A friggen dog wagging it's tail while searching for infected files should be enough reason for anybody to never use Windows! Old Yeller has to be put down, BLAM!
Or the fact it takes longer to configure a search on windows than it takes to find it on OS X! Searching in OS X is soooooo much faster than windows. I had 70GB of stuff on my PowerBook (5400RPM) and it thrashes the Windows machine at searching. Searching on Windows is soo poor I don't know any PC users that use it. It's only Mac and PC uses that even attempt Windows search. It's awful to configure and lacks advanced configuration settings.
It was just now that I logged in and really noticed the difference between macs and PCs. Log-in takes a minute so if you click firefox stragiht away it still takes a while. On the Mac safari opened before the finder finished loading, as in under 7 seconds. You can turn on a Mac and go, hibernate is not needed on a mac because of this.
You can turn on a Mac and go, hibernate is not needed on a mac because of this.
That feature alone is worth a billion dollars to me, it?s not OSX that does that though is it? I believe my old Lambard did that, believe it's hardware related. But very cool to say the least!
Standby 1: High powered sleep, equivalent to a Mac's sleep, can sleep/wake up really quickly (a touch slower than a mac but still is pretty instant) - keeps RAM, cache powered, kills power to display and hard disk.
Standby 2: Stand by - Cuts power to cpu and caches
Standby 3: Uses minimum power to keep RAM active.
Hibernate - completely turns off computer, stores stuff onto hard disk. I put my one laptop to sleep, opened the computer, disconnected battery, hard drive, RAM, cd drive, everything down to the bare motherboard (to fix some things), assembled it together, and it turned on from hibernate.
I personally use Standby 1 on my pc laptop, makes it act like a Mac in waking up.
If anything, a hibernate function on a mac could be useful, to completely power it off.
Waking from sleep is so fast on the Mac that you can just put your laptop to sleep and come back to it later.
Windows is nowhere near as fast at waking up an hour later though. If you leave the computer for a long time (might be some level mentioned above) it takes an age. I've fiddled with the energy settings and it doesnt mention 3 levels.
This is not another biased I hate Windows threads. This was a diary, so to speak, of my probelms with Windows after using OS X almost exclusively. Yes 256MB RAM is far too small, but OS X with 256MB is better. The show desktop coomnad is great but there's no shortcut and because it's not an app you can't make one. Also you can't then see them all.
Show desktop does have a shortcut, try WINDOWKEY+m and every window minimises instantly.
Quote:
I was just commenting on the features of OS X that make it great. They fact that firefox, iTunes, Internet Explorer take an age to open is a problem because the blue box in the task bar doesn;t appear until it's open. You don;t know if it's opening or not. The dock tells you something is opening.
On my computer, when I open an application, Windows shows the item in the taskbar, before the application is finished opening. So, when I click on Explorer, I do get notice of that something is opening before the application is really finished loading.
It seems your computer is in a bad shape somehow, if you are experiencing these kind of things. I never had these issues on several PC's I use.
Show desktop does have a shortcut, try WINDOWKEY+m and every window minimises instantly.
That windows shortcut key is unknown and underused by many! For example I don't know anybody who knows Windows-S is a search (and can be used from any app). I myself did not know about this one. However, what I said was true. You cannot assign a shortcut. Yes the PC may be in poor shape, but that's part of my argument.
If you use a Mac for a few years it will slow down slightly etc, but nowhere near to the degree of Windows. I have seen this a few machines, owned by casual users who don;t know anything about computers. For someone who knows little about computers Macs are great and require little maintenance.
That windows shortcut key is unknown and underused by many! For example I don't know anybody who knows Windows-S is a search (and can be used from any app). I myself did not know about this one. However, what I said was true. You cannot assign a shortcut. Yes the PC may be in poor shape, but that's part of my argument.
If you use a Mac for a few years it will slow down slightly etc, but nowhere near to the degree of Windows. I have seen this a few machines, owned by casual users who don;t know anything about computers. For someone who knows little about computers Macs are great and require little maintenance.
