[Jacob]

I just read this:

http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase...a_editions.asp

Take a brief read at how Microsoft is distributing their upcoming release of Windows Vista. I think this is absolutely sick! They are trying to force users into cashing out a lot more money for the 'Ultimate Edition' of Windows. The features Windows XP users have used forever are now only available for Pro Editions. (Which cost a considerable amount more). Meaning, zero config wifi is now a feature only avaiable if you cash out a lot more money for 'Premium Edition.' Same with games like Solitaire. THAT is not even offered in the Starter and Home Editions. Only in th Premium and up. Like...WTF!? It's ****ing Solitaire....Wow. Makes you wonder how greedy these people really are. It's a big scam, and it makes me so happy I'm using an Apple.

Anyhow, take a read, let me know what you think of this scandal.

[Scandalous Ion Cannon]

I'm pretty sure the OS is going to tank. I know die hard windows users that are already looking at Tiger because of it.

[Tyler McAdams]

God I can't wait to see how much the premiere edition is going to run...

[ghporter]

So far all of my Windows updates have been though a "Campus User Licensing" deal-software that costs $5 to %7 per disc...Which includes ALL the copies of XP Pro I'm running right now. So old Bill has NOT cashed in on me.

I have to agree with SIC though-everything I see about Vista is late, with reduced features, and with reduced support. Not at all the way to keep an increasingly intelligent and inquisitive user base on the Windows leash; not at all.

I'm getting a vision...It's getting clearer...clearer... Ah! There it is! I'm trying out KDE and Gnome desktops on my x86 systems to see which one I like better! That's a nice thought.

[Scandalous Ion Cannon]

Honestly Vista doesn't really anything in Vaporware that Tiger doesn't already offer.

[Jacob]

Vista is a catch-up game that will never be as good as Tiger, or Leopard. Or anything Apple could ever make. Same with Google Maps....well Microsoft had to make their MSN version of that...and the same with Google toolbar, MSN toolbar followed. iTunes Store, now with their own store...er, instant search...well, Apple has delivered that. It's here! HELLO MICROSOFT? They have the money, but they dont have the brains. Just goes to prove money cant buy you everything. Especially not intelligence.

[demograph68]

Who says people will buy it?

[Jacob]

Good point. On the good side of things, I think people will be so 'put off' with Microshite that they will realise Apple is awsome. Which I really really want. I mean, I work at a computer sales/repair franchise (PC's). I SHOULD be promoting PC's to a certain extent, but...no. I am honest with people. When they come in and say...'my computers all messed up,' I tell them it's because they don't have an Apple.

[brokenjago]

I think this will only serve to confuse the crap out of consumers. Offering all these editions is stupid. The fact that not every copy of vista will include Aero is retarded, honestly.

It's like your Mac Mini coming with a version of OS X that doesn't have the genie effect - or wireless networking - or expose.

Stupid.

[Love Calm Quiet]

ghporter:
Who needs to have "support" with their windows? It'll be so intuitive and so high-QC that support will not be an issue.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Jacob

They are trying to force users into cashing out a lot more money for the 'Ultimate Edition' of Windows.

You mean kinda like how Apple cripples the iBook's ability to do dual screen video output in order to drive users who want that feature (readily available on even low end PC laptops) to the PowerBook?

or like crippling the iTunes phone to only hold 100 songs, no matter the size of the phone's memory card, to not steal sales from the Shuffle and Nano?

[besson3c]

Windows features that I envy:

1) Terminal Services (this is very cool)
2) Network backups (although in XP this is limited to insecure FTP and WebDAV)
3) Exchange (although not really a Windows feature, and certainly not flawless)

Ummm.. maybe other things, but nothing major that I can think of off the top of my head.

