For what I do, Windows has the best applications and I prefer the file browser.
Word 2007 is better than any word processor I've used on the Mac.
Firefox is the best browser of all and the Windows version is better than the OSX version.
uTorrent is the best BT application I've used.
Outlook 2007 is the best e-mail client I've used.
foobar2k is the best music player I've used.
Media Player Classic is the most flexible video player I've used.
Now, I do miss two apps every time I'm not on my Powerbook:
1) Adium - Hands down the best IM app out there. I love it and Windows has no real multi-protocol IM client that I like (trillian is OK).
2) Handbrake - Simple and powerful h.264 encoder. MeGUI for Windows is far more complicated.
As others have mentioned more harshly, that set of apps doesn't really mean much in the way of comparison.
Word 2007's interface is a mess but the thing I've been missing for ages on OS X is a word processor that is as powerful as Office but launches as fast as TextEdit. Pages is good but it's a mini-indesign and it's not really all that fast.
I dislike both the Windows and Mac versions of Firefox. I don't really notice much difference between them. Safari is better IMO.
uTorrent I've never used but Azureus works fine so no complaints there.
Outlook, I don't really do serious mailing so Mail is fine for me. I don't see Mail lacking in features that I'd need.
Music players, I just love itunes. It's so simple and powerful for finding and categorizing music. For movies, Windows media player is awful. I can't even fast forward movies most of the time and no editing support. I edit clips all the time in Quicktime.
If Apple just added some more powerful editing to TextEdit then I think they'd be set for most people's basic needs. Reports suggest that leopard has a snappier interface so if it's faster and less bloated than Vista (which their advertising would sugegst), has a new more refined theme (which the unified interface theme seems to point towards). So Leopard vs Vista, I think we have a clear winner naturally with the exception of gaming. But I fear that will always be the exception.
Besides finder, is there anything else about OSX that you do not like?
Lack of options in right-click contextual menus (I guess because Apple thinks I’m too stupid to know how to click a right button, but somehow not too stupid to remember how to activate Expose, stubborn jackasses).
App is running while all the windows are closed. It doesn’t really trip me up, but everyone I try to get to use my Powerbook hates it because it is counter-intuitive (more stubborn Apple jackassery).
Marvin:
Have you actually used those apps under XP or Vista?
Have you actually used Vista for more than a short period, stepping up to it with a purpose other than trying to prove to yourself that Windows totally sucks?
It is not much use comparison-wise when you’ve only used one set of the applications in question.
When someone says “I have used X and Y, and I think Y is better for Z reasons” it is no useful reply to say, “Well I like X!”.
Even better is “I like Apple and hate Windows, and I have decided to accept the reviews and reports that confirm by pre-existing biases. And although I hate Windows and do not use it, I will go ahead and confirm that Apple is the winner between the Apple OS I’ve never used and a Windows version I’ve never used!”
Have you actually used those apps under XP or Vista?
Have you actually used Vista for more than a short period, stepping up to it with a purpose other than trying to prove to yourself that Windows totally sucks?
1. I used many those apps under XP AND Vista. Note that I used both XP and Vista since launch of each software. and yes I still think that Office 2007 interface is "fugly" and if Office 2008 on mac is like that, i won't pay a single cent for it.
uTorrent is great and I actually use it on my PC. But Xtorrent on Mac does the job very well. (Torrent search on the apps ftw)
Firefox is great on PC but pretty slow on Mac but I got other marvelous browser on mac such as Camino, Omniweb, Safari. On PC, I have to either use Firefox or IE7 (spit on IE)... note that I never use Opera and never will.
Never used foobar before because I use iTunes on both my PC and Mac and it works like charm (yes on my Vista too)
Mediaplayerclassic... meh i only watched South Park, Family Guy, and other new dvdrips which can play very well on VLC Media Player. (I have both VLC and MPC on my PC and I do have VLC on my mac)
2. I used vista since launch and yes I still have it right now right next to me MBP and I hated it. I am planning to re-install XP after I finish transferring my stuff to my Extrernals.
Now, it seems that the uniform concern about OSX is the Finder. I used PathFinder and it works very well. I do not have a lot of files on my hard drive so I do not have any problems organizing it (both Mac and PC). I guess to each its own but I think Vista's explorer, while it's great, it is only useful for some group of people and you are probably one of them.
Regarding the icon size, Hell i never even touch them on both my PC and Mac so it is again only catered to some group of people.
Also, regarding "The lack of options in right-click contextual menu"
I want to ask you wnat do you want?? because for me, I use my keyboard to copy and paste and that's all that I need from my right click. I do not need 30 lines options on my right click and have to skim through everything just to cut/copy/paste.
Regarding, App is running while all the windows are closed
Just press (Apple+Q) nothing hard. Yeah get your hand to work chop chop.
Or if you're that lazy, I don't see any performance drop on my MBP when I open a lot of applications for daily usage.
Maybe if you open a crap load of photoshop and other heavy apps it will start slowing down but so far, I usually open at least 10-12 applications (including parallels) and it hasn't slowed down yet.
Lack of options in right-click contextual menus (I guess because Apple thinks I’m too stupid to know how to click a right button, but somehow not too stupid to remember how to activate Expose, stubborn jackasses).
App is running while all the windows are closed. It doesn’t really trip me up, but everyone I try to get to use my Powerbook hates it because it is counter-intuitive (more stubborn Apple jackassery).
