Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Raidiant · May 15, 2003, 08:10 AM

I can't believe that the writers are wowing at longhorn features coming out in 2005, DVD creation applications? Windows scaling into taask bars? Transparency of windows? I don't see how these functions are any new to OS
x, plus the aqua rip off theme, and the representation of a future computer , looking completely like a current apple computer, but it looks less stylish. Widescreen standarization?

In the right hand side there is a representation of what a future computer would look like, its a picture but it looks somthing like cinema display rip off.

All the features mentioneed seem to be just plain copy from OS X:

Somebody please agree with me, the only cool thing is the rotating window...

http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase...eview_2003.asp

Dogma · May 15, 2003, 09:07 AM

Ha ha, 128Mb recommended memory - in your Graphics card!

I would love to get something a bit more technical on this as it looks so far like a big donkeys behind. It really does have that (shock) MacOS X fluidity thing about it, except with the (Awe) professionalism of the Windows User Interface design.

What is it going to provide in terms of programming support in terms of standards like Java, etc.

Miscrosoft really do come across as bedroom hackers with the total pish they come out with sometimes.

maxelson · May 15, 2003, 09:23 AM

Macintosh: all the functionality of Windows 95... since 1984.

Why should any of this change?

"DCE"... sheesh. Man, I got no issue with the copy thing, but for GAWD's sake, don't call it original or innovative.

Nonsuch · May 15, 2003, 09:30 AM

Hint: The site is called "WinSuperSite." You want something more objective, wait for the Ars Technica review.

nvaughan3 · May 15, 2003, 09:33 AM

Originally posted by Dogma:
[B]Ha ha, 128Mb recommended memory - in your Graphics card!

That's not uncommon now-in the PC world-and it certainly wont be in 2 full years.

nvaughan3 · May 15, 2003, 09:34 AM

Originally posted by Nonsuch:
Hint: The site is called "WinSuperSite." You want something more objective, wait for the Ars Technica review.

And the actual name of the site is "(Paul Thurrott's) SuperSite for Windows. If you want to attack his claims then do it on facts, not by a childish claim of what the name of the site is.

Nonsuch · May 15, 2003, 09:39 AM

Originally posted by nvaughan3:
And the actual name of the site is "(Paul Thurrott's) SuperSite for Windows. If you want to attack his claims then do it on facts, not by a childish claim of what the name of the site is.

Bite me. I could care less what his claims are. I'm saying that, regardless of the actual word order of the site name, you can't be surprised if a Windows "Supersite" ends up being a little pro-Windows.

maxelson · May 15, 2003, 09:42 AM

I don't think anyone claimed it to be otherwise. As far as I can see, folks are pointing out the "originality" of features of LH. Objectivity was not expected, nor was it given. How'd you arrive at a different conclusion?

OptimusG4 · May 15, 2003, 09:43 AM

regardless of the name, its still Windows...and sadly yes, everything Microsoft copies and comes out with will be regarded as new and exciting from the PC crowd because, well, it is new to them.

Raidiant · May 15, 2003, 09:56 AM

well really its only equal since windows has got enough games coming that can make anyone take their eyes off OS X, but outside the games the base OS windows is totally crap.

If only god let all the games work on OS X

Raidiant · May 15, 2003, 09:59 AM

"that window is just another texture for longhorn"

wow and OS X windows has been for years god bless

nvaughan3 · May 15, 2003, 09:59 AM

Originally posted by Nonsuch:
Bite me. I could care less what his claims are. I'm saying that, regardless of the actual word order of the site name, you can't be surprised if a Windows "Supersite" ends up being a little pro-Windows.

You are the textbook defition of a fanboy zealot.

Nonsuch · May 15, 2003, 10:11 AM

Originally posted by nvaughan3:
You are the textbook defition of a fanboy zealot.

Where's that laughing-my-ass-off smiley ... nope, doesn't seem to be one ... this'll have to do.

