One issue that no one seems to mention, but bugs me to no end, is that of cursor movement. The mouse movement is accurate and stable and doesn't jump around when using ANY version of the Mac OS (unless you have a dirty mechanical roller ball mouse). This can be attributed to the mouse movement calculations and the algorithms involved. It provides for a smooth flow to the cursor on any screen and with any mouse (even Microsoft mice).
This is not the case when using Microsoft's operating systems (and every Windows-based application). Microsoft has not developed calculations advanced enough to create smooth mouse movements that do not jump around. This is certainly noticeable when trying to... say for example make pixel-accurate selections in Photoshop while using something like the rectangular marque or the lasso tool. When working in Photoshop on a PC, I always find myself gripping onto the mouse for dear life in an effort to maintain control of the cursor. In working on the Mac, I find it so much more relaxing to work. It just flows.
And NOW with Vista out, it is actually WORSE! What are they doing?
Must be some sort of compromise in order to get Aero to work.
I'm a big supporter of OSX, Mac, SJ and Apple. That being said, Apple and OSX are not perfect.
As a dual platform user (by necessity not choice), I see the pluses and minuses of both operating systems daily.
We all want and expect continued improvement in the Mac OS. We're all waiting for the new feature set in Leopard and the new hardware. Many improvements build on the good ideas of the past and reject the bad ones. Both Apple and MS use some ideas and concepts from the other to try to make their OSes better. That's just the nature of competitive research. It happens in all technologies. Here's a good book to read on this subject, "Connections" by James Burke.
As to your comments on Thurrot, I'm glad you finally read at least one of his articles. (Now admit, you did learn something didn't you?) Some of your points are legitimate but on the whole, you really need to calm down. Your giving new meaning to the phrase "Apple Evangelist".
hmurchison,
Your remarks are ignorant. Many noted, influential people in the Mac world like Leo LaPorte abd David Pogue, both well known Mac enthusiasts and supporters, highly respect Paul Thurrot and his reviews. I don't agree with everything he says but I learn a lot from his public reviews and like him, I'm a fan of good technology wherever it comes from.
I'm a big supporter of OSX, Mac, SJ and Apple. That being said, Apple and OSX are not perfect.
As a dual platform user (by necessity not choice), I see the pluses and minuses of both operating systems daily.
We all want and expect continued improvement in the Mac OS. We're all waiting for the new feature set in Leopard and the new hardware. Many improvements build on the good ideas of the past and reject the bad ones. Both Apple and MS use some ideas and concepts from the other to try to make their OSes better. That's just the nature of competitive research. It happens in all technologies. Here's a good book to read on this subject, "Connections" by James Burke.
As to your comments on Thurrot, I'm glad you finally read at least one of his articles. (Now admit, you did learn something didn't you?) Some of your points are legitimate but on the whole, you really need to calm down. Your giving new meaning to the phrase "Apple Evangelist".
hmurchison,
Your remarks are ignorant. Many noted, influential people in the Mac world like Leo LaPorte abd David Pogue, both well known Mac enthusiasts and supporters, highly respect Paul Thurrot and his reviews. I don't agree with everything he says but I learn a lot from his public reviews and like him, I'm a fan of good technology wherever it comes from.
That isn't the first article I read from him. I kept going to his site for his impressions on Office 07 some months ago, and ended up reading some of his other articles as well. I still stand by everyone of my comments about him.
Your remarks are ignorant. Many noted, influential people in the Mac world like Leo LaPorte abd David Pogue, both well known Mac enthusiasts and supporters, highly respect Paul Thurrot and his reviews. I don't agree with everything he says but I learn a lot from his public reviews and like him, I'm a fan of good technology wherever it comes from.
Within the context of the Macintosh Operating System Paul Thurrot has never taught me anything I didn't already know. Now if I wanted to read a bit of cheeleading on Windows I'd peruse his posts for something new. Leo LaPorte is a nice personality but again Leo hasn't taught me anything that I haven't learned in selling and supporting Mac systems. David Pogue is a writer that I respect.
The problem with Thurrotian commentary on Macintosh is always the same.
1. He downplays cool implementation. There's very little orginality anywhere. The road to profits lies in the implementation of old ideas in new ways. That's where innovation really is going to thrive.
