MacNN Forums (http://forums.macnn.com/)
-   MacNN Lounge (http://forums.macnn.com/macnn-lounge/)
-   -   Man.. OS X must be really giving Gates fits. (http://forums.macnn.com/89/macnn-lounge/351402/man-os-x-must-really-giving/)

 
Kevin Oct 21, 2007 10:23 AM
Man.. OS X must be really giving Gates fits.
This may be old news, but holy cow is he lying through his teeth here.

MacDailyNews - Bill Gates has lost his mind: calls Apple liars, copiers; slams Mac OS X security vs. Windows


Quote
Gates: You can go through and look at who showed any of these things first, if you care about the facts. If you just want to say, "Steve Jobs invented the world, and then the rest of us came along," that's fine. If you’re interested, [Vista development chief] Jim Allchin will be glad to educate you feature by feature what the truth is. I mean, it’s fascinating, maybe we shouldn't have showed so publicly the stuff we were doing, because we knew how long the new security base was going to take us to get done. Nowadays, security guys break the Mac every single day. Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally. I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine. So, yes, it took us longer, and they had what we were doing, user interface-wise. Let’s be realistic, who came up with [the] file, edit, view, help [menu bar]? Do you want to go back to the original Mac and think about where those interface concepts came from?
He's obviously worried about 10.5

BTW I wasn't sure were to post this, and if it was posted in the wrong place, feel free to move it.
 
Kevin Oct 21, 2007 10:26 AM
No Vista certainly isn't getting great reviews.

A First Look at Windows Vista - TIME

I little too little, too late. And too slow.
 
Cipher13 Oct 21, 2007 10:44 AM
Wow... just wow. Outright lies, or delusions? He's not stupid enough to lie about such things, but surely he knows he's wrong... >_>

I'd wonder how accurate the quote is.
 
TETENAL Oct 21, 2007 10:47 AM
The quote is from the time of the "Month of Apple Bugs" when it was kind of correct to say that.
 
Kevin Oct 21, 2007 10:54 AM
Nothing he said was ever true at any point. Bunch of lies and FUD.

That is all that Bill knows. He knows he can beat the comp by virtue.
 
Kevin Oct 21, 2007 10:57 AM
Hmm the original page was

Bill Gates on Vista and Apple's 'Lying' Ads - Newsweek Technology - MSNBC.com

But it's no longer there and directs you to

Newsweek - National News, World News, Health, Technology, Entertainment and more... | Newsweek.com

:lol:

And if you go here

MSNBC Search - - MSNBC.com

And do a search, the link comes up, but it then again redirects you.

They removed it. :lol:

Do a search for "Bill Gates on Vista and Apple's 'Lying' Ads" And it comes up as the first link.

I guess it was slammings he got like this one too

Bill Gates on Vista and Apple's 'Lying' Ads - Newsweek Technology - MSNBC.com — Coda Blog

That made him have MSN take out that page. "Nope, I didn't say it, they are lying!"
 
analogika Oct 21, 2007 11:45 AM
Didn't we discuss this one to death when it was published - back in February?
 
Kevin Oct 21, 2007 12:09 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by Kevin (Post 3510561)
This may be old news....
If it was discussed, I obviously didn't remember it. And if the mods want to lock the thread because it was already discussed, then they can freely do so.

However, since 10.5 came out there has been a lot of Vista vs Leopard conversations popping up in threads that have nothing to do with Vista. I thought this thread may fill that positions so that other star syst... er threads wont fall into the same fate as Alderan.
 
lpkmckenna Oct 21, 2007 11:37 PM
"Nowadays, security guys break the Mac every single day. Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally. I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine."

I'm still amazed he said this. If you need to understand why Windows is so ridiculous, there's the root of it.
 
turtle777 Oct 21, 2007 11:58 PM
I'm having a hard time believing Bill really said that.

Is that as (half-)factual as many of the other things attributed to him ?

-t
 
CharlesS Oct 22, 2007 12:19 AM
This just in - the head of a major software company disses a competitor's product in a not-entirely-factual way, something that's clearly never happened before. More on this at 8 - months from now, that is.
 
