Windows 7 vs. Mac OS X Snow Leopard: Apple ups the ante

123468

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 152
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post


    That still doesn't make any sense out of your list of 7 technologies Microsoft support 5 of them and the only 2 they don't is UNIX, which quite frankly is never going to happen as its the equivelent of Microsofts core technology, why would they change? And WebKit which came after they developed there version so again why should they change. Also its not like you cant run WebKit if you want.



    It only makes no sense if you choose to ignore that MS has developed proprietary technology with the intent to compete directly against open software.



    The industry largely decided to use open standards for media playback and document viewing. MS has had no choice but to support open standards along with their proprietary standards. But if given the choice MS would prefer the industry uses its proprietary standards.



    Quote:

    I don't get what it is you expect Microsoft to do, stop developing new ideas? And if they do develop new things why shouldn't they keep it for themselves, after all they developed it in the first place. It's not that much different with Apple, if you wan't to write an iPhone App you have to use Apples technology (no Java aloud) and have to sell it through the App Store, no independant stores aloud.



    I'm not at all saying MS should not develop new ideas and proprietary platforms. Their is a clear difference between developing a product and trying to compete against everyone and dominate everything.



    Their is no need for MS to compete against every standard, every service, and every major software company. MS cannot effectively compete against everyone, its a strategy that is not working and is costing MS billions in losses.



    Their is some crucial technology that needs to be interoperable software that is not tied to any one company's interests. MS has proven a bad stuart of dominant standards. In the sense that MS has been willing to stifle technology that threatens the dominance of Windows. Such as the internet itself.
  • Reply 102 of 152
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post


    It only makes no sense if you choose to ignore that MS has developed proprietary technology with the intent to compete directly against open software.



    The industry largely decided to use open standards for media playback and document viewing. MS has had no choice but to support open standards along with their proprietary standards. But if given the choice MS would prefer the industry uses its proprietary standards.



    How is Apple any different, pray tell?
  • Reply 103 of 152
    gqbgqb Posts: 1,934member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    I've read at least one report that a larger monitor is better than 2 separate ones. If you could have both of your documents side-by-side on one large screen would that not be better? Would n't having virtual windows so you could separate your personal and work windows be cheaper and more organized? My questions are not statements, I'm curious.



    It's all personal preference.

    My work setup is a Lenovo X61, the very small laptop with no trackpad, and a 20" monitor, docked in an expansion bay. Multiple monitors lets me pick and choose what I need. Undock for meetings, where i don't need a lot of screen real estate, and docked for when I need 10-15 apps/windows open.

    Plus, as I said, having a separate screen lets me move distractions out of field of vision, but still off to the side if I need to notice it.

    I look forward to the day when I can plug my as-yet-non-existent iPad into a keyboard/dock at home for a similar small/big combo.
  • Reply 104 of 152
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by buddhaface View Post


    How is Apple any different, pray tell?



    In what areas?
  • Reply 105 of 152
    groveratgroverat Posts: 10,872member
    Quote:

    So how do you suggest they make your system watch out for push updates without running a background process?



    I have no problem with the MobileMe control panel. Obviously it helps a lot. I mentioned that to counter the dishonest assertion that MobileMe was built on open standards and didn't require proprietary software. It does. I don't have a problem with proprietary software.



    Beyond that, the vast majority of my post was about the user being forced to install iTunes and its unrelated background processes as well.



    Not to mention the "Apple Updater" that will hassle you into installing Safari as well.
  • Reply 106 of 152
    backtomacbacktomac Posts: 4,579member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by groverat View Post


    Not to mention the "Apple Updater" that will hassle you into installing Safari as well.



    Yes if it wasn't for Apple, Windows users would never be subjected to ballon pop ups telling them that "updates are ready to be installed".
  • Reply 107 of 152
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TiAdiMundo View Post


    HP already ships 64bit versions of Vista for a lot of Desktops and notebooks. And important detail is that the new Windows Server version developed with Windows 7 called "Server 2008 R2" will only be available in 64bit. Since Vista SP1 the client and server versions of Windows do share the same code base (kernel and stuff).