2. He's so stuck in the windows paradigm he'll try to convince you that the Taskbar in Windows is special or that a "Task Based Interface" is something new. WTF? Everthing you do on a computer is tasked based and if Windows was so efficient then why doesn't it have a better reputation for being more intuitive?
I don't have all night to rant and rave. Perhaps I'll do a bit of digging tomorrow on Thurrots recent Mac commentary and post my thoughts here. I'm just not impressed with him as a non-biased source for Mac information. I agree that OS X isn't without fault but after dealing with XP for a few years and now after having my Tiger based Mini I have a bit more clarity about the battle.
The tranquility of OS X is amazing. No popup messages telling me my computer is unprotected. No annoying antivirus popups harassing me with every step. The OS isn't for sale like Windows meaning I don't have to clean out 10 internet providers and a bunch of other useless junk. No Registry to sift through to "truly" remove application that have fucked up your TCP/IP stack.
Again I could learn about Windows from Thurrot but regarding Macintosh and all things Apple he's got nothing for me. Why should he? I've been focused on Apple for 17 years a part timer isn't going to hold sway with me.
One issue that no one seems to mention, but bugs me to no end, is that of cursor movement. The mouse movement is accurate and stable and doesn't jump around when using ANY version of the Mac OS (unless you have a dirty mechanical roller ball mouse). This can be attributed to the mouse movement calculations and the algorithms involved. It provides for a smooth flow to the cursor on any screen and with any mouse (even Microsoft mice).
This is not the case when using Microsoft's operating systems (and every Windows-based application). Microsoft has not developed calculations advanced enough to create smooth mouse movements that do not jump around. This is certainly noticeable when trying to... say for example make pixel-accurate selections in Photoshop while using something like the rectangular marque or the lasso tool. When working in Photoshop on a PC, I always find myself gripping onto the mouse for dear life in an effort to maintain control of the cursor. In working on the Mac, I find it so much more relaxing to work. It just flows.
And NOW with Vista out, it is actually WORSE! What are they doing?
Must be some sort of compromise in order to get Aero to work.
You mean the article I mentioned and quoted? The one that talks about a professional level review of actual workflow in real environments?
The article that directly and explicitly talks about exactly that issue, and blasts Aero for being worse than XP and both way worse then OS X.
You'd think I'd get a little credit for raising the issue, even if also bugs you.
Oh, and folks? Thurrot? Idiot. You want a good review of OS X go read Sircusa at Ars.
Vista is actually not bad. I recommend giving it a try, even if you go to a horrible Comp-USA kind of environment to check it out. It's pretty nice-looking, and has a lot of good features (many of them, er, "inspired" by OS X).
The breadcrumb bar, improved alt-tab, the Start menu search bar, mouse-over previews in the Taskbar, and overall application simplification all stand out to me as very good improvements.
The overall look and feel is generally polished as well.
That said. Flip 3D is borderline useless, and compares very poorly to Exposé. While improved, Windows is still huge and still way overcomplicated, and the polish is not always consistently applied. There's still too many options and widgets and controls all over the place (take your standard Explorer window): they really pack 'em in. The attempt to remove the menu bar and replace it with a toolbar is an ambitious one, but it works better in some places than others. Frankly, while I like the idea (the menu bar could use some simplification and improvement), or the idea of the idea, it's far from consistent. And some of the visual bling, while nifty at first, I have to say gets grating. You get a little tired of some of those translucent borders, glitzy glow effects, and distracting rollovers even faster than you might expect. Some are used with subtlety (the window-closing effect is particularly nice) but others are much less so. If there's any way to turn the annoying ones off I haven't discovered it yet...
And of course Vista still has a very window-centric philosophy, opposed to OS X's more application-centric philosophy. I see that as more of a personal choice than anything (both paradigms work), but it's still a point of difference. Each have their pros and cons, and while OS X has added more and more window-centric tools to its UI (interweaving windows, a global place for minimized windows, Exposé), Vista doesn't seem to add any app-centric tools to round out its behavior.