Atomic Rooster Oct 22, 2007 12:25 AM
Friday, February 02, 2007 - 10:01 AM EDT
 
Chuckit Oct 22, 2007 01:56 AM
I know this is old, but it just occurred to me: Isn't Jim Allchin the guy whose e-mails were leaked and there were a bunch talking about how Apple is so much more innovative and the Mac OS is vastly superior to Windows? That's the guy Gates wants people to ask about how creative Microsoft has been?
 
vmarks Oct 22, 2007 03:35 AM
Chuckit,

MS has been talking about doing WinFS since NT5 (win2000).

WinFS replaces NTFS, and enables spotlight-like searches.

So in 2005, Allchin wrote in email something like "they have our WinFS, and they have it today." as he was talking about Spotlight on Mac. Gates figures "we had it first, we just haven't implemented it even today in 2007. They still copied us, even if they were first to market."
 
Kevin Oct 22, 2007 04:25 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by lpkmckenna (Post 3511112)
"Nowadays, security guys break the Mac every single day. Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally. I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine."

I'm still amazed he said this. If you need to understand why Windows is so ridiculous, there's the root of it.
exactly
Quote, Originally Posted by turtle777 (Post 3511128)
I'm having a hard time believing Bill really said that.

Is that as (half-)factual as many of the other things attributed to him
I believe there is a video of it.
Quote, Originally Posted by vmarks (Post 3511238)
Chuckit,

MS has been talking about doing WinFS since NT5 (win2000).

WinFS replaces NTFS, and enables spotlight-like searches.

So in 2005, Allchin wrote in email something like "they have our WinFS, and they have it today." as he was talking about Spotlight on Mac. Gates figures "we had it first, we just haven't implemented it even today in 2007. They still copied us, even if they were first to market."
And it's not like MS was the first to think of such things. MS has always been poor at the execution. Taking far too long to do something and come back with poor results. While Apple does the opposite for the most part.

And if Apple did do this to them. They have a right to. A few more times actually. With the amount of crap MS has ripped off Apple.

PARC's GUI didn't really work or act like Apple's GUI. MS took it's ideas from Apple, NOT Parc as they claimed. As their GUI resembled Mac's more so than PARC's.
 
Big Mac Oct 22, 2007 10:51 AM
Gates has always lied about PARC. It's part of his M.O..
 
OreoCookie Oct 22, 2007 10:57 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by vmarks (Post 3511238)
MS has been talking about doing WinFS since NT5 (win2000).

WinFS replaces NTFS, and enables spotlight-like searches.
Actually they have been talking about that ever since they started developing Windows 95: they wanted to include that functionality, but soon found out that it was way too much for systems at that time. (My printer runs circles around the PC I had back then.)

You're absolutely right, though: WinFS is not a new idea (nor were they the first, anyone remember the original BeFS (which is not the same as the BeFS that was used in the last reincarnation of BeOS)), but MS hasn't delivered yet.
 
mdc Oct 22, 2007 11:06 AM
Microsoft has always been notorious for announcing far too much, cutting out most of it, and then wondering why the public isn't welcoming their new product with open arms.
Microsoft's idea is that they can announce everything and when it doesn't make it into the next version of Windows and someone else comes out with it, say that they were copied.

Gates and co. must be furious that Apple has so much media attention nowadays and that the general public has started giving Mac OS X notice.

Competition is good, but Bill's comments are inexcusable for someone in his position. Everyone, who doesn't have an intention to spread F.U.D, knows just how well the Month of Apple bugs worked out.
 
Kevin Oct 22, 2007 11:55 AM
I just keep reading this part over again. And how it reminds me of people i've spoken to here when it comes to extremes and it makes me laugh :lol:.

Quote
Nowadays, security guys break the Mac every single day. Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally. I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine.
TOTALLY CONSTANTLY AND OTHER EXTREME WORDS.

Not that I don't do it myself. But then again I am not in charge of a multi-billion dollar company.
 
Big Mac Oct 22, 2007 11:57 AM
He's not really in charge anymore, though. Monkey boy is.
 
Kevin Oct 22, 2007 12:07 PM
Suuuuure he isn't. They just keep monkey boy embarrassing himself so BIll wont.
 
scaught Oct 22, 2007 12:28 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by Kevin (Post 3510561)
This may be old news, but holy cow is he lying through his teeth here.