Well Sorry McCrazy, I think the MAC shortcuts are unknown and underused by many! I know a lot less MacOS shortcuts! It's just what kind of reference an individual has! I don't see how this is better on the Mac at all!
Does MacOS give you a presentation on shortcut keys when you boot? Nope it doesn't. Just like Windows. So, in the end it's just what happens to be your knowledge on shortcut keys. You know the shortcut, or you don't!
If you call yourself "McCrazy" and call the topic "Windows vs MacOSX" I can't help to think you are a Mac addict, or at least are subjective on what you write.
About computer maintanance; if you keep your PC up to date, do some basic maintanance, it can perform for a long time, very well. Were I agree on though, is that the registry isn't a good idea and is an over-complex solution.
What exactly IS the goal in your post? Just to praise MacOS? Then say so and admit you are biased in your opinion! Then I would respond with: "Cool to see you are happy with MacOS" and no problem at all.
You seem to think you just can compare those two OSses as if you were some objective reviewer! Well, if you are going to do THAT I really expect a more professional, well thought out review.
What exactly IS the goal in your post? Just to praise MacOS? Then say so and admit you are biased in your opinion! Then I would respond with: "Cool to see you are happy with MacOS" and no problem at all.
You seem to think you just can compare those two OSses as if you were some objective reviewer! Well, if you are going to do THAT I really expect a more professional, well thought out review.
I've just doen a quick search in Windows and the shortsuts are documented, as are the OS X ones on the Mac. However, the number of people who use help when they have a problem is few and far batween. I've searched for many problems on both Macs and PCs, and i've never found what I'm looking for on PC help. Mac help is missing things as well and is not used as much as it should be.
My PC used to automatically connect to the internet and I struggled to turn it off. In OS X there is one dialogue area for the internet. On Windows there is the Internet Options, modem settings, network settings and the Services menu (where you turn off automatic connection). This is not intuitive or documented. In OS X a search would tell you where to go if you didn't know. Both intuitive and helpful.
In OS X when an URL doesn't exist it doesn't load. In Windows, Windows trys to dial up my dial-up connection. It's these differences that make windows confusing and anti-intuitive. I try to be un-biased in this thread, but the advantages of the Mac OS are plain to see (for me at least).
Indeed, there is something wrong there. It is perhaps the memory (too little), something with the installation, or some background process eating up CPU.
Check for spyware. Those apps might tend to stay active, thus causing extensive paging for user level apps, if you don't have enough memory.
Windows is nowhere near as fast at waking up an hour later though. If you leave the computer for a long time (might be some level mentioned above) it takes an age. I've fiddled with the energy settings and it doesnt mention 3 levels.
It depends. If you select standby then computer (at least my Fujitsu XP laptop) gets to desktop in less than 3 seconds.
If you select hibernate and do not interrupt power, then it takes as long as it does for the hard drive to dump the image of memory contents back into memory. This obviously depends both on the speed of the drive and the amount of memory.
If you selected hibernate and then interrupt power (say, disconnect desktop from AC), then the computer will go through post and memory drive identification and then will begin to reimage memory. In that case it will take an additional 10-30 seconds.
Windows is nowhere near as fast at waking up an hour later though. If you leave the computer for a long time (might be some level mentioned above) it takes an age. I've fiddled with the energy settings and it doesnt mention 3 levels.
The 3 levels are not in the standard energy configuration, which is kind of dumb, so it is a hidden feature. The power software that came with my laptop let me change it, and it's pretty damn fast - 6 seconds to go into standby, 3 seconds to get out.
The following proves there is little difference in speed. BUT my perceptions are that OS X is faster. That is because of feedback.
startup time - PC 49.6, Mac 42.3
log-in time - PC 1.07, Mac 7.7
iTunes - 10.3, 3.0
Firefox - 10.4, 11.4
IE - 4.9, 5.1
Photoshop 6.0 - 19.5 (PC only)
Photoshop CS (try-out on PC so doesn't include time taken for try out dialogue)
24.8 (PC), 22.6 (Mac)
ThunderBird - 9.8, 10.1
MS Word (2000 on PC 2004 on Mac - which is noticably slower than Office v.X)
5.3 (PC), 12.0 (Mac)
QT Player - 4.6, 1.7
This shows that there is not lot in it. IE should be faster on the PC and QT should be faster on the Mac. This mac has just had a re-install so it's a bit unfair. Also PC has too few RAM. I'll buy a FireWire card for the PC. Thenb backup the data onto DVDs and reinstall windows and the apps and retest. This time, against my PowerBook.
