[driven]

From the Longhorn FAQ on the Windows Supersite:
(Sorry .. I make my living on Windows so I have to drudge around the "darkside" quite a bit.)

I'm not even going to touch this passage. I'm sure the rest of you will have fun with it.

Q: But Mac OS X already has a lot of these features. What's the big deal?
A: Apple has implemented some basic desktop composition features in Mac OS X "Panther." But the basic problem with Mac OS X isn't going away: It's a classic desktop operating system that doesn't offer anything in the way of usability advancements over previous desktop operating systems. Today, Windows XP and its task-based interface are far superior to anything in Mac OS X. In the future, Longhorn will further distance Windows from OS X. From a graphical standpoint, there won't be any comparison. As Microsoft revealed at the PDC 2003 conference, Longhorn is far more impressive technically than Panther.

Source: http://www.winsupersite.com/faq/longhorn.asp

[chris v]

Well, What EVVV ar.

CV

[Millennium]

This is Paul Thurrott we're talking about, astroturfer extraordinaire. He runs no fewer than three of the biggest Windows news sites out there, all by himself.

Unfortunately, the man gets far more respect than he deserves. The fact is, task-based interfaces aren't usable for anything but the single specific task they're designed for, and so they're only useful in very limited circumstances. Even then, they're so limiting that they're not worth going for in all but the simplest circumstances. That's what Thurrott doesn't want you to know.

[Mr Ti]

It's amazing to read this, when I will have been using Panther for nearly 2 and half years before I get my first Loghorn experience... It is strange how many comparing the two OS's forget that longhorn is yet to go beta...Ridiculous.

It would be nice to compare Tiger with Longhorn (or even OSX.5), but understandably we know little about Tiger, probably because apple want to announce the feature list as late as possible to make it harder for M$ to feature copy into longhorn.

[Scarpa]

Funny, turning off the task-based interface is the very first thing I do on a new XP install.

The only usability enhancement IMO on XP is that multiple windows from the same application collapse in the taskbar. Hardly an innovation when compared to Expose.

[gorickey]

gorickey likes OS X over Windows (any version)...

[msuper69]

"The Longhorn Start Menu and task bar will be enhanced with a new Sidebar component that can optionally appear locked to one side of the desktop. The Sidebar is an XML-based panel that includes links to local and remote resources."


Desktop? I thought Longhorn did away with the "Desktop metaphor"?

Sidebar? Been there, done that.


Seriously, his whole website is just his way of reassuring himself that he has made the right computing platform choice. Nobody likes to admit they might be wrong.

Someday, someday the world will finally see that the emperor has no clothes.

[driven]

I found statements like the following to be humorous:

Longhorn is far more impressive technically than Panther

So ... according to Therot, Windows XP and Longhorn are both technically superior *and* have a better usability experience than OSX which is a "classic desktop operating system".

Uh ... ok.

[iohead]

Well, all "experts" have some agenda to push. I don't think I have ever come across an "expert", or "analyst", or "technologist" who:

1. Was modest about his/her "expertise"
2. Was not self-proclaimed
3. Had a lot of bad things to say about what he was an "expert" of, or had a lot of good things to say about the competition

A lot of the time such people don't know what they're talking about. They don't have any first-hand experience with the technology they're commenting on -- they've never designed or implemented a system, nor any of its components. Their idea of "good" or "bad" is often selfish -- and based on what they like or dislike. It's simply an opinion, and opinion is one of the most commonly found entities in the Universe.

That said, let me offer my opinion: -) If one does look under the hoods of Windows (today -- not Longhorn) and Mac OS X, one can see several things that are *technically superior* in Windows. What sets Mac OS X apart (and what's really amazing) is that Mac OS X does a very fine job of "execution" - things come together far better in OS X, from a user's point of view, than in Windows. Just because something is technically better in Windows doesn't mean it's going to "work better".

Now, many OS X components are getting seriously obsolete (take the filesystem, for example, which is kind of primitive when compared to today's NTFS, there there's so much to be done on the server side, if Apple wants to compete in the Enterprise market), when it comes to operating system technology, and Apple needs to do something about this very soon (I'm sure they are, already). Apple is in a much more favorable position (politically, and technically) to draw from software pools such as the Open Source one, as compared to Microsoft.