Fair enough but nothing you've mentioned bothers me as much as the barrage of dialogue boxes to accomplish tasks in XP( is this better in vista?) and constant attacks of viruses and spyware. Yes viruses and spyware can be combated but it's extra work that I find distracting. To each his own, I respect your opinion but disagree.
Lack of options in right-click contextual menus (I guess because Apple thinks I’m too stupid to know how to click a right button, but somehow not too stupid to remember how to activate Expose, stubborn jackasses).
You need to be more specific. What is missing, exactly?
It's been a while since I've seriously used Windows, but the only thing I remember it having in contextual menus that the Finder didn't have was the New Document submenu and Copy/Paste/et al.
Quote:
App is running while all the windows are closed. It doesn’t really trip me up, but everyone I try to get to use my Powerbook hates it because it is counter-intuitive (more stubborn Apple jackassery).
That's complaining that an apple doesn't have an orange peel.
This is my number one frustration with Windows. I'm glad you don't like Apple's method, which is why there's choices in the world, but it is neither counter-intuitive nor jackassery.
It's is how real people work.
Note that most serious Windows programs use an MDI window within a window interface to get around this: no one likes waiting 5 minutes for Photoshop to open up just because they closed their last window.
App is running while all the windows are closed. It doesn?t really trip me up, but everyone I try to get to use my Powerbook hates it because it is counter-intuitive (more stubborn Apple jackassery).
That's more of a developer thing than an Apple thing though. I prefer apps to stay open when I close all the windows. Why would I want to go through Photoshop's loading screen every time I close all my documents?
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat
Have you actually used those apps under XP or Vista?
Have you actually used Vista for more than a short period, stepping up to it with a purpose other than trying to prove to yourself that Windows totally sucks?
I use XP quite a bit. I did only try Vista briefly and it didn't seem much different from XP except things in different places. I tried to install it on Parallels and it blue screened so I put it aside. I will probably get round to using it more but it's not really on my to do list. I don't think Windows completely sucks but I think relative to OS X, it is worse and if the problems I have with OS X are sorted in leopard then for me it will be the clear winner because I still see big flaws in Vista even from the short time I used it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat
It is not much use comparison-wise when you?ve only used one set of the applications in question.
When someone says ?I have used X and Y, and I think Y is better for Z reasons? it is no useful reply to say, ?Well I like X!?.
I must've missed your Z reasons the first time. The parts I quoted, you basically said you like X and gave no reason why X was better than any OS X equivalent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat
Even better is ?I like Apple and hate Windows, and I have decided to accept the reviews and reports that confirm by pre-existing biases. And although I hate Windows and do not use it, I will go ahead and confirm that Apple is the winner between the Apple OS I?ve never used and a Windows version I?ve never used!?
Wow. You realise you're really coming off like a flame-baiting Windows fanboy? I don't hate Windows and I do use it regularly but I find it is worse than OS X. If you read that differently then you're deluding yourself.
I'll say this, Mac OS X is much better in terms of multi-tasking, was easier to much easier to search for things on your hard drive, had the advantage of expose, and much more secure in terms of kernel access. I also like my removable disks showing up on my desktop. Having to good hunting through the my computer screen for my flash drive can is a pain. Disk showing up on my desktop and double clicking to see the contents is easy.
On the flip side, I agree with much of what groverat says about the finder. The applications menu in the start menu is far easier to use than the to having to hunt down the applications folder in OSX. Yes, I know the hack of putting the applications folder on the dock, but you shouldn't have to. Most novice users or switchers aren't going to be able to figure that solution out anyway. The lack of any kind of navigation aides in the finder's list and icon views can make things confusing. All you have is the ability to press the back or forward buttons.
Vista also has one major advantage over OSX, it's on familiar hardware. Upgrading to vista doesn't require adapting to a much different (and sometimes conflicting) hardware philosophy and it it many cases you don't even need a new computer. Vista really doesn't have to be better than OSX, they already have the users. It just has to be good enough to keep them.
I've been a dual platform user for about 20 years. I much prefer OS X (supplemented with a lot of great, cheap small apps like Path Finder iClip, 1passwrd, etc.) but, by necessity, have become an XP power user. I've always particularly detested the Word module in the MS Office Suite (both Mac and Windows) but again, by necessity, had to use it
I've been using the trial versions of Word and Excel 2007 on my Sony TX160 for about a week. I couldn't disagree with you more about the ribbon interface. It is not a mess. It's very logical, easy to use and speeds up complex doc creation by an order of magnitude (at least for me). I like the functional tab feature of the ribbbon. When I'm in the formatting tab, only the formatting tool icons are displayed close at hand and easy to access. When I'm in the Table of Contents tab, only what I need for this operation is displayed in the ribbon. Ditto for Tables which I use frequently for the many statistical reports I have to write. It also integrates exceptionally well with Excel, something that is very important to my needs in report writing.
I can only hope that the new Mac Office 2008 is as good as this Office 2007 demo I'm now using on the Sony. I have read in reviews and on Windows user forums that a lot of long time Wintel users of Office products hate the new ribbon interface because after many years of use, they had learned how to navigate the menu-submenu-submenu-submenu.... centric Word bloatware program. Now they're confronted with something totally new, very tab and icon-centric, something very Mac-esque, and they hate it with unbridled passion. You would not believe the outcry against Office 2007 on the MS evangelist sites.
