Vista earily adopters(and even some future late ones) hair pull.
And I doubt corporate would touch that thing with a long handled, sterilized stick. Reprograming internal programs is bad enough, but paying for certain upgrades = managers sitting on it till the problem goes away or can't be avoided.
Vista has a long trek up(not as long as macosx, but long) road up.
Lepoard is relatively short growing pains, and Intel users would like it as anything that crunches Rosetta/code optimization better = need.
They may be pinned together in the hype, but they are very different senerio's.
Microsoft looks at Vista as a long term(burn roads to pave new), while Apple with Leopard is another stepping stone.
Vista at intro = risk taking (will you burn if you install)
Leopard at intro = value assessment (Is it worth the price)
No, you go back to yours. I'm here on Earth where flash is slower than HDDs.
Hmmm....
Thinking about it... Flash has much lower latencies, but I'm not sure how much that matters when it comes to Virtual Memory, and I'm not sure how true that actually is when you compare an HDD on a SATA bus to a USB stick connected to a USB port. What happens if you've another USB device sucking up all the bandwidth?
I still fail to see what's so great about this feature. RAM is cheaper than a USB stick.
That was one of the first posts here with an actually valid opinion.
Mr H: NO. Flash is FASTER than hard drives.
Vista at intro = risk taking (will you burn if you install)
Leopard at intro = value assessment (Is it worth the price)
I note you are assuming that Leopard won't have a repeat/something-similar-to Panther's lovely FireWire bug?
Hm. Spaces. "Innovative?" Are you JOKING? Linux has had that for HOW many years....?
Automatic file backups is another idea that is HARDLY new.. Perhaps Apple's approach is slightly different from what other people are doing, but not hugely. And Windows DOES have "Previous Versions."
Wait, I thought we were comparing OS X to Windows, not various flavors of Linux...? Windows does not have virtual desktops, Leopard will. Besides, as always, the devil is in the details, and Apple's implementation w/ Spaces looks really cool. (Check out some of Spaces + Exposé videos on YouTube to get a taste of what it's like.)
Same goes for Time Machine. Basic tech, basic idea... but just a brilliant, fun, drop-dead easy-to-use implementation.
It is stuff like this that I am talking about: "Actually, you don't understand much about Vista's feature's either. Oops! They had to remove all of them." COME ON, PEOPLE! Admit it, Vista has some really cool things about it. SO DOES OS X. BUT SO DOES VISTA. I'm not saying Vista is better. I LIKE OS X BETTER. I just think it is cleaner. System Preferences vs Control Panels would be a good example. But I am pointing out how disgusted I was with WWDC, where Apple was just being so stuck up it ended up being FUNNY. Because they are acting like they own the world, when HOW MUCH MORE MARKET SHARE DOES MICROSOFT HAVE? It just makes me mad when they completely diss Microsoft, who is actually doing a STELLAR job of improving from XP...
The knee-jerk "Vista sucks" comments bug me too, and I also found Apple's attitude at WWDC rather childish. (And super-ironic, since all the stuff they were announcing was stuff basically in Vista.
That said, I can't really agree that MS is doing a "stellar" job. Yes, it's a major step from XP, but huge chunks of Vista are frankly uninspired. I mean, 5 years, and they've got "Windows Mail", an iPhoto-like app, a iCal-like app, a Konfabulator/Dashboard-like app that looks a little like the Dock, a compositing engine that renders graphics to the video card, and glass-like, 3-D, pulsing blue buttons in dialogs? (cough) lame (cough). C'mon, guys.
Of course there's good stuff too. Nice type. The breadcrumb bar. The ability to upgrade the OS online (very cool). A much-improved alt-tab with previews. (Don't get me started on "Flip 3D".) And so on.
But that's small stuff. I want to see *great* things in Windows -- things that make me want to switch. Nothing I've seen in Vista makes me come even close. Though I'm sure it'll all be great for Windows users... eventually.
I note that you requested for people to name "one single little" feature that Leopard will have over Vista, and now that people have named several, you have conveniently (for you) ignored it.
But I would agree that Apple and Apple users would do well not to be so cocky about Vista. It is nowhere near as bad as they like to think it is.
And so Hobbes: while we're talking about implementation, here: Vista's implementation of many of these OSXish features is different than Apple's.
Windows Explorer now has many of the features that the Finder does. But it is still very different. The "look" is pretty OSXish. But totally different.
Well I'm just pointing out that all this "new" and "innovative" stuff isn't as new as you guys seem to think.
But as I have said MANY times, I LIKE OSX BETTER. So no need to convice me of that: I agree.
And I agree with that.
That's why I use a Mac.
But no one has named anthing solidly better.
Or did you hear something I didn't?
No, that's about as absurdly harsh a review as you're going to find.
The Inquirer is a well-known sourpuss rag. Same goes for their acidic articles on Apple.
Here's an actually average report on Vista RC1.
I consider that one to be too mild.
What has to be remembered in these reviews, is that they are SUPPOSED to wring out problems and bugs. Any review that doesn't, isn't useful, or even a full review.
Some reviewers put the OS on their machine, look at it for a while, and pronounce it good.
That's a waste of time.
The problems that were mentioned are real problems. And the lack of any new major features has been gone over so many times in the PC press, that we should all know it by heart by now.
You;re right, there is nothing in Vista making me want to switch from a Mac. But there is DEFINITELY stuff that makes me want to go to the store on OPENING DAY and upgrade my XP.
Oh, absolutely. The people trying to make Vista = XP + transparent windows are either ill-informed or full of it. Vista is a big upgrade for Windows users, with lots and lots of features. It will sell well.
And so Hobbes: while we're talking about implementation, here: Vista's implementation of many of these OSXish features is different than Apple's.
