| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Windows Vista Beta 1 vs. Mac OS X | |
|
||
| Time: 07:51 EST/12:51 GMT | News Source: SuperSite for Windows | Posted By: John Quigley | ||
|
In part one of my comparison of Windows Vista Beta 1 and Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger," I looked at three key aspects of each system: Look and feel, desktop search, and data visualization and organization. For the most part, OS X came out well ahead of Windows Vista, as you'd expect, since it's a polished finished product. Vista, meanwhile, is all knees and elbows, an awkward teenager on its way to maturity. Microsoft will iron out the details, I'm sure, but the end result will likely not change much. Specifically, OS X will always be elegant, and Windows will almost certainly lag behind in the fit and finish department. The only questions are how much Vista will improve when compared to previous Windows versions, and whether it will be enough to keep customers from moving to OS X. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 309 Last | Next |
The time now is
11:25:14 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 5912 (62.58.60.27) at 11/29/2005 8:43:17 AM |
|
"Well this guy certainly shows which way he is biased, which is of course why I put no stock in the comparison."
One would expect a different kind of preference on a site called "SuperSite for Windows". Maybe it is not that biased after all? This post was edited by rnmboon on Tuesday, November 29, 2005 at 08:44. |
| #2 By 1124 (165.170.128.65) at 11/29/2005 10:11:09 AM |
| I sometime think Pauls job is just to annoy both side so that he site gets a lot of traffic. Why waste time comparine a beta OS with one thats shipping. |
| #3 By 21203 (208.252.96.220) at 11/29/2005 10:54:35 AM |
| #5 hit it right on the money with the first comment. |
| #4 By 8556 (12.217.111.92) at 11/29/2005 11:45:34 AM |
| Who's flocking to OS X? I don't know anyone other than long time Mac users and one person that doesn't know how to maintain Anti-Virus apps and other utility programs on Windows. |
| #5 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 11/29/2005 11:56:35 AM |
|
The impression that I have of Paul is that he's trying to appeal to Mac users by putting down Windows (although often rightly so), and trying to appear as a technology enthusiast rather than a platform enthusiast. He also likes to be the first one with "the scoop." I think he generally calls it as he sees it--he says what he likes and what he does not. You know, these editorials are not binding--it's just his take on things. At the same time, he has far more access into the workings of Microsoft than most, and I suppose that gives him unique insight (as he states in the article--it's only beta 1). When Vista ships, you may very well see a completely different story, as he has done in the past.
On the other hand, I'm surprised by this review. To me, it reflects a very consumer-oriented mindset, as well as a somewhat superficial covering of the technology. For example: Mac OS X, meanwhile, was truly designed for excellent security, thanks to its wonderful UNIX roots and clean architecture. If anyone should know about "wonderful UNIX roots" vs. NT, it should be Paul. Regarding security, the granularity and flexibility offered by NT and NTFS far surpasses that of OS X. The "roots" of NT vs. the roots of UNIX isn't really the issue here, though--it's the implementation of other subsystems, and the ecosystem. Running as non-admin has been supported as part of the NT design from day one, but due to a variety of reasons--primarily the compatibility of applications written for the 3.1 and 9x versions of Windows--this never took hold. In other words, this is not a fault of NT's "roots," but an amalgam of practical necessities. I think many vendors--particularly in the enterprise space--are finally getting the message, though, and due to customer push-back, many apps DO work in a non-admin environment (or at least can be tweaked to work in this way). And the vast, vast majority of Windows security issues today are due to IE, not NT's "roots." For example, if the first version of Windows was 2003 and the only application available was IIS 6, we would be praising the security record of Windows. It's not the roots, it's what sits on top. Paul doesn't go into some other important details, such as the totally lousy 64-bit support in OS X, or the horrible threading architecture (which will become increasingly important as chip manufacturers resort to SMP rather than clock speed to increase performance), or what is arguably the biggest asset to Windows, .NET and the overall development platform and tools. The applications are far more important than the OS (assuming it's reliable, as both XP/Vista and OS X are) to consumers of all sorts, and Windows has the clear advantage here, both now and in the future. I have a hunch that Apple may have something very significant in the works for broad Windows compatibility now that they're switching to Intel, and that could certainly stir things up. However, I can't see such an implementation being worth the effort--even to the most vehement anti-Microsoft fanatic, a Steve Jobs-ruled computing world would be far worse than anything Microsoft ever dreamt, and if you're already contemplating a switch away from Windows, Linux would probably have more allure. |
| #6 By 10022 (69.204.110.203) at 11/29/2005 5:58:33 PM |
|
Do any of these people that review OS X actually try to use it to do real, everyday things or do they just simply look at the pretty graphics?