You don't know a thing about me or my opinions. But feel free to go on calling me names if it makes you feel smarter.

voodoo · May 15, 2003, 10:21 AM

Originally posted by nvaughan3:
You are the textbook defition of a fanboy zealot.

u are a peecee troll.

kalonji · May 15, 2003, 11:28 AM

damnit you guys are hilarious. the mac communitiy is something else

maxelson · May 15, 2003, 11:35 AM

Well, you HAVE ventured onto a Mac forum. The Mac part of the MacNN header should offer the first clue.

kalonji · May 15, 2003, 12:09 PM

bah

Sven G · 10:08 AM

... As for Windows Longhorn, I'd say that it might be better not to underestimate it - whether Microsoft is a copycat (historically, they are!) or not...

Personally, the only thing I find is still a little better in Windows vs. OS X is the "integrated interface" (or "integrated workspace") attitude: in the Mac OS, this (optional) mode of organizing things hasn't - yet - been fully implemented.

... BTW, in the town where I live (near Milan, in Italy), the Long Horns are the most popular local rock/blues band - the irony...

maxelson · May 15, 2003, 01:04 PM

Originally posted by kalonji:
bah

"bah" on the Mac forum? On the evidence that it is one? On Humbuggery?

Severed Hand of Skywalker · May 15, 2003, 01:07 PM

Originally posted by kalonji:
damnit you guys are hilarious. the mac communitiy is something else

Yes we are something else. Something other then followers of a monopoly and crappy software.

Thanks for the compliment though

maxelson · May 15, 2003, 01:08 PM

Well said.

bradoesch · May 15, 2003, 01:22 PM

Dragging windows that looks all flappy and such doesn't appeal to me at all. I used to think the Genie effect was a little much.

KeyLimePi · May 15, 2003, 01:27 PM

Originally posted by Jackie Harvey:
Greetings fellow hackers and time again for my monthly PC report.

Lots to report out from Apple Computer this week as the folks up in Cooperstown have been busy as bees churning out updates. So far more than two million people have downloaded the iSongs update, which brings the world of digital music right to your tabletop! This free update includes Apple's new Music Store, which lets you buy any CD you want for just $1! The store has all the greats, from M&M to U2, and unlike Mephisto and Kazoo, this music is legal! Apple has promised a Windows version of this service soon, and you can bet I'll be getting all my CDs there from now on.

Also, to coincide with the release of X-Men 2, Apple has released an update to it's operating system, called (not surprisingly) OS X.2! My McIntosh friend has already downloaded this update and says it gave his tie-book "super powers!" Web browsering is faster, all the icons look sharper and it even fixed the squeaking hinge! Way to go Apple!

Finally, as part of the X.2 update, Apple released its long-awaited demo of the fast-paced shooter Unreal Torment 2003 (UT23k). In this game you play Commander Player who is trying to destroy the evil Bots. The 3D environments are as gorgeous as they are gruesome but you'll need one of Apple's best video cards if you want to get the high Frags Per Second (FPS) count. That's all for now. Enjoy Mackers!

MindFad · May 15, 2003, 01:41 PM

Hahahaahaha.

klinux · May 15, 2003, 01:46 PM

Originally posted by Raidiant:
All the features mentioneed seem to be just plain copy from OS X:

Somebody please agree with me, the only cool thing is the rotating window...

http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase...eview_2003.asp

Yawn... I love selective comparisons. "All the features mentioned" oh except for rotating Windows, a database-based filing system, etc.

Of course you are looking for someone to agree with you because if anyone does not, they'd be called a PC troll.

I mean, why did OS X took so long to get a journalung filing system? How come I still cannot establish TCP/IP network over Firewire out of the box? How come I cannot have two users concurrently logged in at once? Why is resizing a window still a drag?

As for the "128Mb recommended memory" comment, so what? Every OS-maker prints a vastly deflated memory requirement? Is this news to you?

voodoo · May 15, 2003, 02:41 PM

Originally posted by klinux:
Yawn... I love selective comparisons. "All the features mentioned" oh except for rotating Windows, a database-based filing system, etc.

Of course you are looking for someone to agree with you because if anyone does not, they'd be called a PC troll.

I mean, why did OS X took so long to get a journalung filing system? How come I still cannot establish TCP/IP network over Firewire out of the box? How come I cannot have two users concurrently logged in at once? Why is resizing a window still a drag?