Most of all, though, the most glaring issue with Vista is just the plain lack of vision. If you're OS X user, it's very hard to use Vista and not shake your head in wonder at times at the glossy controls, the "gadgets", the iCal-like calendar program, the iPhoto-like Photo Gallery, the Spotlight-like rounded search fields, the flip-arrow to minimize or expand dialog boxes, the new multicolored pinwheel-like waiting cursor... the list goes on and on and on.
Except for Previous Versions and Parental Controls, almost every consumer-level thing in it has already been done in OS X... and we're talking about a 2-yr old version of OS X here, with Apple almost certainly planning new, interesting, still-secret things for Leopard.
Vista is actually not bad. I recommend giving it a try, even if you go to a horrible Comp-USA kind of environment to check it out. It's pretty nice-looking, and has a lot of good features (many of them, er, "inspired" by OS X).
My first experience with Windows Vista PC:
Well CompUSA was taking too long to get someone over to the camera section to recommend a good camera for me, so I decided to check out Vista. I walked over to a PC on Front Display with a 30"+ Display, exactly 2 things greeted me when it came out of screen saver.
The first was about 40 Windows Media Center Errors, and Icons on the Desktop the size of my palm!
Cute... though that says more about CompUSA than it does about Vista, though, don't you think?
Just like OS X, Vista has 256x256 icons that can be scaled to any size.
There's a fair amount of good UI in Vista. Keep an open mind and evaluate the OS on its own terms.
That doesn't excuse MS for bringing extraordinarily little that's new to the table, though. If I were on the MS UI team, I'd be more than a little embarrassed.
Cute... though that says more about CompUSA than it does about Vista, though, don't you think?
Just like OS X, Vista has 256x256 icons that can be scaled to any size.
There's a fair amount of good UI in Vista. Keep an open mind and evaluate the OS on its own terms.
That doesn't excuse MS for bringing extraordinarily little that's new to the table, though. If I were on the MS UI team, I'd be more than a little embarrassed.
I checked out another PC later actually, Vista is essentially a reskinned XP.
Comments
This is not the case when using Microsoft's operating systems (and every Windows-based application). Microsoft has not developed calculations advanced enough to create smooth mouse movements that do not jump around. This is certainly noticeable when trying to... say for example make pixel-accurate selections in Photoshop while using something like the rectangular marque or the lasso tool. When working in Photoshop on a PC, I always find myself gripping onto the mouse for dear life in an effort to maintain control of the cursor. In working on the Mac, I find it so much more relaxing to work. It just flows.
And NOW with Vista out, it is actually WORSE! What are they doing?
Must be some sort of compromise in order to get Aero to work.
And NOW with Vista out, it is actually WORSE! What are they doing?
Must be some sort of compromise in order to get Aero to work.
Maybe one of those 10,000 didn't think it was important enough. Just like the way Vista handles fonts.
Sebastian
I'm a big supporter of OSX, Mac, SJ and Apple. That being said, Apple and OSX are not perfect.
As a dual platform user (by necessity not choice), I see the pluses and minuses of both operating systems daily.
We all want and expect continued improvement in the Mac OS. We're all waiting for the new feature set in Leopard and the new hardware. Many improvements build on the good ideas of the past and reject the bad ones. Both Apple and MS use some ideas and concepts from the other to try to make their OSes better. That's just the nature of competitive research. It happens in all technologies. Here's a good book to read on this subject, "Connections" by James Burke.
As to your comments on Thurrot, I'm glad you finally read at least one of his articles. (Now admit, you did learn something didn't you?) Some of your points are legitimate but on the whole, you really need to calm down. Your giving new meaning to the phrase "Apple Evangelist".
hmurchison,
Your remarks are ignorant. Many noted, influential people in the Mac world like Leo LaPorte abd David Pogue, both well known Mac enthusiasts and supporters, highly respect Paul Thurrot and his reviews. I don't agree with everything he says but I learn a lot from his public reviews and like him, I'm a fan of good technology wherever it comes from.
Sebastion,
I'm a big supporter of OSX, Mac, SJ and Apple. That being said, Apple and OSX are not perfect.
As a dual platform user (by necessity not choice), I see the pluses and minuses of both operating systems daily.
