snow leopard vs windows seven
Mac Vs PC
I was one of the ("new converts") XP people who got Macs for the first time because of some very fabulous advertizing and Apple's image as a company with superior products. But after 1 year of using a Mac, I have come to believe that a computer is a computer is a computer.
Latest OS whether it is windows or OSX, would always have learnt something from its predecessors and competitors and in some extent would be better. Some new OS represent a big step forward (windows XP or leopard), others a small step (vista or snow leopard). Microsoft suffered because they took a small step forward with XP when Apple took a big step with leopard and now it is Apple's turn to suffer when Microsoft takes a big step with Seven vs. Apple's small step forward with SL.
I went for a better product switching to Mac at that time when time comes around for my next computer; it won't be a Mac just because I am a Mac user. It will be whichever is a better product at that time in both features and value. Whether it is a PC or a Mac, because a computer is a computer is a computer.
I was one of the ("new converts") XP people who got Macs for the first time because of some very fabulous advertizing and Apple's image as a company with superior products. But after 1 year of using a Mac, I have come to believe that a computer is a computer is a computer.
Latest OS whether it is windows or OSX, would always have learnt something from its predecessors and competitors and in some extent would be better. Some new OS represent a big step forward (windows XP or leopard), others a small step (vista or snow leopard). Microsoft suffered because they took a small step forward with XP when Apple took a big step with leopard and now it is Apple's turn to suffer when Microsoft takes a big step with Seven vs. Apple's small step forward with SL.
I went for a better product switching to Mac at that time when time comes around for my next computer; it won't be a Mac just because I am a Mac user. It will be whichever is a better product at that time in both features and value. Whether it is a PC or a Mac, because a computer is a computer is a computer.
Comments
Mac Vs PC
I was one of the ("new converts") XP people who got Macs for the first time because of some very fabulous advertizing and Apple's image as a company with superior products. But after 1 year of using a Mac, I have come to believe that a computer is a computer is a computer.
Latest OS whether it is windows or OSX, would always have learnt something from its predecessors and competitors and in some extent would be better. Some new OS represent a big step forward (windows XP or leopard), others a small step (vista or snow leopard). Microsoft suffered because they took a small step forward with XP when Apple took a big step with leopard and now it is Apple's turn to suffer when Microsoft takes a big step with Seven vs. Apple's small step forward with SL.
I went for a better product switching to Mac at that time when time comes around for my next computer; it won't be a Mac just because I am a Mac user. It will be whichever is a better product at that time in both features and value. Whether it is a PC or a Mac, because a computer is a computer is a computer.
With all due respect if you've only been computing on OS X for a year you've likely only scratched the surface of what the OS can do. I've computed on Apple for almost two decades and OS X is the deepest OS we've ever had. When you think you need 3rd party software to do something a search will generally yield a solution that is right on your computer now.
I see no reason to buy a PC when the path of least resistance is to buy a Mac and run Windows virtualized.
I believe a computer is a computer but that doesn't mean all things are equal in use.
Snow leopard is a misdirection. Although they will implement all the stuff they say they will, which is needed right now, I believe they are simultaneously working on a cocoa touch variant of Snow Leopard. From the ground up! For Mac touch of course.
Cocoa Touch will be an integral part of Snow Leopard so no variant will really need to be made. I imagine we may see new input devices that are somewhat OS dependant. Touch based keyboards or even mice. Wacom Cintiq tablets with multi-touch capabilties. Mac Touch computers for human digit based tablet action.
I expect that Windows 7 is good for Apple and computing in general. I also think that SL is the right product at the right time. I'm still learning how to use all the doodads in Leopard. I don't need any major new features ..I need stability and a co-hesive UI for managing the immense power of the OS and application.
Cocoa Touch will be an integral part of Snow Leopard so no variant will really need to be made.
I don't know. It really depends on how the whole UI will look on the Mac touch. My gut says there will be a "Snow Leopard touch" or something. A separate variant. You could be right though. It's really hard to know guessing like this. It's fun to think about though.
I don't know. It really depends on how the whole UI will look on the Mac touch. My gut says there will be a "Snow Leopard touch" or something. A separate variant. You could be right though. It's really hard to know guessing like this. It's fun to think about though.
The UI design is managed via Interface Builder, for both platforms. Cocoa APIs will merge and be extended for each platform's UI paradigm.
Mac Vs PC
I was one of the ("new converts") XP people who got Macs for the first time because of some very fabulous advertizing and Apple's image as a company with superior products. But after 1 year of using a Mac, I have come to believe that a computer is a computer is a computer.