BTW - Where is there a backup utility built into Windows? Also does Windows support DVD drives natively (I have a LaCIe FW DVD-RW drive)
Windows supports DVD drives natively, but if you have some sort of brand that doesnt use standard protocol drivers, or is released after Windows was released, it might not be supported directly. In that case, Windows Update often suggests to install the driver for you, if you choose "custom install".
Applications boot a lot faster on my PC than on my Powerbook, but like you said, it isn't fair to compare two different systems (my PC has better specifications).
In the end it doesnt matter really much.
It's the Unix architecture that I prefer (OSX) but my background mainly is Windows and AmigaOS.
Every OS has it's negative/positive aspects and it's a very personal thing. Comparing is almost impossible, you have to take out one small thing: an OS is simply too complex to compare. Too much variables going on. Personally, I like the startmenu better than the Dock....see? It's all about preference.
Yes, I agree on how the control panel in OSX works; better designed and the settings are all "at one place".
Windows supports DVD drives natively, but if you have some sort of brand that doesnt use standard protocol drivers, or is released after Windows was released, it might not be supported directly. In that case, Windows Update often suggests to install the driver for you, if you choose "custom install".
Applications boot a lot faster on my PC than on my Powerbook, but like you said, it isn't fair to compare two different systems (my PC has better specifications).
In the end it doesnt matter really much.
It's the Unix architecture that I prefer (OSX) but my background mainly is Windows and AmigaOS.
Every OS has it's negative/positive aspects and it's a very personal thing. Comparing is almost impossible, you have to take out one small thing: an OS is simply too complex to compare. Too much variables going on. Personally, I like the startmenu better than the Dock....see? It's all about preference.
Yes, I agree on how the control panel in OSX works; better designed and the settings are all "at one place".
Thanks for the info. I really appreciate a difference of opinion. This wasn't intending to be a Windows slagging session. There are enough of those posts already!
The main difference I see between Macs and Windows is the way they expect the user to interact.
When anything is plugged in on a PC, Windows tells you, this is useful for those inexperienced users. On a Mac the Mac makes the thing work but doesn't tell the user what it's doing. New users soon get used to the printer just appearing in the print menu without telling you it was installing (or whatever it was). There's no need to inform the user, in my opinion, unless something goes wrong.
In Windows there is a task-centric side-bar. This try's to predict what you want to do. When you click an item you go through a wizard. In OS X you would choose the App and then the task; obviously you can do the second in Windows. What I resent is the Print Photos (or burn disc) button in Explorer which doesn't save settings so you can't just press print and then choose an already assigned layout etc. This mans the wizard has to be worked through everytime. But other than that it's a useful feature, especially for amateurs. In OS X you would use Preview or iPhoto (page-setup in iPhoto is a pain - unless iPhoto 5 has improved).
I suppose it's really a case of getting used to the OS. IMO I'm used to OS X and Windows; and Windows is significantly more annoying for me than OS X. Other non-OS X users would agree with me that Windows annoys them. And some Windows users would find OS X annoying because of the lack of available preferences in certain apps (or the OS for that matter)
A big mistake from Microsoft is the way they handled Service Pack 2. Because of security issues (that's what you get if you have 98% of the world using Windows) they implemented annoying messages instead of grabbing the problems by the balls.
Instead, I get messages like "Are you sure to download this and that", or "Windows security centre has noticed you don't have an updated virus scanner"....
It doesn't help the user, it annoyes them. Their intentions are okay though but if you download an EXE, you ought to know it can contain viruses! Windows sometimes treats me like I'm utterly insane, dumb, or both.
But, I love the speed of the OS, something that I really get annoyed with on the Mac. MacOS is slow, I probably will get flamed because of this, but I find it much too slow. I hope Tiger will indeed change this.
