[PeteWK]

I was at my regional office (66 employees and lots of Windows computers) yesterday. I wrote an article for one of our publications and was dropping by to deliver a photo I needed to snap on the way there. I arrive with my Panasonic Superdisk Camera and the USB cord that came with it. I plug it into the computer at the PR office only to be told I needed a driver. Trying several different computers offered no better luck. I finally went to the IT guy who assured me he could just get the driver. Guess what?, the driver didn't work with Windows 2000. Now I have to email it to them. This is pathetic. Throw Bill Gates out on his ear and give me an operating system that actually works. . . oh wait, I have one. It's called OS X!

Just goes to show ya.

PeteWK

[Wet Jimmy]

I have a SONY DSC-S70 Digital Camera, which uses a USB 1.1 connection.

I take lot's of snaps, fill up the memory stick, and then plug it into a Windows XP machine at work... Camera is detected automatically and the Memory stick is mounted as a removable disk drive.

It just goes to show - there's always two sides to a story, and you just sound like a Mac-Zealot. If you want to talk about OS and device shortfalls, we could discuss native OSX printing?

[bradoesch]

IMHO, I'd compare Mac OS X to Windows XP, and not Windows 2000 or below.

[yzeater]

Even if drivers are recognized, there is nothing that compares to iPhoto in XP (or any other os)

[PeteWK]

knally posted by Wet Jimmy:
I have a SONY DSC-S70 Digital Camera, which uses a USB 1.1 connection.

I take lot's of snaps, fill up the memory stick, and then plug it into a Windows XP machine at work... Camera is detected automatically and the Memory stick is mounted as a removable disk drive.

It just goes to show - there's always two sides to a story, and you just sound like a Mac-Zealot. If you want to talk about OS and device shortfalls, we could discuss native OSX printing? [/QUOTE]

My native OS X printing woes went away when I upgraded to 10.2. In any case, all of their computers are using Windows 2000. I realize that XP deals with many of the W2000 shortfalls. But my point is that Windows 2000 came out when my camera was current technology and it doesn't work! Wake up! Microsoft supports whatever they decide you should have. Apple OS supports whatever is standard. Exceptions on both sides, to be sure. But I've been frustrated WAY more by MS than I have Apple.

PeteWK

[Eug]

Originally posted by PeteWK:
knally posted by Wet Jimmy:
I have a SONY DSC-S70 Digital Camera, which uses a USB 1.1 connection.

I take lot's of snaps, fill up the memory stick, and then plug it into a Windows XP machine at work... Camera is detected automatically and the Memory stick is mounted as a removable disk drive.

It just goes to show - there's always two sides to a story, and you just sound like a Mac-Zealot. If you want to talk about OS and device shortfalls, we could discuss native OSX printing?

My native OS X printing woes went away when I upgraded to 10.2. In any case, all of their computers are using Windows 2000. I realize that XP deals with many of the W2000 shortfalls. But my point is that Windows 2000 came out when my camera was current technology and it doesn't work! Wake up! Microsoft supports whatever they decide you should have. Apple OS supports whatever is standard. Exceptions on both sides, to be sure. But I've been frustrated WAY more by MS than I have Apple.

PeteWK [/QUOTE]
I'd have to agree. You sound like a Mac Zealot.

For instance, my DVD-RAM cam's discs are not supported by Apple at all. And yes, the UDF 2.0 discs are a current standard.

Having one particular peripheral not work with a computer is in no way valid to assess the entire OS. If that were true, I would have tossed my Mac a long time ago... as well as my PC.