    This means that OEMs do have to create 64bit drivers for a lot of hardware. There is no real reason not to deliver new client systems in 32bit.



    Another reason for 64bit is the cheap memory. 4 GB RAM or even 8 GB isn't something special for Desktops at the end of this year. As you know 32bit only supports up to 3 GB.



    By golly, you're right. I went to FutureShop today, and about half the desktop and laptops come with Vista 64-bit installed.
  • Reply 108 of 152
    nvidia2008nvidia2008 Posts: 9,262member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GQB View Post


    It's all personal preference.

    My work setup is a Lenovo X61, the very small laptop with no trackpad, and a 20" monitor, docked in an expansion bay. Multiple monitors lets me pick and choose what I need. Undock for meetings, where i don't need a lot of screen real estate, and docked for when I need 10-15 apps/windows open.

    Plus, as I said, having a separate screen lets me move distractions out of field of vision, but still off to the side if I need to notice it.

    I look forward to the day when I can plug my as-yet-non-existent iPad into a keyboard/dock at home for a similar small/big combo.



    Agreed.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 View Post


    My argument was that for me (and of course others probably), having two virtual screens is a much better solution than having the multiple physical screens. At work I currently use an iMac. I always have about three screens on the go, but they are "spaces" or virtual desktops. Virtual desktop software has been around for years and years but has only recently been built into OS X.



    It's also my contention that in the techie realm at least, some of the reason for the extra *physical* screens is to do with status. The more work you do, the more screens, and the bigger screens you (apparently) need. It's also good to have many terminal windows open, and have lots of Unix-y goodness scrolling through them when the boss walks by.



    Obviously, that's a (tiny) dig at techies who probably make up the majority of posters here, so no one's going to agree with me on that. It would be like Porche drivers owning up to buying the car to show (at least partially), how "manly" they are and to impress their dates. Everyone knows these are factors but no one will say it out loud.



    Understood. Some techies probably just have a server ping constantly running on a screen... But I do use an extra screen, I'm not out to impress anyone since I have to carry a 17" screen to work a few days a week. That ain't worth the trouble just to impress somebody. Heh. A lot of people at my office do a lot of work on a 13" MacBook. If I were the boss, the mobility is great, but I would feel their productivity is hampered when sitting at a desk. Unless they have very good eyesight or suitable glasses/contacts. Which they might. Or generally I'm picky.
  • Reply 109 of 152
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JavaCowboy View Post


    By golly, you're right. I went to FutureShop today, and about half the desktop and laptops come with Vista 64-bit installed.



    Damn... I wish Asia would catch up in that regard. We've got the latest motherboards, CPUs and GPUs, and RAM is hella cheap... but they aren't pushing Vista 64-bit just yet, still just Vista 32-bit. Vista 64-bit Ultimate purchased by itself is about the price of a CPU+motherboard...!
  • Reply 110 of 152
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    I've read at least one report that a larger monitor is better than 2 separate ones. If you could have both of your documents side-by-side on one large screen would that not be better? Would n't having virtual windows so you could separate your personal and work windows be cheaper and more organized? My questions are not statements, I'm curious.



    I used Spaces for a while but I stopped after a while. I'd rather have physical screens, with stuff just minimized when not in use, or just hidden.



    If I could have one 20" monitor that would be good. But two 19" widescreen, for example, would be better. This is because if I have one 20" yes I can have two windows side by side. But I'd be constantly having to resize windows, even on a Mac... All the apps I would have to constantly adjust the window sizing depending on how I want to move things around. I'm very fanatical about symmetry. If I had two 19" screens, maximising one document/ app on one screen or the other is faster, most apps you just hit the Green button and maximise it.



    Given that I have a Macbook 13", if I could have just one external 20" widescreen would be just nice. Then I wouldn't need two screens. But right now I just have a 17" 1280x1024 as my external screen. So I need two screens, the Macbook 13" and the external 17".



    I'm using my laptop now in a "docking station" kind of way when I am at work and home at a desk.



    If I had a Mac Pro I would use two 23". If I had an iMac 20" I might not need an external monitor.
  • Reply 111 of 152
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by backtomac View Post


    Yes if it wasn't for Apple, Windows users would never be subjected to ballon pop ups telling them that "updates are ready to be installed".