[sminch]

and yet the vast majority of people won't switch to apple (or any other os) because it won't even occur to them.

take me for example: i consider myself pretty intelligent and reasonably computer literate, and yet it never occurred to me to use anything other than windows until about a year ago. i'd never even been exposed to anything other than windows so the thought of changing os wasn't an option.

was my situation particularly uncommon? i can't imagine that it was, and my experience with friends and family supports this - none of them have used an apple and they simply labour on with windows, fully aware that it has huge problems but not stopping to think that they have any other option. and these people aren't stupid either - we're talking about research scientists, people running their own businesses, engineers...

i'd bet $10 that loads of people are exactly the same. ergo, i reckon most people will continue to use windows simply because that is what they have always done, and it's ingrained enough that it's what they do, rather than what they choose to do.

sminch

[Big Mac]

There are also some people who actively hostile toward alternatives to Windows. I tried to convince a late family friend to consider switching for security, and he was adamant about not using Macs.

[Paco500]

It's a nice thought, but this will not be Microsoft's undoing.

There was a similar buzz around XP, but people bought new computers with XP on it and then companies bought computers with XP on it and now everybody has XP. It will happen with vista as well.

I would bet that each new major OS upgrade since 95 has has a smaller adoption rate than it's predecessor, but the reality is, the market is still growing fast enough that those that don't upgrade are more than off-set by new seats coming into the market.

[Hawkeye_a]

Thats how Microsoft does business. Thats the business model that's made Microsoft what it is today.
The loosers ? the customers, who in my opinion bear part of the blame as well. Windows users have dug their own graves. On a global scale, there will be many switching to the Mac or Linux, but it wont make a huge difference to the Wintel world imo. Microsoft will make billions and their stock will surge.
Sad part is, most consumers havent realized that that's M$ business model with everything, hence you have people who still support Office(Like myself...due to no full featured and universally compatible alternative), Internet Explorer and the XBox.

Microsoft is consistent in it's business model across industries. Why change it, when you got millions of people who are willing to support it ? Buyer beware.

[Jacob]

Sad really.....

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

You mean kinda like how Apple cripples the iBook's ability to do dual screen video output in order to drive users who want that feature (readily available on even low end PC laptops) to the PowerBook?

or like crippling the iTunes phone to only hold 100 songs, no matter the size of the phone's memory card, to not steal sales from the Shuffle and Nano?

Agreed on the 'books.

The iTunes phone thing might be due to licensing agreements, though.

[mdc]

Originally Posted by sminch

and yet the vast majority of people won't switch to apple (or any other os) because it won't even occur to them.

take me for example: i consider myself pretty intelligent and reasonably computer literate, and yet it never occurred to me to use anything other than windows until about a year ago. i'd never even been exposed to anything other than windows so the thought of changing os wasn't an option.

was my situation particularly uncommon? i can't imagine that it was, and my experience with friends and family supports this - none of them have used an apple and they simply labour on with windows, fully aware that it has huge problems but not stopping to think that they have any other option. and these people aren't stupid either - we're talking about research scientists, people running their own businesses, engineers...

i'd bet $10 that loads of people are exactly the same. ergo, i reckon most people will continue to use windows simply because that is what they have always done, and it's ingrained enough that it's what they do, rather than what they choose to do.

sminch

you're spot on with this.
i know many people who use windows because they just don't realize that there are alternatives out there.
take at my job for example. a lot of very knowledgeable windows support users, and we got into a conversation about macs recently. all of them had "heard" about mac os X, but none had ever used it. they'd all heard about how good it is, but again, none had ever used it.
they all work across the street from a mall that has an apple store in it.

i think some people just don't care, or are too "routined" to contemplate changing from windows.

i met a girl on sunday. she bought an ibook 2 days prior and had a lot of questions for me. she works in a design company that fully runs on windows, and is fully run by people who despise macs. she took the chance, and she loves her ibook. she asked for a tutoring session to get to know it, but at least she tried.

my opinion, i think some people just don't care, or are too "routined" to contemplate changing from windows.

[JoshuaZ]

It is difficult to get some people to even consider looking at Macs, yet horrible problems with Windows does help bring them over to look at my screen. The fact is that many people are extremely scared of having to learn a new OS. They would rather have constant problems with Windows then learn where everything is again. The only thing you can do is offer some help and show them there is another option. It worked for me, switched over 4 of the 5 guys I lived with in college. And two girl friends.