A big mistake from Microsoft is the way they handled Service Pack 2. Because of security issues (that's what you get if you have 98% of the world using Windows) they implemented annoying messages instead of grabbing the problems by the balls.
Instead, I get messages like "Are you sure to download this and that", or "Windows security centre has noticed you don't have an updated virus scanner"....
It doesn't help the user, it annoyes them. Their intentions are okay though but if you download an EXE, you ought to know it can contain viruses! Windows sometimes treats me like I'm utterly insane, dumb, or both.
But, I love the speed of the OS, something that I really get annoyed with on the Mac. MacOS is slow, I probably will get flamed because of this, but I find it much too slow. I hope Tiger will indeed change this.
Are you referring to the finder? I've hard lots of complaints with re-size speeds etc. Tiger should be addressing those. Check out the thread in OS X. I can't remember what it's called but it's about Tiger being faster. I think service pack 2 is good for inexperienced users, but a pain for the experienced. That's the difference with the Mac.
Did you backup before installing it? I need to install it on my Dad's PC but can't back up yet.
Installing the pack did not give me any problems, and I think it will be quite safe to upgrade to.
I'd go against this advice (nothing personal ) and suggest you do make backups. My x86 laptop had severe problems with SP 2, the machine would lock up on about 1 in 2 login attempts and would also occassionally freeze on launching apps. The remove SP2 option didn't really do much good and I needed to reinstall.
I'd go against this advice (nothing personal ) and suggest you do make backups. My x86 laptop had severe problems with SP 2, the machine would lock up on about 1 in 2 login attempts and would also occassionally freeze on launching apps. The remove SP2 option didn't really do much good and I needed to reinstall.
I'll stop this here as I'm a bit off-topic.
yeah I just performed a google search and saw a few issues. I wont risk it as it's not my stuff.
Comments
Originally posted by Relic
A friggen dog wagging it's tail while searching for infected files should be enough reason for anybody to never use Windows! Old Yeller has to be put down, BLAM!
Or the fact it takes longer to configure a search on windows than it takes to find it on OS X! Searching in OS X is soooooo much faster than windows. I had 70GB of stuff on my PowerBook (5400RPM) and it thrashes the Windows machine at searching. Searching on Windows is soo poor I don't know any PC users that use it. It's only Mac and PC uses that even attempt Windows search. It's awful to configure and lacks advanced configuration settings.
It was just now that I logged in and really noticed the difference between macs and PCs. Log-in takes a minute so if you click firefox stragiht away it still takes a while. On the Mac safari opened before the finder finished loading, as in under 7 seconds. You can turn on a Mac and go, hibernate is not needed on a mac because of this.
Originally posted by MacCrazy
You can turn on a Mac and go, hibernate is not needed on a mac because of this.
That feature alone is worth a billion dollars to me, it?s not OSX that does that though is it? I believe my old Lambard did that, believe it's hardware related. But very cool to say the least!
Originally posted by MacCrazy
You can turn on a Mac and go, hibernate is not needed on a mac because of this.
What are you talking about?
Standby 1: High powered sleep, equivalent to a Mac's sleep, can sleep/wake up really quickly (a touch slower than a mac but still is pretty instant) - keeps RAM, cache powered, kills power to display and hard disk.
Standby 2: Stand by - Cuts power to cpu and caches
Standby 3: Uses minimum power to keep RAM active.
Hibernate - completely turns off computer, stores stuff onto hard disk. I put my one laptop to sleep, opened the computer, disconnected battery, hard drive, RAM, cd drive, everything down to the bare motherboard (to fix some things), assembled it together, and it turned on from hibernate.
I personally use Standby 1 on my pc laptop, makes it act like a Mac in waking up.
If anything, a hibernate function on a mac could be useful, to completely power it off.
Originally posted by PB
What are you talking about?
Waking from sleep is so fast on the Mac that you can just put your laptop to sleep and come back to it later.
Windows is nowhere near as fast at waking up an hour later though. If you leave the computer for a long time (might be some level mentioned above) it takes an age. I've fiddled with the energy settings and it doesnt mention 3 levels.