We all want and expect continued improvement in the Mac OS. We're all waiting for the new feature set in Leopard and the new hardware. Many improvements build on the good ideas of the past and reject the bad ones. Both Apple and MS use some ideas and concepts from the other to try to make their OSes better. That's just the nature of competitive research. It happens in all technologies. Here's a good book to read on this subject, "Connections" by James Burke.
As to your comments on Thurrot, I'm glad you finally read at least one of his articles. (Now admit, you did learn something didn't you?) Some of your points are legitimate but on the whole, you really need to calm down. Your giving new meaning to the phrase "Apple Evangelist".
hmurchison,
Your remarks are ignorant. Many noted, influential people in the Mac world like Leo LaPorte abd David Pogue, both well known Mac enthusiasts and supporters, highly respect Paul Thurrot and his reviews. I don't agree with everything he says but I learn a lot from his public reviews and like him, I'm a fan of good technology wherever it comes from.
That isn't the first article I read from him. I kept going to his site for his impressions on Office 07 some months ago, and ended up reading some of his other articles as well. I still stand by everyone of my comments about him.
Sebastian
Sebastion,
hmurchison,
Your remarks are ignorant. Many noted, influential people in the Mac world like Leo LaPorte abd David Pogue, both well known Mac enthusiasts and supporters, highly respect Paul Thurrot and his reviews. I don't agree with everything he says but I learn a lot from his public reviews and like him, I'm a fan of good technology wherever it comes from.
Within the context of the Macintosh Operating System Paul Thurrot has never taught me anything I didn't already know. Now if I wanted to read a bit of cheeleading on Windows I'd peruse his posts for something new. Leo LaPorte is a nice personality but again Leo hasn't taught me anything that I haven't learned in selling and supporting Mac systems. David Pogue is a writer that I respect.
The problem with Thurrotian commentary on Macintosh is always the same.
1. He downplays cool implementation. There's very little orginality anywhere. The road to profits lies in the implementation of old ideas in new ways. That's where innovation really is going to thrive.
2. He's so stuck in the windows paradigm he'll try to convince you that the Taskbar in Windows is special or that a "Task Based Interface" is something new. WTF? Everthing you do on a computer is tasked based and if Windows was so efficient then why doesn't it have a better reputation for being more intuitive?
I don't have all night to rant and rave. Perhaps I'll do a bit of digging tomorrow on Thurrots recent Mac commentary and post my thoughts here. I'm just not impressed with him as a non-biased source for Mac information. I agree that OS X isn't without fault but after dealing with XP for a few years and now after having my Tiger based Mini I have a bit more clarity about the battle.
The tranquility of OS X is amazing. No popup messages telling me my computer is unprotected. No annoying antivirus popups harassing me with every step. The OS isn't for sale like Windows meaning I don't have to clean out 10 internet providers and a bunch of other useless junk. No Registry to sift through to "truly" remove application that have fucked up your TCP/IP stack.
Again I could learn about Windows from Thurrot but regarding Macintosh and all things Apple he's got nothing for me. Why should he? I've been focused on Apple for 17 years a part timer isn't going to hold sway with me.
One issue that no one seems to mention, but bugs me to no end, is that of cursor movement. The mouse movement is accurate and stable and doesn't jump around when using ANY version of the Mac OS (unless you have a dirty mechanical roller ball mouse). This can be attributed to the mouse movement calculations and the algorithms involved. It provides for a smooth flow to the cursor on any screen and with any mouse (even Microsoft mice).
This is not the case when using Microsoft's operating systems (and every Windows-based application). Microsoft has not developed calculations advanced enough to create smooth mouse movements that do not jump around. This is certainly noticeable when trying to... say for example make pixel-accurate selections in Photoshop while using something like the rectangular marque or the lasso tool. When working in Photoshop on a PC, I always find myself gripping onto the mouse for dear life in an effort to maintain control of the cursor. In working on the Mac, I find it so much more relaxing to work. It just flows.
And NOW with Vista out, it is actually WORSE! What are they doing?
Must be some sort of compromise in order to get Aero to work.
You mean the article I mentioned and quoted? The one that talks about a professional level review of actual workflow in real environments?
The article that directly and explicitly talks about exactly that issue, and blasts Aero for being worse than XP and both way worse then OS X.
You'd think I'd get a little credit for raising the issue, even if also bugs you.