I mean really, as some one that get forced to used it on a regualr basis, I can only say that it sucks. No,worse than that, it really F'n sucks- I would rather use an old PIII with 98 on it than OS X- it simply is annoying, lacks any consistancy in the UI, its slow- god awful slow, crashes alot - kernal panics using graphing calculator, stutters when opening an app while using iTunes (on a G5!!!- I mean come on when was the last time your PC did that? 1998??) I looks pretty to some - I personnally dont like it, but thats about all it has- networking support sucks, power management sucks - and they MAKE the hardware!! The Finders file browsing sucks. I love those dialog boxes that gice you the option of selecting ONLY the high level places like Desktop or Documents -- what that mean is you can make a subfolder there- you can ONLY save it to Desktop or Documents, no browsing-- really good! I really think you have to have the mental capacity of a 5 year old to use a Mac - I mean really, if you can figure out explorer and click 'next' a few time to install an app then you must be retarded And Apples security - its security through obscurity - nothing less, and so is Linux to the extent that it doesnt get the kind of brute force attacks that Windows has to hold up to (not to mention the usability issues) This post was edited by kevn84 on Tuesday, November 29, 2005 at 17:59. |
| #7 By 23275 (68.17.42.38) at 11/29/2005 7:28:35 PM |
|
#9, Lord help you....many trolling here are going to be all over you - BUT - you're dead on right.
Blipping by once again - we're bored stiff wating on an EXMERGE to complete.... one has to opine.... OSX is a freaking joke and comparing it to any version of Windows is ridiculous and outrageous to even mention it in the same state [as in physical place] as Vista. Use of OSX aside - try supporting it???!!! Day in - day out - in the enterprise and alongside both Unices and Linuces - then comment. Had enough? No? Try funding it???!!! <that effort> and I have and also helped many <self included> move away from the nightmare that OSX is and will likely remain. Ok, still not had enough? Try dealing with people that think inside an app? As in an app that runs on OSX - GAWD - speak of a closed minded set???!!! What I mean here is, take a person or people that re-flipping-fuse to think around a "REQUIREMENT" and then mix, match and WORK to create a SOLUTION. No, no, no...instead they do only what the app can do - and that dear friends is DEATH in business - and by the way, not at all open. Windows people [across every vertical you can imagine - including media and advertising], take a REQUIREMENT and then mix all sorts of technologies, ideas, and people and create SOLUTIONS that WORK!!! I live in, support and FUND this each and every day and I wish to scream that no more rigid, frozen, closed or narrow a mind has been encountered than any ONE that even suggests OSX is in any way close to what Windows is, or what Vista will be. BTW, Paul is pissed because a) he was cut out of key access to Vista early on and b) because initial PDC builds did not include any of the UI's much spoken to features. Why? Because he's not keen enough to comment about the real meat under an OS - much less Vista and he was left with a dry hole. Also, MS didn't intentionally leave him out - natural selection based upon his lack of ability made that decision rather innocently. So, he chose to act like a giant titty-baby. That is my opinion, of course and we all know just how empty such are; however, I'd bet a big piece of the farm that I am right about Paul's motivations here. Last shot, "OSX is a close-and-play toy as compared to Vista - it's warm, watered down diet coke by comparison." END OF RANT and back into exile - thank you for allowing this expression. Begin flaming at will. |
| #8 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 11/30/2005 8:21:05 AM |
| Hey, lketchum--nice to see you around. Don't be a stranger--you usually have insightful (or this case, maybe more inciteful ;) ) posts. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 309 Last | Next |
The time now is
11:25:14 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