Originally posted by MacCrazy
This is not another biased I hate Windows threads. This was a diary, so to speak, of my probelms with Windows after using OS X almost exclusively. Yes 256MB RAM is far too small, but OS X with 256MB is better. The show desktop coomnad is great but there's no shortcut and because it's not an app you can't make one. Also you can't then see them all.
Show desktop does have a shortcut, try WINDOWKEY+m and every window minimises instantly.
I was just commenting on the features of OS X that make it great. They fact that firefox, iTunes, Internet Explorer take an age to open is a problem because the blue box in the task bar doesn;t appear until it's open. You don;t know if it's opening or not. The dock tells you something is opening.
On my computer, when I open an application, Windows shows the item in the taskbar, before the application is finished opening. So, when I click on Explorer, I do get notice of that something is opening before the application is really finished loading.
It seems your computer is in a bad shape somehow, if you are experiencing these kind of things. I never had these issues on several PC's I use.
Originally posted by dacloo
Show desktop does have a shortcut, try WINDOWKEY+m and every window minimises instantly.
That windows shortcut key is unknown and underused by many! For example I don't know anybody who knows Windows-S is a search (and can be used from any app). I myself did not know about this one. However, what I said was true. You cannot assign a shortcut. Yes the PC may be in poor shape, but that's part of my argument.
If you use a Mac for a few years it will slow down slightly etc, but nowhere near to the degree of Windows. I have seen this a few machines, owned by casual users who don;t know anything about computers. For someone who knows little about computers Macs are great and require little maintenance.
Originally posted by MacCrazy
That windows shortcut key is unknown and underused by many! For example I don't know anybody who knows Windows-S is a search (and can be used from any app). I myself did not know about this one. However, what I said was true. You cannot assign a shortcut. Yes the PC may be in poor shape, but that's part of my argument.
If you use a Mac for a few years it will slow down slightly etc, but nowhere near to the degree of Windows. I have seen this a few machines, owned by casual users who don;t know anything about computers. For someone who knows little about computers Macs are great and require little maintenance.
Well Sorry McCrazy, I think the MAC shortcuts are unknown and underused by many! I know a lot less MacOS shortcuts! It's just what kind of reference an individual has! I don't see how this is better on the Mac at all!
Does MacOS give you a presentation on shortcut keys when you boot? Nope it doesn't. Just like Windows. So, in the end it's just what happens to be your knowledge on shortcut keys. You know the shortcut, or you don't!
If you call yourself "McCrazy" and call the topic "Windows vs MacOSX" I can't help to think you are a Mac addict, or at least are subjective on what you write.
About computer maintanance; if you keep your PC up to date, do some basic maintanance, it can perform for a long time, very well. Were I agree on though, is that the registry isn't a good idea and is an over-complex solution.
What exactly IS the goal in your post? Just to praise MacOS? Then say so and admit you are biased in your opinion! Then I would respond with: "Cool to see you are happy with MacOS" and no problem at all.
You seem to think you just can compare those two OSses as if you were some objective reviewer! Well, if you are going to do THAT I really expect a more professional, well thought out review.
Originally posted by dacloo
What exactly IS the goal in your post? Just to praise MacOS? Then say so and admit you are biased in your opinion! Then I would respond with: "Cool to see you are happy with MacOS" and no problem at all.
You seem to think you just can compare those two OSses as if you were some objective reviewer! Well, if you are going to do THAT I really expect a more professional, well thought out review.
I've just doen a quick search in Windows and the shortsuts are documented, as are the OS X ones on the Mac. However, the number of people who use help when they have a problem is few and far batween. I've searched for many problems on both Macs and PCs, and i've never found what I'm looking for on PC help. Mac help is missing things as well and is not used as much as it should be.
My PC used to automatically connect to the internet and I struggled to turn it off. In OS X there is one dialogue area for the internet. On Windows there is the Internet Options, modem settings, network settings and the Services menu (where you turn off automatic connection). This is not intuitive or documented. In OS X a search would tell you where to go if you didn't know. Both intuitive and helpful.