Longhorn has many things in its favor: good technology, the might of Microsoft, the insanely lopsided market-share (and the consequent user-base). Even if Microsoft "messes it up", all's not lost for them, because they have such a huge "cushion". In this sense, Apple has a very hard job of competing in the OS arena. They have an excellent team though.

Coming back to the "Longhorn FAQ", on one hand, the "expert" says that "Longhorn is far ahead of Panther" (nevermind the fact that Longhorn will be out in 2 years while Panther came out last year), and on the other hand, he says: "One of the coolest new features in Longhorn build 4051 is the pop-up ad blocking feature in Internet Explorer 6.05."

If pop-up ad blocking is "cool" and "new", that's sad. It's been there in Open Source browsers (like Mozilla) for a long while. Safari has had it for a while too.

Regards
-A

[itai195]

Not to mention that I think pop-up blocking is going to be in XP Service Pack 2, don't have to wait for Longhorn.

Thurott basically makes his living by banking on the fact that arguing in favor of Microsoft is a safe bet. The task based interface in XP is mostly useless for us, but I do agree with him that it can be useful for newbies. Same goes for wizards. I still think these are highly limited methods; they are basically shortcuts that leave users empty-handed when they need to learn how to do something more advanced than what the task-based UI supports. Still, I think it would do Apple a lot of good to address these UI differences if they really want to attract switchers. Windows users who try using Macs often find that they have no idea how to do what they want to do, even if it's a relatively simple task.

[Judge_Fire]

Having lived with a PC and Mac side by side for quite awhile, I feel that:

- the Windows 'app' itself is quite nice, with many of the common tasks quite convenient and the contextual menu very convenient. It's much better than that clunky, unresponsive Finder thing, IMHO.

- the Windows consistency doesn't get passed on to any other apps (except maybe office), so it kinda gets wasted. The overall experience is a mess.


While MS tries to push a more task-based approach, as soon as I want to do something that isn't covered by Windows, I need to go into a tool-based mode. And man, the Windows shareware/utility scene sucks, as if all the software was polished by a bunch of Neanderthals.

With the Mac being more of a tool-based experience from the start and the interapplication UI experience quite coherent, whatever Longhorn itself is doesn't matter if MS can't do something about the third party developers' attitude.


But yeah, Tiger (and beyond) vs. Longhorn will be an interesting thing to watch. Both companies come up with good stuff.

J

[paully dub]

Exactly. One of the things that has enhanced my experience with OS X as opposed to XP has been the large amount of very good shareware/freeware apps out there - for the most part striving to make apps which adhere to the philosophy of the OS X gui, and integrate seemlessly. Not to mention an absence of fishy spyware or adware, which can bring down an otherwise fine tuned OS ( in the case of XP ).

Nice little community feel to Mac that makes the experience that much more rewarding, as opposed to the Windows masses.

[bewebste]

Hmmm, I guess I haven't used XP too much yet. How exactly is XP's "task-based" interface different from how you normally use Windows?

[Spliffdaddy]

I think 'task-based' means that instead of looking for a specific application to perform a task (ie, you want to burn a CD, so you search for the 'Nero' application) you'll choose a task which offers all the most common options to complete the job. Perhaps you can choose from several different installed apps within that 'task'.

It makes a lot of sense, really. Especially to folks who don't know the retail name of the application they need - or even what type of application they need.

[thePurpleGiant]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
I think 'task-based' means that instead of looking for a specific application to perform a task (ie, you want to burn a CD, so you search for the 'Nero' application) you'll choose a task which offers all the most common options to complete the job. Perhaps you can choose from several different installed apps within that 'task'.

It makes a lot of sense, really. Especially to folks who don't know the retail name of the application they need - or even what type of application they need.

Not on my copy of XP

On mine, it rarely supports tasks between programs (other than Office - which integrates on the Mac also). It's more like in WIndows Explorer (win equivalent of our Finder) - if I click on a file, I can then select 'Delete this file' from the side of the window, instead of clicking on a button that says 'delete'. It realy isn't all the revolutionary, if at all.

[Spliffdaddy]

Longhorn. The 'task-based' thingy doesn't apply to XP, although they did manage to group related tasks within folder windows. Open a folder containing images and it'll show a list of common tasks associated with images. Perhaps a viewer, editor, slideshow, or burning a photo disk that works on DVD players.

