Any leapfrogging of things like .net and C# -- or anything that runs any deeper? It seemed like 'Longhorn' was leaning towards a re-write, but all that went away by degrees.
For example -- basically CS2 would still run, and CS3 wouldn't really need anything done to it to run on Vista -- if you want to use the new feature you can call it, but you don't have too. (?)
I thought I remembered hearing something about there needing to be some kind of relatively lightweight emulation to run XP programs, could be wrong.
WinFS is also new. If that indeed is being shipped with Vista.
Microsoft is unwilling to do a jump like OS9 to OSX, even though that is exactly what they need to do, because they would lose too many customers. They'll stick with the same buggy software until their doom.
Biggest piece of crap I've heard in a long time! Mac OS 9 was more like Windows 95/98/Me relative to Mac OS X and Windows 2K/XP/2K3 respectively. In fact in some ways Mac OS 9 was more like Windows 3.x (e.g. in its use of cooperative multitasking). Do your homework before spouting out FUD in reverse.
You know what's funny though? People expecting Microsoft to rewrite Windows, while claiming Apple did the same with OS X.
Apple didn't do the same; Apple borrowed a lot of code from other projects, *BSDs mostly, it used a lot of code from NeXT and is currently using a lot of code from the GNU crowd (SMB, GCC, KHTML, KJS).
OS X is a big mix of code others have created, code NeXT brought, and code Apple has created (Aqua, AppleScript, etc). To suggest that Apple 'rewrote' OS9 and created OSX and that Microsoft should do the same is... forget it.
Biggest piece of crap I've heard in a long time! Mac OS 9 was more like Windows 95/98/Me relative to Mac OS X and Windows 2K/XP/2K3 respectively. In fact in some ways Mac OS 9 was more like Windows 3.x (e.g. in its use of cooperative multitasking). Do your homework before spouting out FUD in reverse.
Do your research, Windows has been based in DOS for years upon years. OS9 to OSX is a switch to Unix. I'm not talking features vs features.
And I didn't say that Apple wrote OSX, Unix has been in development since the 70s. To say that Apple wrote it WOULD be wrong. My point is that Apple knows how to move on, as evidenced again by this switch to Intel. Microsoft is stuck in the past because of fear of losing their customer base.
Oh, leave the Windows users alone. They don't want such radical changes; they like being in a rut...it's what they're used to.
Something funny happened to me today. A Windows user that I talk to sometimes came by me as I was using my iBook with 10.4.5. I minimized and maximized a page and he blurts, "Do that again!" He had to see my lovely user interface once again.
What's to care about other than bragging rights that don't even matter, with Konfabulator being the actual inventor?
Or Apple in the early mac days?
Or the fact that the whole damn thing isnt new, it is just copying a real life metephore, I have papers on my desk, I need a phone book or calculator, I take it from the drawr, use it, and put it back.
I have a windows friend who uses an Expose type application on his Dell. I saw it, it's very much like the Mac one, except its shareware that you have to pay for. It also has the flip3d thing that's supposed to be in Vista. I don't think you can drag and drop to the expose windows though, or tab through them either.
BTW - He is fully aware its a copy of Apple's expose.
Then I have another windows friend, my brother He uses the Yahoo widgets, and there's some widgets that Yahoo has that nobody has created for the mac. I felt my ability to brag highly weakened.
Thats awful that a company of Microshafts size can't ensure their website is multi-browser compatible. I look at Apple's website all the time in IE (at uni) and it loads perfectly without any errors or misplaced objects.
Oh, and that Media Center / iTunes image is sheer plagiarism!
I don't even argue / discuss why I switched to Mac with friends or family now, once you step out of Microshafts 'software suite' you finally see the light! , I dont think any Windows user will ever understand us Mac Users until they buy one for themselves.
I don't even argue / discuss why I switched to Mac with friends or family now, once you step out of Microshafts 'software suite' you finally see the light! , I dont think any Windows user will ever understand us Mac Users until they buy one for themselves.
Some would call that Fanboyism. Me, I take the label on with pride
OS X is a big mix of code others have created, code NeXT brought, and code Apple has created (Aqua, AppleScript, etc). To suggest that Apple 'rewrote' OS9 and created OSX and that Microsoft should do the same is... forget it.
Apple also created the Carbon API set, which, together with the creation of aqua, was a re-write of OS 9. They also created the Quartz API, and had to re-write most of the QuickTime API.