In OS X when an URL doesn't exist it doesn't load. In Windows, Windows trys to dial up my dial-up connection. It's these differences that make windows confusing and anti-intuitive. I try to be un-biased in this thread, but the advantages of the Mac OS are plain to see (for me at least).
Originally posted by PB
Indeed, there is something wrong there. It is perhaps the memory (too little), something with the installation, or some background process eating up CPU.
Check for spyware. Those apps might tend to stay active, thus causing extensive paging for user level apps, if you don't have enough memory.
Windows is nowhere near as fast at waking up an hour later though. If you leave the computer for a long time (might be some level mentioned above) it takes an age. I've fiddled with the energy settings and it doesnt mention 3 levels.
It depends. If you select standby then computer (at least my Fujitsu XP laptop) gets to desktop in less than 3 seconds.
If you select hibernate and do not interrupt power, then it takes as long as it does for the hard drive to dump the image of memory contents back into memory. This obviously depends both on the speed of the drive and the amount of memory.
If you selected hibernate and then interrupt power (say, disconnect desktop from AC), then the computer will go through post and memory drive identification and then will begin to reimage memory. In that case it will take an additional 10-30 seconds.
Originally posted by MacCrazy
Windows is nowhere near as fast at waking up an hour later though. If you leave the computer for a long time (might be some level mentioned above) it takes an age. I've fiddled with the energy settings and it doesnt mention 3 levels.
The 3 levels are not in the standard energy configuration, which is kind of dumb, so it is a hidden feature. The power software that came with my laptop let me change it, and it's pretty damn fast - 6 seconds to go into standby, 3 seconds to get out.
Originally posted by MacCrazy
The following proves there is little difference in speed. BUT my perceptions are that OS X is faster. That is because of feedback.
startup time - PC 49.6, Mac 42.3
log-in time - PC 1.07, Mac 7.7
iTunes - 10.3, 3.0
Firefox - 10.4, 11.4
IE - 4.9, 5.1
Photoshop 6.0 - 19.5 (PC only)
Photoshop CS (try-out on PC so doesn't include time taken for try out dialogue)
24.8 (PC), 22.6 (Mac)
ThunderBird - 9.8, 10.1
MS Word (2000 on PC 2004 on Mac - which is noticably slower than Office v.X)
5.3 (PC), 12.0 (Mac)
QT Player - 4.6, 1.7
This shows that there is not lot in it. IE should be faster on the PC and QT should be faster on the Mac. This mac has just had a re-install so it's a bit unfair. Also PC has too few RAM. I'll buy a FireWire card for the PC. Thenb backup the data onto DVDs and reinstall windows and the apps and retest. This time, against my PowerBook.
BTW - Where is there a backup utility built into Windows? Also does Windows support DVD drives natively (I have a LaCIe FW DVD-RW drive)
Windows supports DVD drives natively, but if you have some sort of brand that doesnt use standard protocol drivers, or is released after Windows was released, it might not be supported directly. In that case, Windows Update often suggests to install the driver for you, if you choose "custom install".
Applications boot a lot faster on my PC than on my Powerbook, but like you said, it isn't fair to compare two different systems (my PC has better specifications).
In the end it doesnt matter really much.
It's the Unix architecture that I prefer (OSX) but my background mainly is Windows and AmigaOS.
Every OS has it's negative/positive aspects and it's a very personal thing. Comparing is almost impossible, you have to take out one small thing: an OS is simply too complex to compare. Too much variables going on. Personally, I like the startmenu better than the Dock....see? It's all about preference.
Yes, I agree on how the control panel in OSX works; better designed and the settings are all "at one place".
Originally posted by dacloo
Windows supports DVD drives natively, but if you have some sort of brand that doesnt use standard protocol drivers, or is released after Windows was released, it might not be supported directly. In that case, Windows Update often suggests to install the driver for you, if you choose "custom install".
Applications boot a lot faster on my PC than on my Powerbook, but like you said, it isn't fair to compare two different systems (my PC has better specifications).
In the end it doesnt matter really much.
It's the Unix architecture that I prefer (OSX) but my background mainly is Windows and AmigaOS.