Latest OS whether it is windows or OSX, would always have learnt something from its predecessors and competitors and in some extent would be better. Some new OS represent a big step forward (windows XP or leopard), others a small step (vista or snow leopard). Microsoft suffered because they took a small step forward with XP when Apple took a big step with leopard and now it is Apple's turn to suffer when Microsoft takes a big step with Seven vs. Apple's small step forward with SL.
I went for a better product switching to Mac at that time when time comes around for my next computer; it won't be a Mac just because I am a Mac user. It will be whichever is a better product at that time in both features and value. Whether it is a PC or a Mac, because a computer is a computer is a computer.
Welcome to the boards docid...
Snow leopard is a misdirection.
100% agreed!
Cocoa Touch will be an integral part of Snow Leopard so no variant will really need to be made.
I hope you are right. I don't want Apple to be working on five OS variants (10.6 desktop, 10.6 server, iPhone/iPod Touch OS, Apple TV OS, and Mac Touch OS).
I hope you are right. I don't want Apple to be working on five OS variants (10.6 desktop, 10.6 server, iPhone/iPod Touch OS, Apple TV OS, and Mac Touch OS).
Like it or not, this is the best way to make the OS work with the device at hand the best. To make something work truly well you have to custom design the OS. Don't forget, if you take an old MacBook and new MacBook, system preferences on both machines doesn't look the same. The new machine has unique preferences for it's multi touch trackpad.
I am totally convinced this Apple tablet won't just run the regular desktop OS, it will run something designed especially for it. Like the iPhone has its own UI layer, as does Apple TV. This device will need it, as it's not an iPhone, and it won't be a desktop computer, though they will likely aim it at the computer market, and not the large iPod market. It will be a Mac, but a new type of Mac, and a new UI for computers.
Mac Vs PC
Microsoft suffered because they took a small step forward with XP when Apple took a big step with leopard and now it is Apple's turn to suffer when Microsoft takes a big step with Seven vs. Apple's small step forward with SL.
Windows 7 is Vista sp2 with a new name.
Windows 7 did not get a new kernel or anything else significantly different architecturally. MS squashed bugs, bundled drivers and cut UI requirements through some better implementation code. To complete the charade they changed some of the UI graphical elements and made most of the pop-up security warnings off by default. Substantially it is still Vista, but the name Vista is so connected with the launch disaster that he name had to change for the OS to have any chance at all.
Like it or not, this is the best way to make the OS work with the device at hand the best. To make something work truly well you have to custom design the OS.
No, you do not. For reasons it is obvious you have not thought about, custom is a bad idea nearly all the time. Custom means you have no idea where the bugs are every time you re-start. Custom means nothing else works with it so ALL the software needs to be re-written. Custom means you better have a sugar-daddy government contract.
Leverage of experience and existing functionality completely disappears when you go custom. Even exotic high performance embedded devices do not use custom OSes, they use one of a half-dozen existing embedded OSes bought off the proverbial shelf. The OS developer just ports the absolute minimum amount of the hardware abstraction layer to run the existing kernel on newly developed hardware. Oh, wait those half-dozen or so embedded OS companies do the EXACT same thing Apple as done with OS X!
Windows 7 is Vista sp2 with a new name.
Windows 7 did not get a new kernel or anything else significantly different architecturally. MS squashed bugs, bundled drivers and cut UI requirements through some better implementation code. To complete the charade they changed some of the UI graphical elements and made most of the pop-up security warnings off by default. Substantially it is still Vista, but the name Vista is so connected with the launch disaster that he name had to change for the OS to have any chance at all.
I agree. Microsoft takes too long in development of a new OS, with the time frame for Windows 7 it is Vista sp2.
No, you do not. For reasons it is obvious you have not thought about, custom is a bad idea nearly all the time.
Yeah, regular Mac OS X would be great on the iPhone
All I know is that Windows is used more often. Period.
It's under much more scrutiny. More users, more opportunities for people to be totally stupid and screw up the way it works.
I use OSX. I love it. I don't use windows because I don't need to. All I know is OSX has been getting better and better, and when touchscreen technology is implemented only as Apple can implement it, it will be a force to be reckoned with.
Anyway, we'll see. Windows Seven will meet the scrutiny of the masses, and by golly, a lot of people will probably have problems with it.
Yeah, regular Mac OS X would be great on the iPhone
You have no idea of what makes an OS, do you. Yeah, that wasn't a question, it was a statement.
Swapping out Cocoa for Cocoa Touch and deleting Java+Carbon doesn't make it a "custom design" operating system in any sense of the word. It is a consistent operating system, that's why the iPhone is so damn easy to start programming for, Cocoa schlumps already get it.