Oh, and folks? Thurrot? Idiot. You want a good review of OS X go read Sircusa at Ars.
The breadcrumb bar, improved alt-tab, the Start menu search bar, mouse-over previews in the Taskbar, and overall application simplification all stand out to me as very good improvements.
The overall look and feel is generally polished as well.
That said. Flip 3D is borderline useless, and compares very poorly to Exposé. While improved, Windows is still huge and still way overcomplicated, and the polish is not always consistently applied. There's still too many options and widgets and controls all over the place (take your standard Explorer window): they really pack 'em in. The attempt to remove the menu bar and replace it with a toolbar is an ambitious one, but it works better in some places than others. Frankly, while I like the idea (the menu bar could use some simplification and improvement), or the idea of the idea, it's far from consistent. And some of the visual bling, while nifty at first, I have to say gets grating. You get a little tired of some of those translucent borders, glitzy glow effects, and distracting rollovers even faster than you might expect. Some are used with subtlety (the window-closing effect is particularly nice) but others are much less so. If there's any way to turn the annoying ones off I haven't discovered it yet...
And of course Vista still has a very window-centric philosophy, opposed to OS X's more application-centric philosophy. I see that as more of a personal choice than anything (both paradigms work), but it's still a point of difference. Each have their pros and cons, and while OS X has added more and more window-centric tools to its UI (interweaving windows, a global place for minimized windows, Exposé), Vista doesn't seem to add any app-centric tools to round out its behavior.
Most of all, though, the most glaring issue with Vista is just the plain lack of vision. If you're OS X user, it's very hard to use Vista and not shake your head in wonder at times at the glossy controls, the "gadgets", the iCal-like calendar program, the iPhoto-like Photo Gallery, the Spotlight-like rounded search fields, the flip-arrow to minimize or expand dialog boxes, the new multicolored pinwheel-like waiting cursor... the list goes on and on and on.
Except for Previous Versions and Parental Controls, almost every consumer-level thing in it has already been done in OS X... and we're talking about a 2-yr old version of OS X here, with Apple almost certainly planning new, interesting, still-secret things for Leopard.
Vista is actually not bad. I recommend giving it a try, even if you go to a horrible Comp-USA kind of environment to check it out. It's pretty nice-looking, and has a lot of good features (many of them, er, "inspired" by OS X).
My first experience with Windows Vista PC:
Well CompUSA was taking too long to get someone over to the camera section to recommend a good camera for me, so I decided to check out Vista. I walked over to a PC on Front Display with a 30"+ Display, exactly 2 things greeted me when it came out of screen saver.
The first was about 40 Windows Media Center Errors, and Icons on the Desktop the size of my palm!
I quietly walked away.
Sebastian
Just like OS X, Vista has 256x256 icons that can be scaled to any size.
There's a fair amount of good UI in Vista. Keep an open mind and evaluate the OS on its own terms.
That doesn't excuse MS for bringing extraordinarily little that's new to the table, though. If I were on the MS UI team, I'd be more than a little embarrassed.
Cute... though that says more about CompUSA than it does about Vista, though, don't you think?
Just like OS X, Vista has 256x256 icons that can be scaled to any size.
There's a fair amount of good UI in Vista. Keep an open mind and evaluate the OS on its own terms.
That doesn't excuse MS for bringing extraordinarily little that's new to the table, though. If I were on the MS UI team, I'd be more than a little embarrassed.
I checked out another PC later actually, Vista is essentially a reskinned XP.
Sebastian
You mean the article I mentioned and quoted? The one that talks about a professional level review of actual workflow in real environments?
The article that directly and explicitly talks about exactly that issue, and blasts Aero for being worse than XP and both way worse then OS X.
You'd think I'd get a little credit for raising the issue, even if also bugs you.
Oh, and folks? Thurrot? Idiot. You want a good review of OS X go read Sircusa at Ars.
Before jumping, perhaps consider that I had taken up this issue 9 months before you or the author for which you want to take credit for.
http://www.stratacafe.com/forum/topi...83&whichpage=2 (look at bottom of page)
Regardless it's blown up into the mainstream computer media anyway, there's a number of articles about it on MacSurfer from different publications.