Having said all that, I will never ever use Vista because of the inherent bombshell hidden deep within its kernel. For those who don't know about this bombshell, read the article by world renowned New Zealand security expert Peter Gutmann, " A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection"
This paper has set the Windows world ablaze and may in part be responsible for the slow implementation of Vista. I highly recommend it to all. Here's how the paper begins"
"Executive Summary
Windows Vista includes an extensive reworking of core OS elements in order to provide content protection for so-called ?premium content?, typically HD data from Blu-Ray and HD-DVD sources. Providing this protection incurs considerable costs in terms of system performance, system stability, technical support overhead, and hardware and software cost. These issues affect not only users of Vista but the entire PC industry, since the effects of the protection measures extend to cover all hardware and software that will ever come into contact with Vista, even if it's not used directly with Vista (for example hardware in a Macintosh computer or on a Linux server). This document analyses the cost involved in Vista's content protection, and the collateral damage that this incurs throughout the computer industry.
Executive Executive Summary
The Vista Content Protection specification could very well constitute the longest suicide note in history [Note A]."
Though I'm a strong devotee of Apple, the company (I have lots of stock) the Mac, iPod etc., I'm first and foremost a devotee of great technology wherever it comes from. After first hand usage, Word and Excel 2007 appear to be excellent products. I hate to give 1 stinking dime to MS but I'm afraid I will have to pony up for these 2 new Office products. Unless of course Gee-Rat can hook me up with his MS employee. Nah, that won't work. I don't "borrow" or "copy" software from others. I think the authors of the software deserve to be paid for their work. Gotta run off now to more important stuff like NCAA hoops.
I've been a dual platform user for about 20 years. I much prefer OS X (supplemented with a lot of great, cheap small apps like Path Finder iClip, 1passwrd, etc.) but, by necessity, have become an XP power user. I've always particularly detested the Word module in the MS Office Suite (both Mac and Windows) but again, by necessity, had to use it
I've been using the trial versions of Word and Excel 2007 on my Sony TX160 for about a week. I couldn't disagree with you more about the ribbon interface. It is not a mess. It's very logical, easy to use and speeds up complex doc creation by an order of magnitude (at least for me). I like the functional tab feature of the ribbbon. When I'm in the formatting tab, only the formatting tool icons are displayed close at hand and easy to access. When I'm in the Table of Contents tab, only what I need for this operation is displayed in the ribbon. Ditto for Tables which I use frequently for the many statistical reports I have to write. It also integrates exceptionally well with Excel, something that is very important to my needs in report writing.
I can only hope that the new Mac Office 2008 is as good as this Office 2007 demo I'm now using on the Sony. I have read in reviews and on Windows user forums that a lot of long time Wintel users of Office products hate the new ribbon interface because after many years of use, they had learned how to navigate the menu-submenu-submenu-submenu.... centric Word bloatware program. Now they're confronted with something totally new, very tab and icon-centric, something very Mac-esque, and they hate it with unbridled passion. You would not believe the outcry against Office 2007 on the MS evangelist sites.
Having said all that, I will never ever use Vista because of the inherent bombshell hidden deep within its kernel. For those who don't know about this bombshell, read the article by world renowned New Zealand security expert Peter Gutmann, " A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection"
This paper has set the Windows world ablaze and may in part be responsible for the slow implementation of Vista. I highly recommend it to all. Here's how the paper begins"
"Executive Summary
Windows Vista includes an extensive reworking of core OS elements in order to provide content protection for so-called ?premium content?, typically HD data from Blu-Ray and HD-DVD sources. Providing this protection incurs considerable costs in terms of system performance, system stability, technical support overhead, and hardware and software cost. These issues affect not only users of Vista but the entire PC industry, since the effects of the protection measures extend to cover all hardware and software that will ever come into contact with Vista, even if it's not used directly with Vista (for example hardware in a Macintosh computer or on a Linux server). This document analyses the cost involved in Vista's content protection, and the collateral damage that this incurs throughout the computer industry.
Executive Executive Summary
The Vista Content Protection specification could very well constitute the longest suicide note in history [Note A]."
Though I'm a strong devotee of Apple, the company (I have lots of stock) the Mac, iPod etc., I'm first and foremost a devotee of great technology wherever it comes from. After first hand usage, Word and Excel 2007 appear to be excellent products. I hate to give 1 stinking dime to MS but I'm afraid I will have to pony up for these 2 new Office products. Unless of course Gee-Rat can hook me up with his MS employee. Nah, that won't work. I don't "borrow" or "copy" software from others. I think the authors of the software deserve to be paid for their work. Gotta run off now to more important stuff like NCAA hoops.
like I mentioned, not everybody like the Office 2007/possibly 2008 on mac ribbon interface. I am one of those people who hates it and you like it. to each its own
like I mentioned, not everybody like the Office 2007/possibly 2008 on mac ribbon interface. I am one of those people who hates it and you like it. to each its own
Have you used the Ribbon?
Your quickness to judge reeks of some pre-existing bias.
if the 2008 office on mac comes with that crappy interface. i won't pay a penny for it
well, then I think you can save the money becaue as far as I know, Office for Mac will be using the same style, the tab base interface just like the 2007...
Lack of options in right-click contextual menus (I guess because Apple thinks I?m too stupid to know how to click a right button, but somehow not too stupid to remember how to activate Expose, stubborn jackasses).