Most of what you seem yo be thinking is the OS is fluff sitting on top of the OS. Hell even the UI really isn't "the OS", it is just an interface to the OS, same as the command line, which just happens to be an app that is an interface to the OS.
You have no idea of what makes an OS, do you. Yeah, that wasn't a question, it was a statement.
Swapping out Cocoa for Cocoa Touch and deleting Java+Carbon doesn't make it a "custom design" operating system in any sense of the word. It is a consistent operating system, that's why the iPhone is so damn easy to start programming for, Cocoa schlumps already get it.
Most of what you seem yo be thinking is the OS is fluff sitting on top of the OS. Hell even the UI really isn't "the OS", it is just an interface to the OS, same as the command line, which just happens to be an app that is an interface to the OS.
Yes, with all get the level of your intelligence. We're talking about a custom designed UI, which is a big undertaking. You need to create new metaphors from scratch for interacting with the OS. Copy & Paste etc. That's what I mean by a custom OS. Don't talk smack when you know full well what I mean. Or at least you should. The iPhone wasn't 3 years on the making for nothing. The OS UI layer has be custom designed for finger input, across the whole OS.
Example, when you look at the touch UI in Windows 7, when someone touches the screen with a stylus you see a cursor hand or a pointer appear briefly. This isn't merely annoying, it's completely missing the point entirely. The Windows 7 UI wasn't tailored for touch completely, touch was merely added on almost. Quit your bitching.
Next time any of us reply to one of your posts we all need to try to remember that actually being the one in the conversation to actually say what we mean and use precise enough terminology to get it across is unacceptable to you. Or more bluntly, communicating effectively is seen as arrogant and know-it-all-ish, we need to remember to dumb it down and get the arguments wrong so you can feel better about your own mental level.
Or maybe we should all say one thing then attack the other poster as we say something different. Oh, now I get it! You decided to take up the role of Kim Kap Sol now that he is on vacation!!!
And while the Kernel may be much the same, that doesn't change the fact that it install, boots, and performs faster.
I'm happy you prefer OS X, but being childish doesn't help the image of Apple as overly snobby. I think both OSs are good for each other and help push technology forward.
Windows 7 is Vista sp2 with a new name.
Windows 7 did not get a new kernel or anything else significantly different architecturally. MS squashed bugs, bundled drivers and cut UI requirements through some better implementation code. To complete the charade they changed some of the UI graphical elements and made most of the pop-up security warnings off by default. Substantially it is still Vista, but the name Vista is so connected with the launch disaster that he name had to change for the OS to have any chance at all.
Why do people still think that Vista has serious problems? Or bugs? Yes Vista is a little slower in benchmarks because of the graphic sub-system isn't part of the kernel anymore and there are tons of background processes. But UI improvements will speed up your every day work extremely on Vista compared to XP.
And yes there where hardware incompatibilities at the first months after the release mainly because hardware manufactorers (like Creative and Nvidia) haven't understood that most parts of Vista are completely re-coded (like graphic, network, printing and sound).
Microsoft does fix bugs with service packs, they never introduce new features (XP SP2 was an exception because of the poor security of the OS).
Windows 7 does indeed get e new kernel but not new driver models. So anti-virus software from Vista will not be compatible but almost all drivers will be. 7 isn't Vista SP2 like Leopard isn't a Tiger SP. Vista is the new generation of the Windows OS so it would be fair to call Windows 7 the "Vista 2" like Leopard is "Mac OS X 6" or the 15th (?) version of Mac OS.
Vista doesn't fail because of the quality of the product. There are other reasons:
and finaly:
they are all basically the same, by the way.
most to least problematic systems I've used:
Windows XP
Windows ME
Ubuntu 8.04
Mac OSX 10.5
Windows Vista (Just a fraction less problems than OSX, still not great though)
Windows 7 (Haven't hit a problem yet, but probably because I haven't used it much, and it is just a beta)
and at the end hopefully OSX 10.6
I know, I know 10.5 worse than Vista? But I have just hit walls in 10.5 with bluetooth making the system restart, my poor girlfriend always has problems connecting to Wifi at school, Can't play a single game (aside from the sims 2, which runs better on a 9 year old POS i have)... unfortunately I just hit too many walls. so my girlfriend uses the iMac and macbook, and i use my desktop and laptop. when 10.6 comes out, though, i'll jump right back in and mess around.
the only real pro i see in my desktop over the imac is that i can upgrade the monitor with ease