[Link]

If you think that's bad, go to internet-nexus.com

[driven]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
Longhorn. The 'task-based' thingy doesn't apply to XP, although they did manage to group related tasks within folder windows. Open a folder containing images and it'll show a list of common tasks associated with images. Perhaps a viewer, editor, slideshow, or burning a photo disk that works on DVD players.

I really doubt that Microsoft has the ability (or desire*) to make the interface consistant throughout the Operating System, much less with their own applications. (obviously they have no control over 3rd party apps).


* = Historically Microsoft has created "good enough" software. They have never put the effort forth to create truly "polished" software. This model has served them well ... but to expect that they would start worrying now about such niceties as consistency in their wizards or their task-based interface is extremely optimistic at best.

[typoon]

Why do we keep giving this guy's site any play. I mean we all know he is a Windows Lackey. He worse than many of us "Apple Apologists."

[GORDYmac]

Longhorn's launch will be Apple's first real attempt to unseat--or seriously dent--Windows' dominance. In order to use Longhorn, enterprises will have to buy new hardware and software. I think that's what Apple's getting ready for with the Xserve and G5 series. They should be in a great position to compete come 2005.

Microsoft realizes this vulnerability, and that's why comments like this will become more and more prevalent in the months prior to Longhorn's release.

Just in case you wanted an analyst's perspective...

[Judge_Fire]

Originally posted by driven:
I really doubt that Microsoft has the ability (or desire*) to make the interface consistant throughout the Operating System, much less with their own applications. (obviously they have no control over 3rd party apps).

They have a huge bunch of people who are painfully aware of these problems, but whether those people can change the current course remains to be seen. MS is about great talent and potential for great products, but somehow the process/company manages to dilute all that into sub-par releases. Research there might be fun, but it must be frustrating to work close to the end-user.

Even in the past, they've tried. I have an old copy of their Windows UI Guidelines in my shelf. Not a great piece of literature, sadly.


I think right now they're focusing their work on a level which is a bit too abstract to actually ensure the UI details confronted by the end-user are done right. Still, this effort at producing preset Application Archetypes might guide third party devs in the right direction. Browse around that site for more related info.

J

[PER3]

Originally posted by Millennium:
This is Paul Thurrott we're talking about, astroturfer extraordinaire. He runs no fewer than three of the biggest Windows news sites out there, all by himself.

What's an 'astroturfer'? Something like a 'teabagger'?

[dampeoples]

Originally posted by GORDYmac:
Longhorn's launch will be Apple's first real attempt to unseat--or seriously dent--Windows' dominance. In order to use Longhorn, enterprises will have to buy new hardware and software. I think that's what Apple's getting ready for with the Xserve and G5 series. They should be in a great position to compete come 2005.

Microsoft realizes this vulnerability, and that's why comments like this will become more and more prevalent in the months prior to Longhorn's release.

Just in case you wanted an analyst's perspective...

This i didn't realize, it al makes more sense now

[Millennium]

Originally posted by PER3:
What's an 'astroturfer'? Something like a 'teabagger'?

An "astroturfer" is someone who operates under multiple names and aliases, trying to make his cause sound better-supported than it actually is. Astroturf is the fake grass you see in many baseball stadiums, and an astroturfer (in this sense) is someone who is running a fake grassroots movement.

In Thurrott's case, he runs not one, not two, but three of the biggest Windows sites on the Net. His designs mirror Microsoft's so closely that the only reason they could possibly have not to sue him would be if he's already on their payroll. He also writes numerous technical articles for other magazines, invariably bashing anything other than Windows and heaping unwarranted praise on Microsoft. In fact, he writes so many technical articles that I sometimes wonder if he even exists; it's possible that he's just a pseudonym used by Microsoft's marketing department, similar to how the name "Alan Smithee" used to be used by Hollywood directors who decided that they didn't want to be credited for a specific film.

[Eug Wanker]

< Insert timeline of internet pic here >

[itai195]

Originally posted by Link:
If you think that's bad, go to internet-nexus.com

Heh... For a site that's supposed to be an 'honest look at Windows alternatives,' he talks a lot more about Steve Jobs and Apple as a company than he does about Apple's technology. He also links to every single piece of bad news or negative criticism regarding Apple or its products... even relatively insignificant ones, written by authors with questionable motives (of course, he writes off any journalist who consistently writes positive articles about Apple). It seems he's more concerned with destroying Apple's image than anythign else.