App is running while all the windows are closed. It doesn?t really trip me up, but everyone I try to get to use my Powerbook hates it because it is counter-intuitive (more stubborn Apple jackassery).
ah... just plug your 2 button mouse to your Mac, and you have right-click right away...
Talk about design... I bet some people will like a mouse with 10 buttons... and every button have about 10 features you can customise... but I haven't seen one really using it and being productive...
Firstly, icons in Vista aren’t exactly small (256x256 @ 32bit color). I am a total UI whore and the first thing I do with any OS is crank up icon size on the desktop to the maximum. I LOVE giant pretty icons and Vista delivers.
Seems like this icon whore do not have much taste (sorry about that). Vista's icon is big, but not pretty. This is the same kind of design that Windows have been doing, inconsistancy and lack of good dsign guideline. Icons in Windows Vista is definitely high res, but then, they're hard to read, hard to recognise, and if they're small, they're unclear because of bad coordination of light and shade.
Quote:
Now, you can’t choose between every single icon resolution from 16x16 to 256x256, but the slider size change in Finder seems more like a “look what we can do” gimmick than anything that might actually be useful. Vista gives me 3 or 4 icon size settings and I find this is ample.
That's a pretty personal choice, isn't it? Why do you think people do not want the sizes in the middle of the smallest to the biggest? It's not a gimmick.
Quote:
Column view is a waste of screen space. What do I care what other folders are in a folder that I navigated away from 3 clicks ago? It is confusing and not good for moving things around. I never use Columns view.
I find Column view very useful. Just like you care about the path bar Vista offer right now. You obviously want to know where you're in the system and column view did that in a very elaborative way. In fact, I set column view as my default view.
Quote:
If I am moving a file from one part of the file system to another part of the file system that is distant, then it is far easier to just cut, navigate, then paste. Very very handy.
As I said, in Windows, cut and paste is the easier way to move files, whatever file navigation or views is not helpful in Windows environment, it's just too clumsy and counter-intuitive.
This machine has had XP since it was born. Vista came with a full system drive format.
lfe2211:
No benchmarks, just my own intuition.
I am not surprised people are unhappy with it, it?s pretty different (not very much, but nerds are pretty much autistic when it comes to any change).
The non-classic Explorer window view in XP was pretty much useless, in my opinion. Now in all explorer windows you have a graphical representation of the file system on the left, always pointing to where you are in the main window. And above you have a breadcrumb trail showing the directory structure.
It is not dramatically different, but there are a lot of little changes that add up to it being very nice. One of the main reasons I refuse to use OSX as a main OS is that I hate the Finder with a passion, so maybe my this is a matter of odd personal taste. I really like Vista?s Explorer.
Fewer hard freezes, mainly. Except for iTunes.
You can change volume levels for different apps. The classic example is the insanely loud noises that IM clients can make if you?ve got your music cranked up. Now you can tell AIM or whatever to quiet down up without turning sound completely off or turning your music down.
Adium Instant Messaging Program allows you to change the volume. But I find that with iChat sound set, I don't even need to turn the volume down on adium.
Your quickness to judge reeks of some pre-existing bias.
did you read my post above??
I mentioned that I have vista and office 2007 right next to my MBP and yes I do hate it. And if Office 2008 for mac comes with that interface i won't pay a single penny for it.
Wish they have option to revert back to original interface like Windows XP and Vista "Classic Control panel" option which by the way I used since day 1 with both XP and Vista. (just can't get used to their new XP and Vista control panel)
I mentioned that I have vista and office 2007 right next to my MBP and yes I do hate it. And if Office 2008 for mac comes with that interface i won't pay a single penny for it.
Wish they have option to revert back to original interface like Windows XP and Vista "Classic Control panel" option which by the way I used since day 1 with both XP and Vista. (just can't get used to their new XP and Vista control panel)
It may be "fugly," but have you USED it, in other words, for lengths at a time, paying attention to how it works. The way an interface look is a tiny part of whether it's good or not.
It may be "fugly," but have you USED it, in other words, for lengths at a time, paying attention to how it works. The way an interface look is a tiny part of whether it's good or not.
I have used it since release up to this second (yes I have it open right now) but I do not like the office 2007 look and i will install back to 2003 after reformatting my vista and re-installing back to XP...
It shows off the "Ribbon" interface called Elements Gallery on the Mac. Seriously slick and functional. Based on my continuing testing with Office 2007 Word and Excel, this App is going to be a big winner on the Mac. I don;t want to give $$$ to MS but the productivity improvement with the ribbon is off the charts. Check out the images and see for yourself.
The old paradigm for these types of programs was Menus,Menus,Menus plus Tool Bars, Tool Bars,Tool Bars at the top of the screen. Your task was to be an archeologist to dig thru the menus to find what you wanted if you knew what you wanted.
The new Ribbon paradigm is this--Each Tab is context sensitive. If your in the Cover Page tab for example, only the tool icons you need for this function are displayed in the ribbon. A floating format pallette contains format tools (slightly different design than in Wintel Office 2007) displays all the time. Ditto for Header, Footer, etc. You'll see icons for functions in that Tab that you never knew existed! Also, the Ribbon never expands vertically so you always have the same screen real estate. It pains me to say this but MS has really taken this kind of software a giant step forward. In my own testing, I can't believe how much easier it is to do things that were previuosly painful.