MacDailyNews - Bill Gates has lost his mind: calls Apple liars, copiers; slams Mac OS X security vs. Windows

Quote
Gates: You can go through and look at who showed any of these things first, if you care about the facts. If you just want to say, "Steve Jobs invented the world, and then the rest of us came along," that's fine. If you’re interested, [Vista development chief] Jim Allchin will be glad to educate you feature by feature what the truth is. I mean, it’s fascinating, maybe we shouldn't have showed so publicly the stuff we were doing, because we knew how long the new security base was going to take us to get done. Nowadays, security guys break the Mac every single day. Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally. I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine. So, yes, it took us longer, and they had what we were doing, user interface-wise. Let’s be realistic, who came up with [the] file, edit, view, help [menu bar]? Do you want to go back to the original Mac and think about where those interface concepts came from?

He's obviously worried about 10.5

BTW I wasn't sure were to post this, and if it was posted in the wrong place, feel free to move it.
Wait. Is Gates saying that Apple didn't have the file/edit/view/help menu before MS did?

Look at the apple lisa screenshot on this page: A History of the GUI: Page 4
 
scaught Oct 22, 2007 12:31 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by Kevin (Post 3511435)
I just keep reading this part over again. And how it reminds me of people i've spoken to here when it comes to extremes and it makes me laugh :lol:.



TOTALLY CONSTANTLY AND OTHER EXTREME WORDS.

Not that I don't do it myself. But then again I am not in charge of a multi-billion dollar company.
I know I quake in my boots everyday worrying about how my home mac will be exploited. I have like 10 different security apps running on it. (that's not real. I have 0 and download torrents like a man possessed.)
 
Big Mac Oct 22, 2007 12:58 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by scaught (Post 3511460)
Wait. Is Gates saying that Apple didn't have the file/edit/view/help menu before MS did?

Look at the apple lisa screenshot on this page: A History of the GUI: Page 4
No, he's referring to PARC. His infamous remark to Steve years and years ago went something like, "just because you broke in first and stole the TV doesn't mean we can't break in later and steal the radio." That's the basic attitude he's maintained all this time. Conveniently he forgets that a) Apple paid for a tour for PARC, and b) Apple used PARC as a creative spark that put them on the path to the far more advanced Lisa/Mac GUI, not as a template from which they copied directly - as M$ did to Apple.
 
Kevin Oct 22, 2007 01:12 PM
Yeah MS acting like they got their "spark" from Parc is dishonest. They didn't start getting windows ideas till Apple started showing them early copies of their Macintosh system. "Make it work like a Mac" is another famous quote of Bill's
 
scaught Oct 22, 2007 01:36 PM
That makes sense. I was looking at the old PARC GUI screenshots and didn't see that titlebar thing that Gates mentions in their GUI.
 
Rumor Oct 22, 2007 03:17 PM
Quote
There are two versions targeted at home users : Basic ($199, which is about what OS X costs)
Um, what???
 
Kevin Oct 22, 2007 03:30 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by Rumor (Post 3511604)
Um, what???
He was talking about Windows. And the last time I looked OS X costs $189
 
Rumor Oct 22, 2007 03:42 PM
I thought OSX was $129.
 
Kevin Oct 22, 2007 03:49 PM
Well hot damn you are right. $129

The Apple Store (U.S.) - Mac OS X v10.5 Leopard

I remember when OS 9 was $99.

And that is $129 for the WHOLE OS. Not just the "upgrade" Like Windows sells you.
 
Rumor Oct 22, 2007 03:58 PM
OSX Home, Home Premium, Business, Corporate, Ultimate, Supreme Ultimate with Cheese
 
olePigeon Oct 22, 2007 04:10 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by Rumor (Post 3511671)
OSX Home, Home Premium, Business, Corporate, Ultimate, Supreme Ultimate with Cheese
I don't get what's so difficult. There are only 20 different versions of Windows Vista.