As for the "128Mb recommended memory" comment, so what? Every OS-maker prints a vastly deflated memory requirement? Is this news to you?

ya, criticize selective comparison by offering more selective comparison

May 15, 2003, 11:27 PM

Oh please. Paul Thurrott is a walking Microsoft ad. Just look at his past articles.

Once in a while he ventures into the MacCentral forums to stir up sh*t, gets b*tch-slapped and goes away for a while.

The only good feature in XP that MacOS X doesn't have is the switch-user feature. I don't see anything in Longhorn that is going to be a big improvement. Database file system? Who cares? What's it going to do for the average user? Nothing. Windows users will still save everything to their desktop.

Steve · May 15, 2003, 11:31 PM

Windows users will still save everything to their desktop.

I have not one thing on my WinXP desktop. There are no icons, and everything is minimized.

GG generalizations

.

May 16, 2003, 08:09 AM

Originally posted by Steve:
I have not one thing on my WinXP desktop. There are no icons, and everything is minimized.

GG generalizations .

Why is it that one someone makes a joke, there's always one guy who ignores the point trying to be made and assumes it's seriously referring to 100% every single windows user that ever lived?

Lighten up - it's a joke.

I see your

and raise you a

.

Anyway, the point was how many people know what to do with a DB-based file system.

sambeau · May 16, 2003, 08:14 AM

The Desktop Composition Engine (DCE) handles graphics effects without overloading the CPU.

Steve · May 16, 2003, 08:59 AM

Originally posted by hayesk:
Why is it that one someone makes a joke, there's always one guy who ignores the point trying to be made and assumes it's seriously referring to 100% every single windows user that ever lived?

None of the post was a joke. How is anyone supposed to "know" what you're trying to convey without some sort of emoticons to show?

I see your and raise you a .

That's the way to do it

.

Anyway, the point was how many people know what to do with a DB-based file system.

How many people really know how to use Unix? A minority on this board, which is a minority of the Mac users, which is still a minority of all PCs used in the world.

Steve · May 16, 2003, 09:01 AM

Originally posted by sambeau:

But I bet Quartz Extreme is better!... right? Why is the Finder still slower than all hell even on a "high-end" Mac? (my experiences with a newly formatted 1Ghz G4 tower with a gig of Ram).

It also must be the legacy support of Quartz Extreme that makes it better, eh?

OptimusG4 · May 16, 2003, 09:20 AM

Originally posted by Steve:
But I bet Quartz Extreme is better!... right? Why is the Finder still slower than all hell even on a "high-end" Mac? (my experiences with a newly formatted 1Ghz G4 tower with a gig of Ram).

It also must be the legacy support of Quartz Extreme that makes it better, eh?

I think he was commenting on the fact that Windows is going to be throwing the UI effects to the GPU and not the processor itself, not that QE is better than DCE.

maxelson · May 16, 2003, 09:33 AM

Originally posted by Steve:
But I bet Quartz Extreme is better!... right? Why is the Finder still slower than all hell even on a "high-end" Mac? (my experiences with a newly formatted 1Ghz G4 tower with a gig of Ram).

It also must be the legacy support of Quartz Extreme that makes it better, eh?

Define "slower than hell".
Geebus. Dual 867 with a gig is completely NON chuggy. Even on my "low end". Hell, I can't even apply a "sluggish" to my Ti 667. Slower than Hell? You must have some pretty damned stringent qualifications for a "fast" computer.

maxelson · May 16, 2003, 09:35 AM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Steve:
But I bet Quartz Extreme is better!... right? Why is the Finder still slower than all hell even on a "high-end" Mac? (my experiences with a newly formatted 1Ghz G4 tower with a gig of Ram).

It also must be the legacy support of Quartz Extreme that makes it better, eh? [/QUOTE

Well. Haven't we just gotten away from the point which is this: THERE IS NO APPARENT ORIGINALITY IN THE IDEA.. WHICH CLAIMS TO BE ORIGINAL AND INNOVATIVE.
mine's better!
No! Mine!
No! Mine!
No! Mine!
No! Mine!
No! Mine!
No! Mine!
No! Mine!
No! Mine!
No! Mine!
No! Mine!
No! Mine!