Comments
For what I do, Windows has the best applications and I prefer the file browser.
Word 2007 is better than any word processor I've used on the Mac.
Firefox is the best browser of all and the Windows version is better than the OSX version.
uTorrent is the best BT application I've used.
Outlook 2007 is the best e-mail client I've used.
foobar2k is the best music player I've used.
Media Player Classic is the most flexible video player I've used.
Now, I do miss two apps every time I'm not on my Powerbook:
1) Adium - Hands down the best IM app out there. I love it and Windows has no real multi-protocol IM client that I like (trillian is OK).
2) Handbrake - Simple and powerful h.264 encoder. MeGUI for Windows is far more complicated.
As others have mentioned more harshly, that set of apps doesn't really mean much in the way of comparison.
Word 2007's interface is a mess but the thing I've been missing for ages on OS X is a word processor that is as powerful as Office but launches as fast as TextEdit. Pages is good but it's a mini-indesign and it's not really all that fast.
I dislike both the Windows and Mac versions of Firefox. I don't really notice much difference between them. Safari is better IMO.
uTorrent I've never used but Azureus works fine so no complaints there.
Outlook, I don't really do serious mailing so Mail is fine for me. I don't see Mail lacking in features that I'd need.
Music players, I just love itunes. It's so simple and powerful for finding and categorizing music. For movies, Windows media player is awful. I can't even fast forward movies most of the time and no editing support. I edit clips all the time in Quicktime.
If Apple just added some more powerful editing to TextEdit then I think they'd be set for most people's basic needs. Reports suggest that leopard has a snappier interface so if it's faster and less bloated than Vista (which their advertising would sugegst), has a new more refined theme (which the unified interface theme seems to point towards). So Leopard vs Vista, I think we have a clear winner naturally with the exception of gaming. But I fear that will always be the exception.
But still we wait.
Besides finder, is there anything else about OSX that you do not like?
Lack of options in right-click contextual menus (I guess because Apple thinks I’m too stupid to know how to click a right button, but somehow not too stupid to remember how to activate Expose, stubborn jackasses).
App is running while all the windows are closed. It doesn’t really trip me up, but everyone I try to get to use my Powerbook hates it because it is counter-intuitive (more stubborn Apple jackassery).
Marvin:
Have you actually used those apps under XP or Vista?
Have you actually used Vista for more than a short period, stepping up to it with a purpose other than trying to prove to yourself that Windows totally sucks?
It is not much use comparison-wise when you’ve only used one set of the applications in question.
When someone says “I have used X and Y, and I think Y is better for Z reasons” it is no useful reply to say, “Well I like X!”.
Even better is “I like Apple and hate Windows, and I have decided to accept the reviews and reports that confirm by pre-existing biases. And although I hate Windows and do not use it, I will go ahead and confirm that Apple is the winner between the Apple OS I’ve never used and a Windows version I’ve never used!”
Have you actually used those apps under XP or Vista?
Have you actually used Vista for more than a short period, stepping up to it with a purpose other than trying to prove to yourself that Windows totally sucks?
1. I used many those apps under XP AND Vista. Note that I used both XP and Vista since launch of each software. and yes I still think that Office 2007 interface is "fugly" and if Office 2008 on mac is like that, i won't pay a single cent for it.
uTorrent is great and I actually use it on my PC. But Xtorrent on Mac does the job very well. (Torrent search on the apps ftw)
Firefox is great on PC but pretty slow on Mac but I got other marvelous browser on mac such as Camino, Omniweb, Safari. On PC, I have to either use Firefox or IE7 (spit on IE)... note that I never use Opera and never will.
Never used foobar before because I use iTunes on both my PC and Mac and it works like charm (yes on my Vista too)
Mediaplayerclassic... meh i only watched South Park, Family Guy, and other new dvdrips which can play very well on VLC Media Player. (I have both VLC and MPC on my PC and I do have VLC on my mac)
2. I used vista since launch and yes I still have it right now right next to me MBP and I hated it. I am planning to re-install XP after I finish transferring my stuff to my Extrernals.
Now, it seems that the uniform concern about OSX is the Finder. I used PathFinder and it works very well. I do not have a lot of files on my hard drive so I do not have any problems organizing it (both Mac and PC). I guess to each its own but I think Vista's explorer, while it's great, it is only useful for some group of people and you are probably one of them.
Regarding the icon size, Hell i never even touch them on both my PC and Mac so it is again only catered to some group of people.
Also, regarding "The lack of options in right-click contextual menu"
I want to ask you wnat do you want?? because for me, I use my keyboard to copy and paste and that's all that I need from my right click. I do not need 30 lines options on my right click and have to skim through everything just to cut/copy/paste.
Regarding, App is running while all the windows are closed
Just press (Apple+Q) nothing hard. Yeah get your hand to work chop chop.
Or if you're that lazy, I don't see any performance drop on my MBP when I open a lot of applications for daily usage.
Maybe if you open a crap load of photoshop and other heavy apps it will start slowing down but so far, I usually open at least 10-12 applications (including parallels) and it hasn't slowed down yet.
Lack of options in right-click contextual menus (I guess because Apple thinks I’m too stupid to know how to click a right button, but somehow not too stupid to remember how to activate Expose, stubborn jackasses).
App is running while all the windows are closed. It doesn’t really trip me up, but everyone I try to get to use my Powerbook hates it because it is counter-intuitive (more stubborn Apple jackassery).