[Millennium]

Windows is not, and has never been, a big moneymaker for Microsoft. That's fine by them: it doesn't have to be a big moneymaker. Their real moneymaker is Office. Windows exists anymore only because Microsoft managed to gain a monopoly with it, and they now use that monopoly to drive Office and game sales.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Millennium

Windows is not, and has never been, a big moneymaker for Microsoft. That's fine by them: it doesn't have to be a big moneymaker. Their real moneymaker is Office. Windows exists anymore only because Microsoft managed to gain a monopoly with it, and they now use that monopoly to drive Office and game sales.

Bingo.

[Maflynn]

People will use/buy vista, perhaps not the premier edition but it will sell very well. First you'll have the corporations, MS will be playing hardball to get them to upgrade. The consumers will get a nice media blitz to plunk down some serious money and they will.

Look at tiger and panther, people complained about dropping 125 for this but they did. Window users will do the same albeit dig deeper.

Mostly as Millenium has said, they are a monopoly they can do what they want and use windows as a means to sell office and their other apps.

Mike

[Eriamjh]

Originally Posted by Millennium

Windows is not, and has never been, a big moneymaker for Microsoft. That's fine by them: it doesn't have to be a big moneymaker. Their real moneymaker is Office. Windows exists anymore only because Microsoft managed to gain a monopoly with it, and they now use that monopoly to drive Office and game sales.

If you think M$ makes more money on Office than windows or doesn't make a LOT on Windows, I'd have to disagree.

This is from 2003, but this is what I found: Link

Windows (client business): $2.26 billion profit
Office (falls under Information Worker(??)): $1.59 billion

Here's another link from 2004: http://www.microsoftmonitor.com/archives/003398.html

Seems like Windows and Office are about a 50/50 split, but I do not know how much of information worker is Windows and how much is the rest or even what the rest is.

[james9490]

Your post is misleading. Windows Visa is still in its early stage of development, and it's too early to tell exactly what features will be included in the final release.

Besides, you would notice there are many new enhancements if you actually run the developer release of Windows Vista, including the features not present in OS X. Transition to Windows Vista will be easy. Unlike OS X there will be several different versions to accommodate different people with different needs. Dynamic search capability at the file system level is going to be truly revolutionary. Best of all, it will run on older hardware, meaning maximum compatibility without the pain of Classic Environment many OS X users suffer, especially those who are using QuarkXPress.

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by james9490

Dynamic search capability at the file system level is going to be truly revolutionary.

Oh yes, it would be truly revolutionary, if it weren't already an integrated part of OS X.

Best of all, it will run on older hardware, meaning maximum compatibility without the pain of Classic Environment many OS X users suffer, especially those who are using QuarkXPress.

OS X runs just fine on older hardware. Our school's eMacs are from 1998 or 1999, and OS X runs just fine on them. I tried once to run Windows XP on my old PC from about the same time: it wouldn't even install properly, and was an absolute nightmare to run. Back to Windows98 it was, then. I cannot imagine, with the recommended specifications that have been released so far, that Vista will do any better.

And, now, I am not a graphic designer and do not use QuarkXPress, so correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't there an OS X version of QuarkXPress? Why would Classic be needed to run it?

Oh yes, one more thing: I have plenty of very useful little apps from my days with Windows98 that simply will not run under Windows XP. Great backwards compatibility, that. I would love to have had a feature similar to the Classic environment in XP, 'cause then I'd have been able to use these useful little apps.

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by james9490

Besides, you would notice there are many new enhancements if you actually run the developer release of Windows Vista, including the features not present in OS X. Transition to Windows Vista will be easy. Unlike OS X there will be several different versions to accommodate different people with different needs. Dynamic search capability at the file system level is going to be truly revolutionary. Best of all, it will run on older hardware, meaning maximum compatibility without the pain of Classic Environment many OS X users suffer, especially those who are using QuarkXPress.

Lol...alright dude. here we go. you obviously know a heck of a lot more about Vista than i do. I gave up on Windows in 2000, and have only been developing on OSX since.

1. What are these new incuded features of Vista that are not present in OSX ? (bear in mind i can mention hundreds of features OSX has right now that the shipping version of Windows (XP) dosent have).

2.Transition to Vista will be easy ? really ? thats cool. good for you....im glad the transition to OSX is ..... welll complete. Welcome to the future, i guess.