Really.

olePigeon · May 17, 2003, 12:53 AM

Originally posted by klinux:
As for the "128Mb recommended memory" comment, so what? Every OS-maker prints a vastly deflated memory requirement? Is this news to you?

"Every OS" doesn't have a 128MB recommended memory just for the user interface.

mathew_m · May 17, 2003, 01:14 AM

Blah, blah.

What's wrong with what Microsoft is touting? At least they're showing off the features of the OS.

Your average computer user doesn't even know that OSX exists. Jobs is too busy wasting money on advertising a music store that 98% of users are unable to use. To top it off the comercials suck so completely that the other night when the one with the chick singing "i'll be there for you" came on I quickly turned the channel so no one else in the room would see it.

mathew_m · May 17, 2003, 01:16 AM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by maxelson:

Originally posted by Steve:
But I bet Quartz Extreme is better!... right? Why is the Finder still slower than all hell even on a "high-end" Mac? (my experiences with a newly formatted 1Ghz G4 tower with a gig of Ram).

It also must be the legacy support of Quartz Extreme that makes it better, eh? [/QUOTE

Well. Haven't we just gotten away from the point which is this: THERE IS NO APPARENT ORIGINALITY IN THE IDEA.. WHICH CLAIMS TO BE ORIGINAL AND INNOVATIVE.
mine's better!
No! Mine!
No! Mine!
No! Mine!
No! Mine!
No! Mine!
No! Mine!
No! Mine!
No! Mine!
No! Mine!
No! Mine!
No! Mine!

Really.

More stream-of-concious rambling eh Maxie?

and your point is?

I'm waiting.....

Adam Betts · May 17, 2003, 01:16 AM

Originally posted by Steve:
But I bet Quartz Extreme is better!... right? Why is the Finder still slower than all hell even on a "high-end" Mac? (my experiences with a newly formatted 1Ghz G4 tower with a gig of Ram).

It also must be the legacy support of Quartz Extreme that makes it better, eh?

*yawn*

MindFad · May 17, 2003, 01:18 AM

So you don't like the ads. Enough people figured it out to buy 2+ million songs, so it can't be all that bad. Double yawn. Why does everything have to turn into bickering?

mathew_m · May 17, 2003, 02:05 AM

Originally posted by MindFad:
So you don't like the ads. Enough people figured it out to buy 2+ million songs, so it can't be all that bad. Double yawn. Why does everything have to turn into bickering?

Don't be an Apple apologist. The ads do suck and don't offer any incentive for non-Apple users to switch. I mean are they trying to cater to the American Idol crowd? I've already tried getting one those types to switch and he's scared of Macs. The 2 million songs downloaded so far is great but I'm thinking that like most blockbuster movie opening weekends it is frontloaded. Apple will have to sell 2 million songs every week to keep their stock up and for the store to continue being a success. They're setting themselves up by bragging about it.

OreoCookie · 06:35 AM

Well, the performance hit we experienced with OS X will still come to Windows, but won't be as apparent as for us: we lag behind in the CPU arena by about one generation (a gap that will hopefully be closed soon).

new kind of OS with a very potent graphics engine + lag of CPU power + lack of tuning of graphics drivers (compared to windows) = our current situation

2005: OS X will be optimized much further, a PPC980 (Power5 derivative for desktop) will be available (no joke, the Power5 is scheduled for 2004) = plenty of performance

2005: Windows will bring their first gen next-gen graphics engine to market; lacks optimization (at least initally), many proposed features are missing (anyone remember what Windows95 really was supposed to be?), etc.

We will be looking very good indeed when Apple will have solved its current problems.

MindFad · 01:59 PM

Originally posted by mathew_m:
Don't be an Apple apologist.

No one's apologizing for anything.

The ads do suck and don't offer any incentive for non-Apple users to switch. I mean are they trying to cater to the American Idol crowd? I've already tried getting one those types to switch and he's scared of Macs. The 2 million songs downloaded so far is great but I'm thinking that like most blockbuster movie opening weekends it is frontloaded. Apple will have to sell 2 million songs every week to keep their stock up and for the store to continue being a success. They're setting themselves up by bragging about it.