He makes some good points, but they're not exactly earth shattering. The worst thing about the site is he acts like all Mac fans are mindless zealots, and until he can get past that, he's not going to have any credibility.

[Will McGoonigle]

I dont understand any of this task based nonsense or graphical technical superiority of one OS over another. You still have to double click on a file and open it in applications then wiggle your mouse around and tap on the keyboard. It's the same crap no matter what way you look at it. The most important thing is security and stability.

[itai195]

Then I suppose Linux should already be the desktop market leader? Usability counts for a lot.

[driven]

Originally posted by Will McGoonigle:
I dont understand any of this task based nonsense or graphical technical superiority of one OS over another. You still have to double click on a file and open it in applications then wiggle your mouse around and tap on the keyboard. It's the same crap no matter what way you look at it. The most important thing is security and stability.

Usability absolutely counts for a lot.
(Both from a user perspective as well as for those who have to administer and / or support those users.)

That said:
In Windows you can configure it so you only have to SINGLE click an icon before you wiggle your mouse around and tap on the keyboard. :-)

[Brass]

Originally posted by driven:
Usability absolutely counts for a lot.
(Both from a user perspective as well as for those who have to administer and / or support those users.)

That said:
In Windows you can configure it so you only have to SINGLE click an icon before you wiggle your mouse around and tap on the keyboard. :-)

Yeah, used to be able to do this on Mac OS 9 too (button view). Makes it difficult to select anything without opening it though. Good for applications, not so good for documents. Therefore best done on a per-window basis, or, use an application launching utility... like the Mac OS X Dock!

[chris v]

I know some of you are discussing Win XP, but um, if he's going to push Longhorn's usability, then you've got to figure in the part where you can actually use OS X, unlike Longhorn, which is curently utterly, and totally unusable, as it can't be had to install on a computer, as neither the OS or a machine capable of running it have ever been sold to the public. Longhorn can't be considered from a usability standpoint until such a time as someone can use it. I'm befuddled.

CV

[lookmark]

Originally posted by GORDYmac:
Longhorn's launch will be Apple's first real attempt to unseat--or seriously dent--Windows' dominance. In order to use Longhorn, enterprises will have to buy new hardware and software. I think that's what Apple's getting ready for with the Xserve and G5 series. They should be in a great position to compete come 2005.

Couple of things.

First of all, the software part of this just isn't true. Longhorn will be able to run older Windows applications in its compatibility layer, just the same XP does (and much more transparently than, say, Classic in OS X). Hardware, OTOH... if WinFS and Aero is as demanding as they say... no doubt.

Also, I wouldn't necessarily judge Microsoft entirely by their past OS attempts. They've got some good people there now, and they're learning, folks. Windows 2000 was hugely better than 95/98, and XP is probably their best attempt at a consumer OS yet. (It still drives me crazy in so many ways, but it's got lots of good features mixed in its annoyances.) Longhorn, from what I've seen from the UI guidelines, has a lot of interesting, promising ideas, and will almost certainly be their best OS by a long shot. They finally seem to be picking up a cleaner design aesthetic from Apple (along with everything else in OS X -- transparencies, drop shadows, column view), and Longhorn promises to be much more innovative (metadata-savvy filesystem, stacks, powerful search filters, and so on) and usable than what they've done before. Will they mess it up at the last minute with some ugly visuals? Not impossible. Tie components of the OS to various MS products? Not unlikely. Will it still be too complicated, and choked with annoying wizards (excuse me, "task-based interface assistants")? Almost certainly. But I wouldn't underestimate Longhorn -- it's going to provide a certain amount of what OS X offers today.

But. Operative word there being "today." I'm counting on Apple to have the vision to take OS X to even more amazing place in the next 2-3 years, so... I'm not worried. It's a challenge, but if anyone can pull it off, Apple can.

As for Paul Thurrott... well, exactly, not even worth going near. Let him live in his wistful little fantasy world in which an OS not due for at least two years can be compared to an OS available today, where Windows is superior, Apple copies everything MS does, and a linear series of dialog boxes with radio boxes of choices are best interface possible. Right.

[Taipan]

In the future, Longhorn will further distance Windows from OS X.

Well, that's OK with me. I fail to see how this is a good thing for Windows, though...