    Actually, the Apple Update isn't a balloon pop up, and try playing the Sims 2 while that thing keeps popping up. My girlfriend has a mac and loves the Sims. It kills her, because she spent all of that money on the game and expansions, and the quality is terrible, and pop-ups kick her out of the game. She loves her mac, but plays all of her games on my pc.
  • Reply 112 of 152
    Honestly if budget was not a factor I'd get the latest 17" MacBook Pro with antiglare, leave one 23" Apple Cinema Display at my workplace desk and have one 24" LED Cinema Display at my home desk.



    That would be a Porsche lifestyle, and yes, that would be luxurious. Not sure if it would impress the ladies other than helping them think I'm a rich kid and they should hang around me more and invite their friends that are models over to party at my place.



    But then I'd also have to get a 46" TV screen and XBox360 and BluRay player and Home Theatre sound system and AppleTV for the lounge area.



    You know, for symmetry.
  • Reply 113 of 152
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GQB View Post


    It's all personal preference.

    My work setup is a Lenovo X61, the very small laptop with no trackpad, and a 20" monitor, docked in an expansion bay. Multiple monitors lets me pick and choose what I need. Undock for meetings, where i don't need a lot of screen real estate, and docked for when I need 10-15 apps/windows open.

    Plus, as I said, having a separate screen lets me move distractions out of field of vision, but still off to the side if I need to notice it.

    I look forward to the day when I can plug my as-yet-non-existent iPad into a keyboard/dock at home for a similar small/big combo.



    Isn't it interesting that there is no similar docking station* for a MacBook/Pro/MacMini (right now) where you close the MacBook, put it into some docking station and can use *two* monitors at once...



    *Unless someone has a recommended product they can share with us?



    How is http://www.displaylink.com ?



    The Kensington one looks a little less-spec'ed

    http://us.kensington.com/html/14499.html
  • Reply 114 of 152
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Um, yeah, of course that is what I mean. Who would honestly think that Apple has shelved their next OS for over a month? And why would I mention the internal builds that I have no ability to access and would surely not be discussing on this forum if I did have access to them because I'd then be an Apple employee or doing something very shady?



    Correction, BEEN an Apple employee. Have been.



    There's a reason to things and a reason THINGS are tracked (TRACKED!). If a copy surfaces, somebody gets pulled aside, never to be heard from again. There are rules, both old and new. Dev copies are not shipping because there's no need for it. Any/every app under 10.5 will work on 10.6.



    10.6 slims down some code. Off-loads some to the GPU and introduces some new stuff. Stuff that is already there in xcode. Stuff that will debut for developers later are the later units and will be released with XC 4.



    10.6 early released kernels were built prior to 08MBPS so no drivers were seen. Updated kernels were being built separately in a diff team.



    When you build a modular OS like OS X and Linux you can work on certain things separately, make test compiles all together test then destroy taking notes back.



    I'm NOT an Apple, inc. emp, nor do I play one but I know how the system works.



    ZFS will probably be server only for a large number of reasons. Client side though, at deployment they may be avail but it will require a complete format and install, Hello Time Machine.
  • Reply 115 of 152
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Threpac View Post


    Actually, the Apple Update isn't a balloon pop up, and try playing the Sims 2 while that thing keeps popping up. My girlfriend has a mac and loves the Sims. It kills her, because she spent all of that money on the game and expansions, and the quality is terrible, and pop-ups kick her out of the game. She loves her mac, but plays all of her games on my pc.



    Why not turn off update notification? Or Auto check for updates.
  • Reply 116 of 152
    backtomacbacktomac Posts: 4,579member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Threpac View Post


    Actually, the Apple Update isn't a balloon pop up, and try playing the Sims 2 while that thing keeps popping up. My girlfriend has a mac and loves the Sims. It kills her, because she spent all of that money on the game and expansions, and the quality is terrible, and pop-ups kick her out of the game. She loves her mac, but plays all of her games on my pc.



    Reread the post and whom I replied to. I'm not talking about Apple's OSX SU.
  • Reply 117 of 152
    philipmphilipm Posts: 240member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post


    I used Spaces for a while but I stopped after a while. I'd rather have physical screens, with stuff just minimized when not in use, or just hidden.