3.Several diffeerent versions of Vista. wooowwwww. thats really got me interested. Will it be like picking from one of the different flavours of Linux ? and we all know how easy and userfriendly THAT is. But no seriously....good for you, it'll give you bragging rights over someone who has a lower version of windows. But wouldnt it be a bummer if someone wanted to like...do more than one thing with their operating system ? Like, i guess buying 3 versions of Vista, one for home another for developing software and another to manage your website has it's advantages.....oh wait it dosent.

4. Dynamic search ? Awesome !!! so you guys on windows will get it in 2007/2008 ? Thats great, now i wont feel guilty for having an unfair advantage over Windows users like yourself when i look for stuff on my Mac using spotlight (year 2005).

5. it'll run on older hardware ?!? thats friggon awesome !! i have a Pentium-120.....it'll be great to turn that thing on and install vista on it. But yeah i guess logic would dictate extensive backwards compatibility...i mean, lets face it, Vista is just another skin for Windows in the end.

6. Yeah Classic was such a hack. just like making a skin for DOS(aka Windows).

7. So have they finally finished copying OSX yet ? i mean its been 5 years !!! obviously they must have finished it cause you know so much about it.

8. What ever happened to the huge ".Net" thing ? or "tablet PCs" ? I mean microsoft is really revolutionizing the technology industry with those things....i wonder why i havent heard much about them.

[dav]

Originally Posted by Oisín

And, now, I am not a graphic designer and do not use QuarkXPress, so correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't there an OS X version of QuarkXPress? Why would Classic be needed to run it?

it costs eleventy billion dollars to upgrade to the os x version.

[james9490]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a

Lol...alright dude. here we go. you obviously know a heck of a lot more about Vista than i do. I gave up on Windows in 2000, and have only been developing on OSX since.

Sad.... You are missing so many good things came up on the Windows side since 2000.

1. What are these new incuded features of Vista that are not present in OSX ? (bear in mind i can mention hundreds of features OSX has right now that the shipping version of Windows (XP) dosent have).

There are just too many features to list here. You can find more information here:

http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase...s_tiger_01.asp

2.Transition to Vista will be easy ? really ? thats cool. good for you....im glad the transition to OSX is ..... welll complete. Welcome to the future, i guess.

Huh? Transition to OS X is not even close to "complete." There are still many many people working under OS 8/9 because many of their software titles are either not available for OS X or don't run as well as OS 9 version.

3.Several diffeerent versions of Vista. wooowwwww. thats really got me interested. Will it be like picking from one of the different flavours of Linux ? and we all know how easy and userfriendly THAT is. But no seriously....good for you, it'll give you bragging rights over someone who has a lower version of windows. But wouldnt it be a bummer if someone wanted to like...do more than one thing with their operating system ? Like, i guess buying 3 versions of Vista, one for home another for developing software and another to manage your website has it's advantages.....oh wait it dosent.

As Bill Gates says, it's all about choice. The more OS versions there are, the better it will be for consumers.

4. Dynamic search ? Awesome !!! so you guys on windows will get it in 2007/2008 ? Thats great, now i wont feel guilty for having an unfair advantage over Windows users like yourself when i look for stuff on my Mac using spotlight (year 2005).

Spotlight is just a meta search engine looks up text data inside each file. Windows' new dynamic search can handle system files and other stuff as well.

5. it'll run on older hardware ?!? thats friggon awesome !! i have a Pentium-120.....it'll be great to turn that thing on and install vista on it. But yeah i guess logic would dictate extensive backwards compatibility...i mean, lets face it, Vista is just another skin for Windows in the end.

Just like OS X is another skin for Telnet.

6. Yeah Classic was such a hack. just like making a skin for DOS(aka Windows).

So?

7. So have they finally finished copying OSX yet ? i mean its been 5 years !!! obviously they must have finished it cause you know so much about it.

Vista will be a complete original OS from scratch with a new file system. It's not a copy of OS X.

8. What ever happened to the huge ".Net" thing ? or "tablet PCs" ? I mean microsoft is really revolutionizing the technology industry with those things....i wonder why i havent heard much about them.