Vista Starter
Vista Starter N
Vista Basic
Vista Basic N
Vista Home Premium
Vista Home Premium N
Vista Home Premium 64
Vista Home Premium 64 N
Vista Business
Vista Business N
Vista Business 64
Vista Business 64 N
Vista Enterprise
Vista Enterprise N
Vista Enterprise 64
Vista Enterprise 64 N
Vista Ultimate
Vista Ultimate N
Vista Ultimate 64
Vista Ultimate 64 N
 
analogika Oct 23, 2007 03:03 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by Kevin (Post 3511658)
And that is $129 for the WHOLE OS. Not just the "upgrade" Like Windows sells you.
$129 is technically just for an upgrade.

There is no "whole" OS in the sense that there are no naked machines sold that you could install it on. Any retail OS X install is by definition an upgrade, since it can only be installed on a machine that's already running some version of Mac OS.
 
analogika Oct 23, 2007 03:09 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by olePigeon (Post 3511694)
I don't get what's so difficult. There are only 20 different versions of Windows Vista.
15, AFAIK.
Only Home Basic and Business are available as "N" versions (without Windows Media Player due to anti-competitive behavior and subsequent prosecution in Europe), and Starter is 32-bit only.

Quote
Vista Home Starter
Vista Home Basic
Vista Home Basic N
Vista Home Basic 64
Vista Home Basic 64 N
Vista Home Premium
Vista Home Premium 64
Vista Business
Vista Business N
Vista Business 64
Vista Business 64 N
Vista Enterprise
Vista Enterprise 64
Vista Ultimate
Vista Ultimate 64
See? - much better!

Now! New! Microsoft Windows Vista! - Less confusing than Ever!
 
Kevin Oct 23, 2007 07:21 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by analogika (Post 3512270)
$129 is technically just for an upgrade.

There is no "whole" OS in the sense that there are no naked machines sold that you could install it on. Any retail OS X install is by definition an upgrade, since it can only be installed on a machine that's already running some version of Mac OS.
You can wipe your drive and install the OS X CD you bought. You can't do that with windows UPGRADES. Not the ones I've used anyhow. Things may have changed since then.
 
fhoubi Oct 23, 2007 09:36 AM
Legally an upgrade, technically a full version. I think you must have an "Apple ROM" which always came with an OS, but you may install it on a new unformatted HD. Thus PC or clone -> No.
 
Kevin Oct 23, 2007 09:39 AM
So basically you are agreeing with what I am saying. :)

A version of Windows that you need to buy to install on a blank HD costs a lot more than $199. :p

And I like to backup, and wipe my drive with each MAJOR OS install.
 
chabig Oct 23, 2007 11:13 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by fhoubi (Post 3512380)
Legally an upgrade...
I disagree. It's a full version, no matter how you look at it.
 
Big Mac Oct 23, 2007 11:19 AM
You may be right - Apple is not labeling it as an upgrade online.
 
Kevin Oct 23, 2007 11:54 AM
The 10.X.X versions are upgrades. The 10.X versions are usually full installs.
 
Big Mac Oct 23, 2007 11:58 AM
But they were classically labeled as upgrades. Apple may have made this change to capitalize a bit on Vista discontent.
 
Kevin Oct 23, 2007 12:01 PM
Most Windows users I know think the $129 OS X price was just to upgrade. They took that for granted since a FULL version of Windows costs so much.
 
Cipher13 Oct 23, 2007 12:03 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by Kevin (Post 3512494)
The 10.X.X versions are upgrades. The 10.X versions are usually full installs.
They're full installs, yeah, but anyone that can legitimately use it already owns a previous copy of Mac OS X. I suppose the differentiation comes when we decide whether 10.x to 10.(x+1) is considered an upgrade or a new version, à la Win2K to XP.

Either way, can't wait for my $12 AUD copy to arrive ;)
 
Chuckit Oct 23, 2007 12:37 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by analogika (Post 3512270)
Any retail OS X install is by definition an upgrade, since it can only be installed on a machine that's already running some version of Mac OS.
I've installed Tiger on machines whose hard disks had never had OS X on them before.
 
nonhuman Oct 23, 2007 12:38 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by Chuckit (Post 3512535)
I've installed Tiger on machines whose hard disks had never had OS X on them before.
Yeah, the disks let you format the hard drive and install the OS. Therefore they are full install disks.
 