Every OS has it's negative/positive aspects and it's a very personal thing. Comparing is almost impossible, you have to take out one small thing: an OS is simply too complex to compare. Too much variables going on. Personally, I like the startmenu better than the Dock....see? It's all about preference.
Yes, I agree on how the control panel in OSX works; better designed and the settings are all "at one place".
Thanks for the info. I really appreciate a difference of opinion. This wasn't intending to be a Windows slagging session. There are enough of those posts already!
The main difference I see between Macs and Windows is the way they expect the user to interact.
When anything is plugged in on a PC, Windows tells you, this is useful for those inexperienced users. On a Mac the Mac makes the thing work but doesn't tell the user what it's doing. New users soon get used to the printer just appearing in the print menu without telling you it was installing (or whatever it was). There's no need to inform the user, in my opinion, unless something goes wrong.
In Windows there is a task-centric side-bar. This try's to predict what you want to do. When you click an item you go through a wizard. In OS X you would choose the App and then the task; obviously you can do the second in Windows. What I resent is the Print Photos (or burn disc) button in Explorer which doesn't save settings so you can't just press print and then choose an already assigned layout etc. This mans the wizard has to be worked through everytime. But other than that it's a useful feature, especially for amateurs. In OS X you would use Preview or iPhoto (page-setup in iPhoto is a pain - unless iPhoto 5 has improved).
I suppose it's really a case of getting used to the OS. IMO I'm used to OS X and Windows; and Windows is significantly more annoying for me than OS X. Other non-OS X users would agree with me that Windows annoys them. And some Windows users would find OS X annoying because of the lack of available preferences in certain apps (or the OS for that matter)
A big mistake from Microsoft is the way they handled Service Pack 2. Because of security issues (that's what you get if you have 98% of the world using Windows) they implemented annoying messages instead of grabbing the problems by the balls.
Instead, I get messages like "Are you sure to download this and that", or "Windows security centre has noticed you don't have an updated virus scanner"....
It doesn't help the user, it annoyes them. Their intentions are okay though but if you download an EXE, you ought to know it can contain viruses! Windows sometimes treats me like I'm utterly insane, dumb, or both.
But, I love the speed of the OS, something that I really get annoyed with on the Mac. MacOS is slow, I probably will get flamed because of this, but I find it much too slow. I hope Tiger will indeed change this.
Originally posted by dacloo
Good points.
A big mistake from Microsoft is the way they handled Service Pack 2. Because of security issues (that's what you get if you have 98% of the world using Windows) they implemented annoying messages instead of grabbing the problems by the balls.
Instead, I get messages like "Are you sure to download this and that", or "Windows security centre has noticed you don't have an updated virus scanner"....
It doesn't help the user, it annoyes them. Their intentions are okay though but if you download an EXE, you ought to know it can contain viruses! Windows sometimes treats me like I'm utterly insane, dumb, or both.
But, I love the speed of the OS, something that I really get annoyed with on the Mac. MacOS is slow, I probably will get flamed because of this, but I find it much too slow. I hope Tiger will indeed change this.
Are you referring to the finder? I've hard lots of complaints with re-size speeds etc. Tiger should be addressing those. Check out the thread in OS X. I can't remember what it's called but it's about Tiger being faster. I think service pack 2 is good for inexperienced users, but a pain for the experienced. That's the difference with the Mac.
Did you backup before installing it? I need to install it on my Dad's PC but can't back up yet.
I back up every week (company stuff :-). Installing the pack did not give me any problems, and I think it will be quite safe to upgrade to.
Originally posted by dacloo
Hi,
I back up every week (company stuff :-). Installing the pack did not give me any problems, and I think it will be quite safe to upgrade to.
Cool thanks for the advice!
Installing the pack did not give me any problems, and I think it will be quite safe to upgrade to.
I'd go against this advice (nothing personal
I'll stop this here as I'm a bit off-topic.
Originally posted by Qchem
I'd go against this advice (nothing personal
I'll stop this here as I'm a bit off-topic.
yeah I just performed a google search and saw a few issues. I wont risk it as it's not my stuff.