You haven't heard much about them because you are Mac user and you are blinded in your own little Macintosh sandbox. I suggest you start looking outside your window and see the light.

[james9490]

Here is one example Vista can do that OS X Tiger can't:

http://www.winsupersite.com/images/s...s_tiger_08.jpg

Vista allows you to edit metadata within a search result. Here again, more control options for users.

[MacNStein]

Don't feed the anti-Apple troll. Besides, it's obvious that he's mentally challenged, give the poor guy break.

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by MacNStein

Don't feed the anti-Apple troll. Besides, it's obvious that he's mentally challenged, give the poor guy break.

Your right. im having quite a laugh here. "Bill gates beleives in choice thats why there are so many versions of vista." LOL *my side hurts* lol

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Jacob

Same with games like Solitaire. THAT is not even offered in the Starter and Home Editions. al.

M$ is a bunch of losers. Solitaire is the reason why 30% of all people buy Windows. And they pull it from the Home Edition? Mwahahahaha

-t

[analogika]

Originally Posted by james9490

Dynamic search capability at the file system level is going to be truly revolutionary. Best of all, it will run on older hardware, meaning maximum compatibility without the pain of Classic Environment many OS X users suffer, especially those who are using QuarkXPress.

James, I reaally don't mean to be rude:

You're coming off as somebody who's just reciting stuff that a couple of your friends mouthed off over beer one night.

PLEASE, do YOURSELF the favor of at least doing a quick Google check (if not a forum search) on each of your "arguments".

Because one of your biggest problems here is that you spout an incredible amount of points that are simply WRONG in a verifiably factual sense of the word - and you have turned yourself into a real laughing-stock. I'm sure that wasn't your intention when you joined this forum.

Cases in point:
1. Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger runs smoothly on 400 MHz G3 iMac DVs that were the LOW END of Apple's product line in 2000. It actually runs *noticeably* better than 10.3.9 did. The only problems I've seen on my machine were higher-resolution DivX playback, newer games, and some extremely heavy Flash websites. FACT.

2. 10.4 Tiger has Spotlight built-in, which is - guess what - "dynamic search capability at the file-system level". Since April 2005. FACT.

3. QuarkXPress is OS X-native. FACT.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by james9490

Here is one example Vista can do that OS X Tiger can't:

http://www.winsupersite.com/images/s...s_tiger_08.jpg

Vista allows you to edit metadata within a search result. Here again, more control options for users.

Really now?

When I search with Spotlight, I can click an item in the Spotlight window and Get Info on it, which will open the Inspector, where I can not only add Spotlight keywords, but also change the application that it will open in, AND change user access permissions and owners.

That seems like a lot MORE control than Vista *may* offer.

Except of course, we haven't seen what 10.5 will have by the time Vista is (maybe) released, and I'm doing all of this TODAY.

[Stradlater]

Originally Posted by james9490

Here is one example Vista can do that OS X Tiger can't:

http://www.winsupersite.com/images/s...s_tiger_08.jpg

Vista allows you to edit metadata within a search result. Here again, more control options for users.

WHOA AWESOME

TOTALLY SWITCHING

TOTALLY

EDIT: WHICH VERSIAN SHOULD I GET? HOME BASIC? HOME PREMIUM? ULTIMATE? SMALL BUSINESS? PROFESSIONAL? ENTERPRISE? XTREME? MAYBE JUST STARTER!

[Thade]

I usually don't agree with james but there's some truth to this statement:

"You haven't heard much about them because you are Mac user and you are blinded in your own little Macintosh sandbox. I suggest you start looking outside your window and see the light."

Then the typical response:

"Don't feed the anti-Apple troll. Besides, it's obvious that he's mentally challenged, give the poor guy break"

Are the anti-microsoft trolls any better?

Being a multi platform kind of guy, I find that the Mac cowd is much more close minded & very much in the dark about what they pop off about as if speaking from atop Mt. Olympus. The Windows world has opened their eyes & shown some respect for Apple & OS X while the Apple troll is living in the past.

On the topic of cost, XP has been around for a long time. You can complain all day that Win has problems & requires updates & fixes but at least they're free. Mac bug fixes & improvements cost $129.00.

