I know I open myself up to being called an "Apple fanboy", but Paul Thurott's review is both biased and quite inaccurate. As a disclaimer, I am a Leopard and Windows Vista user, so I'm experienced with both systems.
First of all, he clearly fails to understand the difference between the substantial 'under-the-hood' changes available in SL and the minor 'tweaks' that happen in Windows 'Service Packs'. Just because the UI isn't much different doesn't mean, as Thurott claims, that this is 'typical Apple overcharging for something Microsoft gives away for free'. When has a Service Pack ever made such sweeping upgrades, to the point of completely rewriting applications? When has a Service Pack reduced the footprint of its OS-- in fact, when has Microsoft not exponentially increased the size and hardware requirements of its OS?
I don't know the specifics on this next issue, but I highly doubt that SL's multicore processor functionality is 'picking up on something Windows has had for years'. As I understand it, Windows is still a mess of single-core and multi-core, 32-bit and 64-bit functionality-- far behind Apple's full 64-bit, multicore SL. Anyone know more?
Regarding Expose-- again, 'taking from the Windows playbook'? He clearly hasn't ever learned to use Expose in its full 'glory', because it was 'improved to work with individual applications' years ago-- and has had mouse-driven features for years as well.
Windows 7 offers the 'same internal updates' but offers more 'major fixes' than SL? I have a hard time believing that, as many W7 reviews I've read say that in many ways it's the Same Old Windows. And being a Vista user, I can say that Microsoft's claims of a 'completely redone OS' ring hollow.
Overall, I find it somewhat comical that Thurott continually makes it seem as though SL is 'copying' W7-- when in fact it is quite apparent that since Vista, Microsoft is the one copying Apple with functionality and UI fixes.
First of all, he clearly fails to understand the difference between the substantial 'under-the-hood' changes available in SL and the minor 'tweaks' that happen in Windows 'Service Packs'. When has a Service Pack ever made such sweeping upgrades? Just because the UI isn't much different doesn't mean, as Thurott claims, that this is 'typical Apple overcharging for something Microsoft gives away for free'.
He's playing to his base. It's so obvious it's embarrassing. You think Leo will call him out on it on the Windows weekly podcast? No chance.
I would think about waiting until a few of the bugs with plug-ins and apps were worked out, but there is no reason to not update to Snow Leopard by the end of year.
I would think about waiting until a few of the bugs with plug-ins and apps were worked out, but there is no reason to not update to Snow Leopard by the end of year.
Honestly there's no reason to wait, unless you run an old version of photoshop. I normally try to wait, not this time.
Comments
First of all, he clearly fails to understand the difference between the substantial 'under-the-hood' changes available in SL and the minor 'tweaks' that happen in Windows 'Service Packs'. Just because the UI isn't much different doesn't mean, as Thurott claims, that this is 'typical Apple overcharging for something Microsoft gives away for free'. When has a Service Pack ever made such sweeping upgrades, to the point of completely rewriting applications? When has a Service Pack reduced the footprint of its OS-- in fact, when has Microsoft not exponentially increased the size and hardware requirements of its OS?
I don't know the specifics on this next issue, but I highly doubt that SL's multicore processor functionality is 'picking up on something Windows has had for years'. As I understand it, Windows is still a mess of single-core and multi-core, 32-bit and 64-bit functionality-- far behind Apple's full 64-bit, multicore SL. Anyone know more?
Regarding Expose-- again, 'taking from the Windows playbook'? He clearly hasn't ever learned to use Expose in its full 'glory', because it was 'improved to work with individual applications' years ago-- and has had mouse-driven features for years as well.
Windows 7 offers the 'same internal updates' but offers more 'major fixes' than SL? I have a hard time believing that, as many W7 reviews I've read say that in many ways it's the Same Old Windows. And being a Vista user, I can say that Microsoft's claims of a 'completely redone OS' ring hollow.
Overall, I find it somewhat comical that Thurott continually makes it seem as though SL is 'copying' W7-- when in fact it is quite apparent that since Vista, Microsoft is the one copying Apple with functionality and UI fixes.
First of all, he clearly fails to understand the difference between the substantial 'under-the-hood' changes available in SL and the minor 'tweaks' that happen in Windows 'Service Packs'. When has a Service Pack ever made such sweeping upgrades? Just because the UI isn't much different doesn't mean, as Thurott claims, that this is 'typical Apple overcharging for something Microsoft gives away for free'.
He's playing to his base. It's so obvious it's embarrassing. You think Leo will call him out on it on the Windows weekly podcast? No chance.
I would think about waiting until a few of the bugs with plug-ins and apps were worked out, but there is no reason to not update to Snow Leopard by the end of year.
Honestly there's no reason to wait, unless you run an old version of photoshop. I normally try to wait, not this time.
So does Microsoft ship Windows 7 Mail with built in exchange support? The engadet reviewer is very happy with the Exchange integration.
Windows 7 doesn't have a built-in Mail client. You can download Windows Live Mail instead. And no, that doesn't have Exchange support.
He's never had it before on a Mac. The Lack of native exchange support has been a pain when using a Mac in business.
Point me to the version of Windows with "native exchange support".
You'd need Outlook. And on the Mac, you'd need Entourage. What's the big difference, really?