Fair enough but nothing you've mentioned bothers me as much as the barrage of dialogue boxes to accomplish tasks in XP( is this better in vista?) and constant attacks of viruses and spyware. Yes viruses and spyware can be combated but it's extra work that I find distracting. To each his own, I respect your opinion but disagree.
Lack of options in right-click contextual menus (I guess because Apple thinks I’m too stupid to know how to click a right button, but somehow not too stupid to remember how to activate Expose, stubborn jackasses).
You need to be more specific. What is missing, exactly?
It's been a while since I've seriously used Windows, but the only thing I remember it having in contextual menus that the Finder didn't have was the New Document submenu and Copy/Paste/et al.
App is running while all the windows are closed. It doesn’t really trip me up, but everyone I try to get to use my Powerbook hates it because it is counter-intuitive (more stubborn Apple jackassery).
That's complaining that an apple doesn't have an orange peel.
This is my number one frustration with Windows. I'm glad you don't like Apple's method, which is why there's choices in the world, but it is neither counter-intuitive nor jackassery.
It's is how real people work.
Note that most serious Windows programs use an MDI window within a window interface to get around this: no one likes waiting 5 minutes for Photoshop to open up just because they closed their last window.
App is running while all the windows are closed. It doesn?t really trip me up, but everyone I try to get to use my Powerbook hates it because it is counter-intuitive (more stubborn Apple jackassery).
That's more of a developer thing than an Apple thing though. I prefer apps to stay open when I close all the windows. Why would I want to go through Photoshop's loading screen every time I close all my documents?
Have you actually used those apps under XP or Vista?
Have you actually used Vista for more than a short period, stepping up to it with a purpose other than trying to prove to yourself that Windows totally sucks?
I use XP quite a bit. I did only try Vista briefly and it didn't seem much different from XP except things in different places. I tried to install it on Parallels and it blue screened so I put it aside. I will probably get round to using it more but it's not really on my to do list. I don't think Windows completely sucks but I think relative to OS X, it is worse and if the problems I have with OS X are sorted in leopard then for me it will be the clear winner because I still see big flaws in Vista even from the short time I used it.
It is not much use comparison-wise when you?ve only used one set of the applications in question.
When someone says ?I have used X and Y, and I think Y is better for Z reasons? it is no useful reply to say, ?Well I like X!?.
I must've missed your Z reasons the first time. The parts I quoted, you basically said you like X and gave no reason why X was better than any OS X equivalent.
Even better is ?I like Apple and hate Windows, and I have decided to accept the reviews and reports that confirm by pre-existing biases. And although I hate Windows and do not use it, I will go ahead and confirm that Apple is the winner between the Apple OS I?ve never used and a Windows version I?ve never used!?
Wow. You realise you're really coming off like a flame-baiting Windows fanboy? I don't hate Windows and I do use it regularly but I find it is worse than OS X. If you read that differently then you're deluding yourself.
On the flip side, I agree with much of what groverat says about the finder. The applications menu in the start menu is far easier to use than the to having to hunt down the applications folder in OSX. Yes, I know the hack of putting the applications folder on the dock, but you shouldn't have to. Most novice users or switchers aren't going to be able to figure that solution out anyway. The lack of any kind of navigation aides in the finder's list and icon views can make things confusing. All you have is the ability to press the back or forward buttons.
Vista also has one major advantage over OSX, it's on familiar hardware. Upgrading to vista doesn't require adapting to a much different (and sometimes conflicting) hardware philosophy and it it many cases you don't even need a new computer. Vista really doesn't have to be better than OSX, they already have the users. It just has to be good enough to keep them.
I've been a dual platform user for about 20 years. I much prefer OS X (supplemented with a lot of great, cheap small apps like Path Finder iClip, 1passwrd, etc.) but, by necessity, have become an XP power user. I've always particularly detested the Word module in the MS Office Suite (both Mac and Windows) but again, by necessity, had to use it
I've been using the trial versions of Word and Excel 2007 on my Sony TX160 for about a week. I couldn't disagree with you more about the ribbon interface. It is not a mess. It's very logical, easy to use and speeds up complex doc creation by an order of magnitude (at least for me). I like the functional tab feature of the ribbbon. When I'm in the formatting tab, only the formatting tool icons are displayed close at hand and easy to access. When I'm in the Table of Contents tab, only what I need for this operation is displayed in the ribbon. Ditto for Tables which I use frequently for the many statistical reports I have to write. It also integrates exceptionally well with Excel, something that is very important to my needs in report writing.
I can only hope that the new Mac Office 2008 is as good as this Office 2007 demo I'm now using on the Sony. I have read in reviews and on Windows user forums that a lot of long time Wintel users of Office products hate the new ribbon interface because after many years of use, they had learned how to navigate the menu-submenu-submenu-submenu.... centric Word bloatware program. Now they're confronted with something totally new, very tab and icon-centric, something very Mac-esque, and they hate it with unbridled passion. You would not believe the outcry against Office 2007 on the MS evangelist sites.