Riiight, a whole bunch of "blah," just like the orginial post I replied to -- you don't like the ads, it's a big sales conspiracy. I didn't say I liked the ads (I'm also not a fan) -- I was just pointing out that whining about the ads doesn't really matter much because Apple's obviously doing something right according to sales. In case you missed my original poit, there, I've made it again.

35� a song, 2 million songs, that's can't be too shabby in only two or so weeks?

nvaughan3 · May 17, 2003, 12:31 PM

35� a song, 2 million songs, that's can't be to shabby inly only two or so weeks

Actually I bet they are heavily in losses right now. They gained much (good) free publicity, which I'm sure might help sell some ipods and computers, but I dont see how the service is anywhere near profitable right now.

.30 cents/song x 2M = $600,000.

They've spent more than that alone on TV commercials, not to mention the backend expenses like bandwidth, servers, lawyers, R&D, web designers and techs...I don't know that it will ever be profitable on it's own.

mrfrost · May 17, 2003, 12:37 PM

Given the fact that only Mac users in the U.S. are able to download songs from the Music store makes 2 million songs in 2 weeks not too shabby indeed.

voodoo · May 17, 2003, 12:58 PM

Originally posted by Steve:
But I bet Quartz Extreme is better!... right? Why is the Finder still slower than all hell even on a "high-end" Mac? (my experiences with a newly formatted 1Ghz G4 tower with a gig of Ram).

It also must be the legacy support of Quartz Extreme that makes it better, eh?

troll.

why is a moderator a troll?

stop it steve, you just showed how stupid you are.

(I am writing this on a dual gig MDD G4 with 256 MB RAM and the Finder flies)

I usually work on a 600 MHz G3 iBook, and I find that to be slow. But this G4 I am using now makes working in OS X like being back in OS 9. Everything happens fast and effectively. I really like this machine.

MindFad · May 17, 2003, 02:03 PM

My point was it's a good start, considering Mac-only, US-only -- I wasn't trying to guess their losses and predict how well they might or might not do. And imagine how wel things will do when the service is opened up to the rest of the market? Things look good for Apple, even if I'll probably never use the service.

Isn't this supposed to be about Longhorn anyway?

AKcrab · May 17, 2003, 05:24 PM

Originally posted by voodoo:
troll.

why is a moderator a troll?

Yay, somebody said it.

sambeau · May 18, 2003, 06:08 AM

Originally posted by Steve:
But I bet Quartz Extreme is better!... right? Why is the Finder still slower than all hell even on a "high-end" Mac? (my experiences with a newly formatted 1Ghz G4 tower with a gig of Ram).

It also must be the legacy support of Quartz Extreme that makes it better, eh?

this is one of the few good uses for top. Try it - and see how much CPU Quartz extreme is using..

Code:
  PID COMMAND      %CPU   TIME   #TH #PRTS #MREGS RPRVT  RSHRD  RSIZE  VSIZE
17655 Safari      12.8%  4:56.45   5   318   686  39.2M  17.0M  48.3M   217M 
18652 iPhoto       9.1% 10:11.68   8   155  2014   423M  16.7M   250M   562M 
18693 top          9.1%  0:06.19   1    14    18   304K   240K   600K  13.6M 
18686 Terminal     1.8%  0:10.74   5    60   165  3.82M  8.69M  11.0M   113M 
    0 kernel_tas   0.0% 38:38.86  26     0     -      -      -  59.0M-  563M 
17519 Mail         0.0%  9:44.52   3   122   173  6.28M  5.30M  5.50M   113M
17516 Palm Deskt   0.0%  6:00.70   1    44    95   768K  3.30M  1.93M   100M
   73 update       0.0%  3:07.10   1     7    13    32K   204K    84K  1.26M 
17497 Window Man   0.0%  2:48.02   3   227   834  7.27M+ 32.3M  33.2M+  140M+

On my machine - practically nothing.

The finder is slow for other reasons.

simonjames · May 18, 2003, 07:34 AM

At least with OS X a lot of Mac people could use the new OS on their old machines whereas it looks as though anyone wanting to run longhorn are going to have a new-ish PC

And with new file structures etc I wonder how backwards compatible it'll be.

Its going to be fun hearing all the PC folk complaining that they have to upgrade all their apps due to a new OS - looking forward to that