Yeah, it's the surface details (right down the trash can!) that feel to me most shamelessly ripped-off. And just to be clear, I'm not saying that Vista is copying the Mac UI philosophy; I'm sure Vista is still Windows, and acts like Windows (for good and bad). But I mean, compare the Sidebar to Dashboard, or "Flip 3D" to Exposé, and I think you'll have a good idea of how "different" in Vista's case ain't necessarily better.
Thanks Kuku.
That was one of the first posts here with an actually valid opinion.
Mr H: NO. Flash is FASTER than hard drives.
No, it's not. The fastest Flash is under 20MBs. The fastest HD's today, which are pretty easily to buy, are over 80MBs.
Sidebar is, I think, similar to Dashboard, but a) was in older builds of Vista, BEFORE Dashboard, and b) Dashboard = Konfabulator, which is a WIndows app too. If Apple can rip off a Mac app, Windows can rip off the same app for Windows.
You;re right, RAM is faster. But for VM, flash is a better solution.
Again. you're wrong. VM can consume more memory than the largest Flash drives, by far. And there is that write lifetime problem.
When this comes out, sometime in late 2008, it will be different. And expensive at first. But, by then 10.* will be using it as well.
http://samsung.com/PressCenter/Press...911_0000286481
Mr. H: The "features" that people have named are not so much "features Vista doesn't have" as "Apple's is prettier."
Er... Well, the features I listed in this post are not in Vista, in any shape or form, to the best of my knowledge.
FW target disk mode, as someone else mentioned is a very useful feature. I guess that's sort of covered under EFI/OpenFirmware, but just supporting those boot firmware systems doesn't give you FW target mode for free, you still have to implement it. Also, it's debatable as to whether target disk mode is a OS X feature or a Mac platform feature.
Someone else mentioned Automator, I'm not aware of a GUI-based automation system as part of Vista.
Print to PDF from any App.
Bonjour.
I consider that one to be too mild.
What has to be remembered in these reviews, is that they are SUPPOSED to wring out problems and bugs. Any review that doesn't, isn't useful, or even a full review.
Some reviewers put the OS on their machine, look at it for a while, and pronounce it good.
That's a waste of time.
The problems that were mentioned are real problems. And the lack of any new major features has been gone over so many times in the PC press, that we should all know it by heart by now.
Huh? What are you talking about? It's not a final product, it's RC1 (aka Beta 3).
The sum of reports I've seen say: looks good, not 100% sure about UAC, and not quite yet ready for prime time.
As for the lack of new major features, we're not in disagreement exactly. There's plenty of new features for loyal XP users, so if MS can sell 'em Vista without them looking at the other side of the lawn, they're in OK shape. For anyone who's used a Mac, of course... not so much.
Huh? What are you talking about? It's not a final product, it's RC1 (aka Beta 3).
The sum of reports I've say: looks good, but not yet ready for prime time.
As for the lack of new major features, we're not in disagreement exactly. There's plenty of new features for loyal XP users, so if MS can sell 'em Vista without them looking at the other side of the lawn, they're in OK shape. For anyone who's used a Mac, of course... not so much.
The entire point of RC is that it is feature complete, and has only very minor bugs that can be eliminated quickly. It is not an aka Beta 3. But this SHOULD have been called beta 3, as many PC users have noted. I'm sure you've read plenty of that. Oh, and why would a final release candidate have a 1 after it? If it is final release, it should be going to Golden Master, shortly after the bugs are gone.
And what about all of the calls to delay it from weeks to months?
No, this is still a mess.
The main feature, other than the fact that is makes the first release of OS 10 seem like a speedy bit of software, is that it seems to be more intelligently thought out, except for the Start menu, which I'm reading a lot of negativity about, and is confusing to me as well.
Well I think Flip 3D is pretty different than Expose, after all 3D has been a part of "Longhorn" for a LOOOONG time, and I wouldn't consider it a ripoff.
Sidebar is, I think, similar to Dashboard, but a) was in older builds of Vista, BEFORE Dashboard, and b) Dashboard = Konfabulator, which is a WIndows app too. If Apple can rip off a Mac app, Windows can rip off the same app for Windows.
Actually, the scuttlebutt is that MS was working on an Exposé-like solution internally when Apple released Panther. So, to avoid the appearance of flat-out copying, they released the sort of nifty-looking but low-utility Flip 3D. (Tip to MS: if you can't see the full contents of your windows all at once, it ain't so useful.)
That's one of the problems inherent in working on something for years and years without releasing to the public.
As for Sidebar... yeah, yeah, Sidebar had been floating around for ages, but it took a decidedly Konfabulator/Dashboard-like look-and-feel exactly after Tiger's release. (shrug) Apple did the same thing, really, so whatever.
The entire point of RC is that it is feature complete, and has only very minor bugs that can be eliminated quickly. It is not an aka Beta 3. Bur this SHOULD have been called beta 3, as many PC users have noted. I'm sure you've read plenty of that.
And what about all of the calls to delay it from weeks to months?
No, this is still a mess.
The main feature, other than the fact that is makes the first release of OS 10 seem like a speedy bit of software, is that it seems to be more intelligently thought out, except for the Start menu, which I'm reading a lot of negativity about, and is confusing to me as well.
Vista makes OS 10.0 seem speedy? Um.... yeah, right.
I've heard (and believe it) that MS is pulling a PR stunt with RC1. Basically, it's Beta 3, but they're calling it RC1 in an effort to show development is moving just fine and who knows maybe in a mad effort to actually make their ship date.
I don't know if it's still a mess or not. I suspect it's shaping up and will be a decent OS, but we'll see.
BTW, the Vista Start panel looks sensible to me. It's basically like Quicksilver for launching apps (a smart addition), plus the fiddly, cluttered hierarchical Programs menu (ugh) if you want it. What's the problem?