Having said all that, I will never ever use Vista because of the inherent bombshell hidden deep within its kernel. For those who don't know about this bombshell, read the article by world renowned New Zealand security expert Peter Gutmann, " A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection"
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut00...ista_cost.html
This paper has set the Windows world ablaze and may in part be responsible for the slow implementation of Vista. I highly recommend it to all. Here's how the paper begins"
"Executive Summary
Windows Vista includes an extensive reworking of core OS elements in order to provide content protection for so-called ?premium content?, typically HD data from Blu-Ray and HD-DVD sources. Providing this protection incurs considerable costs in terms of system performance, system stability, technical support overhead, and hardware and software cost. These issues affect not only users of Vista but the entire PC industry, since the effects of the protection measures extend to cover all hardware and software that will ever come into contact with Vista, even if it's not used directly with Vista (for example hardware in a Macintosh computer or on a Linux server). This document analyses the cost involved in Vista's content protection, and the collateral damage that this incurs throughout the computer industry.
Executive Executive Summary
The Vista Content Protection specification could very well constitute the longest suicide note in history [Note A]."
Though I'm a strong devotee of Apple, the company (I have lots of stock) the Mac, iPod etc., I'm first and foremost a devotee of great technology wherever it comes from. After first hand usage, Word and Excel 2007 appear to be excellent products. I hate to give 1 stinking dime to MS but I'm afraid I will have to pony up for these 2 new Office products. Unless of course Gee-Rat can hook me up with his MS employee. Nah, that won't work. I don't "borrow" or "copy" software from others. I think the authors of the software deserve to be paid for their work. Gotta run off now to more important stuff like NCAA hoops.
Marvin,
I've been a dual platform user for about 20 years. I much prefer OS X (supplemented with a lot of great, cheap small apps like Path Finder iClip, 1passwrd, etc.) but, by necessity, have become an XP power user. I've always particularly detested the Word module in the MS Office Suite (both Mac and Windows) but again, by necessity, had to use it
I've been using the trial versions of Word and Excel 2007 on my Sony TX160 for about a week. I couldn't disagree with you more about the ribbon interface. It is not a mess. It's very logical, easy to use and speeds up complex doc creation by an order of magnitude (at least for me). I like the functional tab feature of the ribbbon. When I'm in the formatting tab, only the formatting tool icons are displayed close at hand and easy to access. When I'm in the Table of Contents tab, only what I need for this operation is displayed in the ribbon. Ditto for Tables which I use frequently for the many statistical reports I have to write. It also integrates exceptionally well with Excel, something that is very important to my needs in report writing.
I can only hope that the new Mac Office 2008 is as good as this Office 2007 demo I'm now using on the Sony. I have read in reviews and on Windows user forums that a lot of long time Wintel users of Office products hate the new ribbon interface because after many years of use, they had learned how to navigate the menu-submenu-submenu-submenu.... centric Word bloatware program. Now they're confronted with something totally new, very tab and icon-centric, something very Mac-esque, and they hate it with unbridled passion. You would not believe the outcry against Office 2007 on the MS evangelist sites.
Having said all that, I will never ever use Vista because of the inherent bombshell hidden deep within its kernel. For those who don't know about this bombshell, read the article by world renowned New Zealand security expert Peter Gutmann, " A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection"
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut00...ista_cost.html
This paper has set the Windows world ablaze and may in part be responsible for the slow implementation of Vista. I highly recommend it to all. Here's how the paper begins"
"Executive Summary
Windows Vista includes an extensive reworking of core OS elements in order to provide content protection for so-called ?premium content?, typically HD data from Blu-Ray and HD-DVD sources. Providing this protection incurs considerable costs in terms of system performance, system stability, technical support overhead, and hardware and software cost. These issues affect not only users of Vista but the entire PC industry, since the effects of the protection measures extend to cover all hardware and software that will ever come into contact with Vista, even if it's not used directly with Vista (for example hardware in a Macintosh computer or on a Linux server). This document analyses the cost involved in Vista's content protection, and the collateral damage that this incurs throughout the computer industry.
Executive Executive Summary
The Vista Content Protection specification could very well constitute the longest suicide note in history [Note A]."
Though I'm a strong devotee of Apple, the company (I have lots of stock) the Mac, iPod etc., I'm first and foremost a devotee of great technology wherever it comes from. After first hand usage, Word and Excel 2007 appear to be excellent products. I hate to give 1 stinking dime to MS but I'm afraid I will have to pony up for these 2 new Office products. Unless of course Gee-Rat can hook me up with his MS employee. Nah, that won't work. I don't "borrow" or "copy" software from others. I think the authors of the software deserve to be paid for their work. Gotta run off now to more important stuff like NCAA hoops.
like I mentioned, not everybody like the Office 2007/possibly 2008 on mac ribbon interface. I am one of those people who hates it and you like it.
like I mentioned, not everybody like the Office 2007/possibly 2008 on mac ribbon interface. I am one of those people who hates it and you like it.
Have you used the Ribbon?
Your quickness to judge reeks of some pre-existing bias.
if the 2008 office on mac comes with that crappy interface. i won't pay a penny for it
well, then I think you can save the money becaue as far as I know, Office for Mac will be using the same style, the tab base interface just like the 2007...
Lack of options in right-click contextual menus (I guess because Apple thinks I?m too stupid to know how to click a right button, but somehow not too stupid to remember how to activate Expose, stubborn jackasses).
App is running while all the windows are closed. It doesn?t really trip me up, but everyone I try to get to use my Powerbook hates it because it is counter-intuitive (more stubborn Apple jackassery).
ah... just plug your 2 button mouse to your Mac, and you have right-click right away...