OS X was a massive amount of work and I for one continue to be impressed by the software engineering that it represents.
Then I have another windows friend, my brother He uses the Yahoo widgets, and there's some widgets that Yahoo has that nobody has created for the mac. I felt my ability to brag highly weakened.
Like a Bluescreen Counter widget. (Get ready for Vista, featuring Red Screens too!)
But seriously, what Yahoo widgets are you envious of?
Do your research, Windows has been based in DOS for years upon years. OS9 to OSX is a switch to Unix. I'm not talking features vs features.
Are you implying Windows is based on DOS? Win2k is 6 years old. NT4 is 10 years old. OSX is just recently becoming a full-featured OS.
Longhorn isn't entirely a GUI upgrade. Extremetech wrote a decent article a while back. It will include a faster, rewritten network and audio stack. Several new APIs, prioritized disk IO, shadow volumes, cablecard support, userspace drivers, upgrades on it's bundled apps, and some other stuff.
Despite all the transparency tricks, borrowed but still handy tools and the security updates, Windows Vista will still lack style and purpose.
No matter how many types of tea the OS once will be able to serve you - deep inside, it will always carry the the soul of Marvin, the Paradroid Android ("Life's bad enough as it is without trying to invent any more of it.").
Are you implying Windows is based on DOS? Win2k is 6 years old. NT4 is 10 years old. OSX is just recently becoming a full-featured OS.
Longhorn isn't entirely a GUI upgrade. Extremetech wrote a decent article a while back. It will include a faster, rewritten network and audio stack. Several new APIs, prioritized disk IO, shadow volumes, cablecard support, userspace drivers, upgrades on it's bundled apps, and some other stuff.
Yes, he is correctly implying that Windows is based on dos, Windows XP(32bit) still carries some code from the good old 16bit dos days, so it really was time to do some rewriting, Windows XP 64 on the other hand is based mostly on new code, but the gui is still from 32 bit windows with some enhancements. Now hopefully they have rewritten that gui part in Vista, so they actually can say that they did a major rewrite. And not a day too late.
Comments
Originally posted by Elixir
exactly, most of the time they dont, i mean HELLO they are window users haha.
What's to care about other than bragging rights that don't even matter, with Konfabulator being the actual inventor?
Originally posted by dmz
Any leapfrogging of things like .net and C# -- or anything that runs any deeper? It seemed like 'Longhorn' was leaning towards a re-write, but all that went away by degrees.
For example -- basically CS2 would still run, and CS3 wouldn't really need anything done to it to run on Vista -- if you want to use the new feature you can call it, but you don't have too. (?)
I thought I remembered hearing something about there needing to be some kind of relatively lightweight emulation to run XP programs, could be wrong.
WinFS is also new. If that indeed is being shipped with Vista.
Originally posted by DeaPeaJay
Microsoft is unwilling to do a jump like OS9 to OSX, even though that is exactly what they need to do, because they would lose too many customers. They'll stick with the same buggy software until their doom.
Biggest piece of crap I've heard in a long time! Mac OS 9 was more like Windows 95/98/Me relative to Mac OS X and Windows 2K/XP/2K3 respectively. In fact in some ways Mac OS 9 was more like Windows 3.x (e.g. in its use of cooperative multitasking). Do your homework before spouting out FUD in reverse.
Apple didn't do the same; Apple borrowed a lot of code from other projects, *BSDs mostly, it used a lot of code from NeXT and is currently using a lot of code from the GNU crowd (SMB, GCC, KHTML, KJS).
OS X is a big mix of code others have created, code NeXT brought, and code Apple has created (Aqua, AppleScript, etc). To suggest that Apple 'rewrote' OS9 and created OSX and that Microsoft should do the same is... forget it.
Originally posted by cygsid
Biggest piece of crap I've heard in a long time! Mac OS 9 was more like Windows 95/98/Me relative to Mac OS X and Windows 2K/XP/2K3 respectively. In fact in some ways Mac OS 9 was more like Windows 3.x (e.g. in its use of cooperative multitasking). Do your homework before spouting out FUD in reverse.
Do your research, Windows has been based in DOS for years upon years. OS9 to OSX is a switch to Unix. I'm not talking features vs features.