Eriamjh Oct 24, 2007 09:28 AM
Quote
Any retail OS X install is by definition an upgrade, since it can only be installed on a machine that's already running some version of Mac OS.
Wah wah WaaaaaH? What are you smoking? All retail editions of OSX are FULL INSTALLs.
I have heard of upgrade discs, but never actually ever seen them in real life.
 
Kevin Oct 24, 2007 09:46 AM
I've had seen a few upgrade disks that they sent here to me at the office. But it told you that you needed a previous version before installing. I never payed for it.

I think It was Apple's way of making sure certain customers update their OS.
 
Dork. Oct 24, 2007 10:00 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by Eriamjh (Post 3513330)
Wah wah WaaaaaH? What are you smoking? All retail editions of OSX are FULL INSTALLs.
I have heard of upgrade discs, but never actually ever seen them in real life.
You guys are just splitting hairs, the distinction is meaningless (at least, until this Friday). I hope you'll all tolerate a little diversion from the topic at hand....

All retail OS X copies are, in fact, full installs. But analogika's point is that every computer that can have Mac OS X installed on it is a Mac that originally shipped with OS X. In that respect, even if the CD contains a full install, you can make the argument that you're theoretically just upgrading from the version that originally shipped with it. It's not an upgrade in the MS sense of the word -- you don't need the old OS present to install the upgrade.

Up until Friday, every retail OS X Copy that Apple has sold has been PPC-only, and Apple was the only provider of desktop PPC's that were compatible with OS X. You could not install OS X legally on a plain vanilla PC, because the only way you could get OS X for Intel was to use an OEM copy of OS X that originally came with an Intel Mac.

Once Apple ships retail OS X software for Intel Macs, nothing is stopping you from buying the box and legally installing it on a PC that did not originally ship with OS X. Well, nothing but the EULA, which will no doubt state that you are limited to installing the software on Apple-branded hardware. But I doubt that clause of the EULA will be enforceable. Once you buy the software at retail, why should Apple restrict where you use it?
 
Kevin Oct 24, 2007 10:12 AM
I like the fact that I can spend less than $150 and I am able to wipe my drive clean, and reinstall OS X on it. I guess that is what makes the difference.

The full versions of Windows that allow you to do this cost twice as much as OS X

Amazon.com: Microsoft Windows Vista Ultimate FULL VERSION [DVD]: Software

Which according to them is $319. And that's a deal! It lists for $399.

BTW I love one of the few positive comments left

"by nashlarry "nashlarry" (Milwaukee, WI) - See all my reviews
I own Vista Ultimate and the support you receive from Microsoft is exceptional; please do not purchase any other operating system because Vista Ultimate is what you truly want for security and ease of use. I know the price can make you consider buying one of their cheaper versions but cut back on something else and join the elite Vista Ultimate end user society. I truly love my Vista Ultimate "Geek Love for Vista Ultimate, Forever".

And the reply to it even funnier

"thank you fake STOOGE writer! i'll see you at the MS Xmas party in redmond. if the jerks which make up the American public keep reading great STOOGE REVIEWS like yours, I'm sure our Xmas bonuses will be extra green this year!

keep up the good work.

your boss,

Stephen "Sweaty" Balms-er,
CEO & Queso Grande, MicroBoob Corp."

:lol:
 
mdc Oct 24, 2007 03:05 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by Dork. (Post 3513344)
Once Apple ships retail OS X software for Intel Macs, nothing is stopping you from buying the box and legally installing it on a PC that did not originally ship with OS X. Well, nothing but the EULA, which will no doubt state that you are limited to installing the software on Apple-branded hardware. But I doubt that clause of the EULA will be enforceable. Once you buy the software at retail, why should Apple restrict where you use it?
I have a feeling there will be a lot stopping people from installing 10.5 on a regular PC.
I don't think that the 10.5 disc is just going to boot on a PC and let you install it. Unless I'm mistaken there was a lot of 'hackery' that was involved in getting Intel Mac OS booting on a PC.
I'm sure 10.5 will eventually be hacked, people will torrent it, and install it on their PC.

Apple has every right to restrict you to install their OS on devices that they say are eligible. aka. Apple-branded hardware.
 
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:20 PM.

Copyright © 2005-2007 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2