Talk about design... I bet some people will like a mouse with 10 buttons... and every button have about 10 features you can customise... but I haven't seen one really using it and being productive...
Firstly, icons in Vista aren’t exactly small (256x256 @ 32bit color). I am a total UI whore and the first thing I do with any OS is crank up icon size on the desktop to the maximum. I LOVE giant pretty icons and Vista delivers.
Seems like this icon whore do not have much taste (sorry about that). Vista's icon is big, but not pretty. This is the same kind of design that Windows have been doing, inconsistancy and lack of good dsign guideline. Icons in Windows Vista is definitely high res, but then, they're hard to read, hard to recognise, and if they're small, they're unclear because of bad coordination of light and shade.
Now, you can’t choose between every single icon resolution from 16x16 to 256x256, but the slider size change in Finder seems more like a “look what we can do” gimmick than anything that might actually be useful. Vista gives me 3 or 4 icon size settings and I find this is ample.
That's a pretty personal choice, isn't it? Why do you think people do not want the sizes in the middle of the smallest to the biggest? It's not a gimmick.
Column view is a waste of screen space. What do I care what other folders are in a folder that I navigated away from 3 clicks ago? It is confusing and not good for moving things around. I never use Columns view.
I find Column view very useful. Just like you care about the path bar Vista offer right now. You obviously want to know where you're in the system and column view did that in a very elaborative way. In fact, I set column view as my default view.
If I am moving a file from one part of the file system to another part of the file system that is distant, then it is far easier to just cut, navigate, then paste. Very very handy.
As I said, in Windows, cut and paste is the easier way to move files, whatever file navigation or views is not helpful in Windows environment, it's just too clumsy and counter-intuitive.
backtomac:
P4 3.0ghz
1.25GB DDR
Nvidia 6600GT (128MB)
This machine has had XP since it was born. Vista came with a full system drive format.
lfe2211:
No benchmarks, just my own intuition.
I am not surprised people are unhappy with it, it?s pretty different (not very much, but nerds are pretty much autistic when it comes to any change).
The non-classic Explorer window view in XP was pretty much useless, in my opinion. Now in all explorer windows you have a graphical representation of the file system on the left, always pointing to where you are in the main window. And above you have a breadcrumb trail showing the directory structure.
It is not dramatically different, but there are a lot of little changes that add up to it being very nice. One of the main reasons I refuse to use OSX as a main OS is that I hate the Finder with a passion, so maybe my this is a matter of odd personal taste. I really like Vista?s Explorer.
Fewer hard freezes, mainly. Except for iTunes.
You can change volume levels for different apps. The classic example is the insanely loud noises that IM clients can make if you?ve got your music cranked up. Now you can tell AIM or whatever to quiet down up without turning sound completely off or turning your music down.
Adium Instant Messaging Program allows you to change the volume. But I find that with iChat sound set, I don't even need to turn the volume down on adium.
Have you used the Ribbon?
Your quickness to judge reeks of some pre-existing bias.
did you read my post above??
I mentioned that I have vista and office 2007 right next to my MBP and yes I do hate it. And if Office 2008 for mac comes with that interface i won't pay a single penny for it.
Wish they have option to revert back to original interface like Windows XP and Vista "Classic Control panel" option which by the way I used since day 1 with both XP and Vista. (just can't get used to their new XP and Vista control panel)
did you read my post above??
I mentioned that I have vista and office 2007 right next to my MBP and yes I do hate it. And if Office 2008 for mac comes with that interface i won't pay a single penny for it.
Wish they have option to revert back to original interface like Windows XP and Vista "Classic Control panel" option which by the way I used since day 1 with both XP and Vista. (just can't get used to their new XP and Vista control panel)
It may be "fugly," but have you USED it, in other words, for lengths at a time, paying attention to how it works. The way an interface look is a tiny part of whether it's good or not.
It may be "fugly," but have you USED it, in other words, for lengths at a time, paying attention to how it works. The way an interface look is a tiny part of whether it's good or not.
I have used it since release up to this second (yes I have it open right now) but I do not like the office 2007 look and i will install back to 2003 after reformatting my vista and re-installing back to XP...
http://www.eweek.com/slideshow/0,120...=198271,00.asp
It shows off the "Ribbon" interface called Elements Gallery on the Mac. Seriously slick and functional. Based on my continuing testing with Office 2007 Word and Excel, this App is going to be a big winner on the Mac. I don;t want to give $$$ to MS but the productivity improvement with the ribbon is off the charts. Check out the images and see for yourself.
The old paradigm for these types of programs was Menus,Menus,Menus plus Tool Bars, Tool Bars,Tool Bars at the top of the screen. Your task was to be an archeologist to dig thru the menus to find what you wanted if you knew what you wanted.
The new Ribbon paradigm is this--Each Tab is context sensitive. If your in the Cover Page tab for example, only the tool icons you need for this function are displayed in the ribbon. A floating format pallette contains format tools (slightly different design than in Wintel Office 2007) displays all the time. Ditto for Header, Footer, etc. You'll see icons for functions in that Tab that you never knew existed! Also, the Ribbon never expands vertically so you always have the same screen real estate. It pains me to say this but MS has really taken this kind of software a giant step forward. In my own testing, I can't believe how much easier it is to do things that were previuosly painful.
Shut up M$ SUX!
Your reply gives new meaning to the word obtuse.