And I didn't say that Apple wrote OSX, Unix has been in development since the 70s. To say that Apple wrote it WOULD be wrong. My point is that Apple knows how to move on, as evidenced again by this switch to Intel. Microsoft is stuck in the past because of fear of losing their customer base.
Originally posted by Gene Clean
Well, when your customer base is 90% of all the people using computers, it's kinda hard to just move on.
not my problem
Something funny happened to me today. A Windows user that I talk to sometimes came by me as I was using my iBook with 10.4.5. I minimized and maximized a page and he blurts, "Do that again!" He had to see my lovely user interface once again.
Originally posted by Placebo
What's to care about other than bragging rights that don't even matter, with Konfabulator being the actual inventor?
Or Apple in the early mac days?
Or the fact that the whole damn thing isnt new, it is just copying a real life metephore, I have papers on my desk, I need a phone book or calculator, I take it from the drawr, use it, and put it back.
BTW - He is fully aware its a copy of Apple's expose.
Then I have another windows friend, my brother He uses the Yahoo widgets, and there's some widgets that Yahoo has that nobody has created for the mac. I felt my ability to brag highly weakened.
Oh, and that Media Center / iTunes image is sheer plagiarism!
I don't even argue / discuss why I switched to Mac with friends or family now, once you step out of Microshafts 'software suite' you finally see the light! , I dont think any Windows user will ever understand us Mac Users until they buy one for themselves.
Originally posted by smclintock
I don't even argue / discuss why I switched to Mac with friends or family now, once you step out of Microshafts 'software suite' you finally see the light! , I dont think any Windows user will ever understand us Mac Users until they buy one for themselves.
Some would call that Fanboyism. Me, I take the label on with pride
Originally posted by Gene Clean
OS X is a big mix of code others have created, code NeXT brought, and code Apple has created (Aqua, AppleScript, etc). To suggest that Apple 'rewrote' OS9 and created OSX and that Microsoft should do the same is... forget it.
Apple also created the Carbon API set, which, together with the creation of aqua, was a re-write of OS 9. They also created the Quartz API, and had to re-write most of the QuickTime API.
OS X was a massive amount of work and I for one continue to be impressed by the software engineering that it represents.
Originally posted by DeaPeaJay
Then I have another windows friend, my brother He uses the Yahoo widgets, and there's some widgets that Yahoo has that nobody has created for the mac. I felt my ability to brag highly weakened.
Like a Bluescreen Counter widget. (Get ready for Vista, featuring Red Screens too!)
But seriously, what Yahoo widgets are you envious of?
Originally posted by DeaPeaJay
Do your research, Windows has been based in DOS for years upon years. OS9 to OSX is a switch to Unix. I'm not talking features vs features.
Are you implying Windows is based on DOS? Win2k is 6 years old. NT4 is 10 years old. OSX is just recently becoming a full-featured OS.
Longhorn isn't entirely a GUI upgrade. Extremetech wrote a decent article a while back. It will include a faster, rewritten network and audio stack. Several new APIs, prioritized disk IO, shadow volumes, cablecard support, userspace drivers, upgrades on it's bundled apps, and some other stuff.
Originally posted by bergz
--B
1) blatant
2) tacky
3) low class
all you M$ fanboys gotta feel real special
Rip off!!!!!
Ok they have changed the proportions but they have the mic icon in its own window and volume bars. So un-original.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvist...ne/speech.mspx
No matter how many types of tea the OS once will be able to serve you - deep inside, it will always carry the the soul of Marvin, the Paradroid Android ("Life's bad enough as it is without trying to invent any more of it.").
Originally posted by xmoger
Are you implying Windows is based on DOS? Win2k is 6 years old. NT4 is 10 years old. OSX is just recently becoming a full-featured OS.
Longhorn isn't entirely a GUI upgrade. Extremetech wrote a decent article a while back. It will include a faster, rewritten network and audio stack. Several new APIs, prioritized disk IO, shadow volumes, cablecard support, userspace drivers, upgrades on it's bundled apps, and some other stuff.
Yes, he is correctly implying that Windows is based on dos, Windows XP(32bit) still carries some code from the good old 16bit dos days, so it really was time to do some rewriting, Windows XP 64 on the other hand is based mostly on new code, but the gui is still from 32 bit windows with some enhancements. Now hopefully they have rewritten that gui part in Vista, so they actually can say that they did a major rewrite. And not a day too late.