I've never had a problem with Windows. My many hard core gaming rigs have always run flawlessly. I see a lot of this kind of bigotry in the Mac community & it's rather insulting.

OS X RUNS on my iMac DV. I wouldn't go as far as to say it runs smoothly

Can't we all just get along?

[Stradlater]

Originally Posted by Thade

Can't we all just get along?

I use both platforms every day. OS X on my personal computer, Windows on my work machine. I don't have problems with XP (though I still have nightmares about '98 and ME), really, but it's just not a fun operating system to use. I wouldn't switch to Vista for a few junk features that are one step closer (in poorer implementation) than the Mac counterpart; if Vista actually proved to be intuitive, that would be another story.

Time will tell, but right now it's telling me that Vista will be no great leap forward.

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by Thade

Being a multi platform kind of guy, I find that the Mac cowd is much more close minded & very much in the dark about what they pop off about as if speaking from atop Mt. Olympus. The Windows world has opened their eyes & shown some respect for Apple & OS X while the Apple troll is living in the past.

I'd have to disagree with that one. Most Windows places I've seen around are just as bad as the anti-Microsoft trolls here, many even worse. I'd say the communities are about even in that respect.

On the topic of cost, XP has been around for a long time. You can complain all day that Win has problems & requires updates & fixes but at least they're free. Mac bug fixes & improvements cost $129.00.

Windows95 cost XXX amount of money. Windows98 cost XXX amount of money. Xindows XP cost XXX amount of money. Same thing as OS X 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, etc. Only difference is that the OS X updates are more, and more regular. The security updates and fixes in Windows can be compared to the (also free) 10.4.1, 10.4.2, etc. updates in OS X.

I've never had a problem with Windows. My many hard core gaming rigs have always run flawlessly. I see a lot of this kind of bigotry in the Mac community & it's rather insulting.

Many people here (and elsewhere) say the same. Or rather, they have problems with Windows, but they have problems with OS X as well. Neither is perfect. But most here also agree that there are many aspects of Windows that are frustratingly bad UI and gives the user a bad experience, while there are notably fewer in OS X.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by james9490

Best of all, it will run on older hardware, meaning maximum compatibility without the pain of Classic Environment many OS X users suffer, especially those who are using QuarkXPress.

You haven't changed your arguement since 2000 I see.

Quark has been OS X native for YEARS.

And I haven't had OS 9, or classic running since 2001.

[Stradlater]

Originally Posted by Kevin

You haven't changed your arguement since 2000 I see.

Quark has been OS X native for YEARS.

I didn't even catch that. What "many" users suffer through the Classic environment? I haven't needed to have that launched in years. Multiple.

[Thade]

OK: trolls are about even

Win95 & 98 are bad examples. Kinda like bringing OS 7, 8, & 9 into the mix. All fixes, improvements to the current OS XP have been free while OS X versions cost. 10.1, 10.2.... it's all OS 10. If Apple went the MS route, updates would be free until they start calling is OS XI.

Agreed, both have issues, neither is perfect.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not gonna jump to MS defense every time someone bad mouths them. It's futile, especially here & I'm not exactly a die hard Windows fan. I'm a die hard geek. My Windows machines run perfectly. It's annoying when I hear someone just blindly bashing the OS or it's features & capabilities when they clearly have no clue. I'm with Stradlater. I prefer OS X cause it's just plain more fun, not because my PC is inadequate or problematic. I don't find the Windows interface to be difficult or a bad experience. The OS X "experience" is just more appealing.

Tomorrow, the UPS guy will deliver my DP 2GHZ G5. That's an expensive switch It's tough trying to hang out here & not get offended by some of the troll type statements. It's probably best to avoid these kind of debates & stay in the closet

Another post in the lounge that I got sucked into:

"Does Windows make people dumber? "

I mean c'mon....



Jeff

[nbnz]

Originally Posted by james9490

As Bill Gates says, it's all about choice. The more OS versions there are, the better it will be for consumers.