    I would use Spaces if it wasn't broken. Many apps get confused by it and you have to jump through hoops to get the window you want. Excel does weird stuff like all your windows are in space #3, you click on the icon in the dock and go to space #2. This time is not only M$ who have it wrong.



    I haven't done an update in a while so possibly some of this has been fixed but for now I am back in single-screen mode. This is something that was right on X-windows a long time ago. I'm not sure if NeXT supported this concept but if they did, it wouldn't be the only aspect where the Mac port of NeXTstep went backwards.
  • Reply 118 of 152
    groveratgroverat Posts: 10,872member
    Quote:

    Yes if it wasn't for Apple, Windows users would never be subjected to ballon pop ups telling them that "updates are ready to be installed".



    That's one way to dodge the issue, I suppose. A cowardly and insipid way, but a way…
  • Reply 119 of 152
    philipmphilipm Posts: 240member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Slewis View Post


    Yes, generally ANY company that wishes for their formats, in this decade anyway, to be widely adopted will submit them to a standards body, and generally any company that wishes for any interoperability of any kind or at least does not want to waste time remaking the wheel will adopt other open standards. UNIX has been reduced to a spec, I don't consider it a standard even if you can "certify" it and be able to use it's trademark, common UNIX software has long since been ported to Unix-like systems, BSD ended up rewriting UNIX but is still considered UNIX, OSs based on System V like Solaris and AIX can claim to have original UNIX source code, but if a Linux distributor had the money they could iron out anything in their distro that's not compliant, make it compliant, then submit it the Open Group and be proud licensees of a name, at least POSIX is a real standard, but even that's not important to anybody except management government agencies.



    UNIX was never open source; the model was far worse. Universities got it close to free including source and were expected to contribute back any improvements, a deal so asymmetric that it led to developments like free BSD. M$ tried to pull off the same stunt but no one was interested by that time. IBM still sells AIX but Linux is being pushed (and developed) heavily by them now. Their model is similar to Apple's: they give away most of their work, but charge for value adds, including support. Apple charges for a decent user interface so you don't need as much support. A clear choice there.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Slewis View Post


    Of course if Mac OS X were ported to more architectures, then of course software could be compiled in a fat mach-o binary to support those other architectures, I've always wondered how it would run on the Cell.



    Probably terribly like everything else. Getting decent performance out of Cell is a PhD-level project. More detail at my blog.
  • Reply 120 of 152
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Apple primarily bases its apps on open source/standard tools. Is willing to cooperate with partners such as Google and Yahoo in using or supporting their services. What if MS made its own phone. Looking at MS strategy an MS phone would be Windows only and locked into Windows services and development languages.



    The iPhone development platform is Objective-C, HTML5/CSS/javascript.

    MS development platform would be .NET and Silverlight.



    The iPhone uses OpenGL-ES and Open AL for multimedia API.

    MS phone would use its own DirectX as its multimedia API.



    iPhone allows easy set up of several popular email services.

    MS phone would allow easy set up of Outlook and Windows Hotmail.



    iPhone calendar and address book are based on the open source vCard and CalDav/WebDav.

    MS phone calendar and address book would be based on MS Outlook extensions.



    iPhone encourages downloading pictures to Flickr and Facebook.

    MS phone would encourage picture downloads to Windows Live Photos.



    The iPhone has a built in Youtube app.

    MS phone would have a built in Soapbox app and Silverlight streaming.



    iPhone has integrated google and yahoo search

    MS phone would have integrated Windows Live search.



    iPhone has integrated Google Maps app.

    MS phone would have integrated Windows Search Maps.



    iPhone has encouraged the use of AOL AIM

    MS phone would encouraged the use of MS Messenger.



    iPhone encourages the use of Facebook for social networking.

    MS phone would encourage Windows Live Spaces.



    iPhone encourages the use of Twitter.

    MS phone would encourage the use of Windows Live Groups.







    Quote:
    Originally Posted by buddhaface View Post


    How is Apple any different, pray tell?



Sign In or Register to comment.