You seem to rely on WinSuperSite as a source, so you'll appreciate this article from Paul Thurrot...
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase...a_editions.asp

What's scary here, of course, is how widely Microsoft is expanding the Windows product line. As with its Office family of products, Microsoft is stretching things a bit with this wide number of product editions, and this will lead to consumer and business confusion, which is never a good thing. <snip> The sheer number of Windows Vista versions is going to cause massive consumer confusion, and some of these versions will likely be orphaned after they prove to be targeting niche markets. That will lead to further migration confusion when the time to upgrade comes.

Originally Posted by james9490

Vista will be a complete original OS from scratch with a new file system. It's not a copy of OS X.

Are you talking about WinFS? Which was dropped from Vista?

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by Thade

Win95 & 98 are bad examples. Kinda like bringing OS 7, 8, & 9 into the mix. All fixes, improvements to the current OS XP have been free while OS X versions cost. 10.1, 10.2.... it's all OS 10. If Apple went the MS route, updates would be free until they start calling is OS XI.

The way I see it, OS 7/8/9 can be said to be roughly the equivalents of Windows 3/3.11/NT, etc., with OS X accounting for Windows95 and above. Both represent the most major changes to the OS in recent times.

I don't agree that 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, and 10.4 are all just OS 10—well, of course, they are all OS 10, but there is a hell of a lot more difference between OS X version 10.0.0 and 10.4.2 than there is between the very first installment of XP, and the latest and newest version with all the updates and fixes installed. Every new version of OS X has included a, usually fairly big, amount of new features (especially Tiger, of course, which brought both Spotlight and Dashboard), which change the OS quite a lot. The basic graphic interface is still the same (don't see why it shouldn't be, since it works so well), but I think the new features added to each of the 10.X upgrades are many and big enough to warrant calling the upgrades a whole new OS each time, much the same way as I see Windows2000 and WindowsME as upgrades to Windows98, despite the fact that they look much the same and share the same core of features.*

However, we are basically talking about two completely different systems here, with their own unique timelines. Who says we need to have exact equivalents in the various forms of updates to OS'es, anyway?


*And despite the fact that I consider both 2000 and ME to be more along the lines of downgrades from 98, what with their extreme degrees of suckiness and crashiness.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by Oisín

The way I see it, OS 7/8/9 can be said to be roughly the equivalents of Windows 3/3.11/NT, etc., with OS X accounting for Windows95 and above. Both represent the most major changes to the OS in recent times.

Technically, NT should not be grouped with Win 3 and 95/98. Win 3 through Win 98 are MS DOS based.

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Technically, NT should not be grouped with Win 3 and 95/98. Win 3 through Win 98 are MS DOS based.

That's true, of course. I was just looking at it more from a UI point of view. As far as I remember it, at least, NT 4.0 looked more or less exactly like 98, though the bases and functions were of course somewhat different.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Technically, NT should not be grouped with Win 3 and 95/98. Win 3 through Win 98 are MS DOS based.

So is Windows ME. And doesn't XP have some legacy junk in it as well ?

-t

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Thade

I usually don't agree with james but there's some truth to this statement:

"You haven't heard much about them because you are Mac user and you are blinded in your own little Macintosh sandbox. I suggest you start looking outside your window and see the light."

Yeah. In this particular case, James is right. You haven't heard about .NET or tablet PCs very much because you're using a Mac. Both are relatively well-adopted technologies on the PC side (remembering that tablet PCs are kind of a niche product).

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by turtle777

So is Windows ME. And doesn't XP have some legacy junk in it as well ?

I guess you could say XP has some "legacy junk," but it ain't DOS-based.

And if you ask me, the comparison between OS versions should go like this:

System 6 and below = Windows 3.1 and below

System 7 = Windows 95

Mac OS 8/9 = Windows ME

Mac OS X = Windows 2000

[Jacob]

Wwwooowww. Yikers! I didn't quite expect this post to take off and cause a war between Apple and Microsoft fans. *laughs* Let's just say both OS's have their advantages and disadvantages. I use Windows XP and 9x at work all the time, so I can't totally badmouth it. I simply 'prefer' the OS X environment. There's a lot you can't do on OS X compared to Windows, I mean...gaming sure isn't there! And with XP, well...it's totally weak when it comes to Virii. They both have their downfalls...but yeah.