Leopard Vs. Vista

[bigb0y]

Why go with Leopard?
Why not Vista?

What does/will Leopard have that Vista doesn't? and are these reason good enough?

I want to see the enthusiasts rip apart Vista.

How would you convince someone to use Leopard?

Let's go!

[Dont Hurt Me]

OSX rules but I have first hand knowledge that Vista won be out now till Jan 31. It says so on my new Vista Coupon that came with this DELL e521.

[Warbrain]

OSX rules but I have first hand knowledge that Vista won be out now till Jan 31. It says so on my new Vista Coupon that came with this DELL e521.

So they hope. I say more like March 31st.

[Dont Hurt Me]

I wonder if it will show in 2007? It was suppose to be here in 2005,2006, now 2007. This coupon expires it says March 31 so they must feel they are close.:D

[Killyp]

Viruses, spyware, adware, cost, no Core Image/Core Video/Core Audio/Core Animation, cost (astronomical), poor design (it's still ugly IMO), installing drivers, lack of decent software, low feature count, difficult to use, lack of decent hardware to run it on...

The list could go on and on, but it won't, I'll refrain...

[Will_reed]

AND Leopord is BOTH 64bit and 32bit, In the same package none of this windows 64 bit or windows 32 bit

[ChrisA]

Why go with Leopard?
Why not Vista?


Silly question. No one buys an OS just to run the OS. They buy it to run applications. So if you want to run iPhoto or Final Cut Pro you need Mac OSX.

So if you are going to recommend a computer and OS to someone you first have to know what they are planning to do with the new computer. In many cases I have recommended Solaris

[Chundles]

1. I don't like using Windows.
2. I prefer to use OSX
3. Vista won't run on my Mac so why should I bother?
4. Vista is going to cost a lot more because I'd need to buy a PC to run it on.
5. iLife won't run on Vista.
6. My copy of Office won't run on Vista.
7. Handbrake and iSquint won't run on Vista.
8. Vista won't be able to read or write to my iPod.

Want more?

[OnceUGoMac]

You're question doesn't make sense. Why go with Leopard over Vista? Because Leopard will be the OS that runs my Mac. Vista will be the OS that runs my PC. If you're wanting us to compare the two, wait until they're both released.

[dsnort]

Vista might actually be pretty good, and have some nice stuff in it.

But unless that nice stuff includes a hefty reimbursement for the years of my life I wasted trying to function with their last offering, then MS is "whistling Dixie" as far as I am concerned.

[dmw007]

Viruses, spyware, adware, cost, no Core Image/Core Video/Core Audio/Core Animation, cost (astronomical), poor design (it's still ugly IMO), installing drivers, lack of decent software, low feature count, difficult to use, lack of decent hardware to run it on...

The list could go on and on, but it won't, I'll refrain...


All excellent reasons to say NO to Vista! :D :)

[dpaanlka]

It really is ugly too... translucent inactive windows? Didn't we, like, have that already, and remove it because it was way too distracting, unattractive, and evens slightly confusing to the eye?

61074
Mac OS X 10.0

[SMM]

Vista had better succeed for Microsoft's sake. They have a lot riding on Vista, reputation not the least. But, as an IT manager and buyer of all of our hardware, and software, I will not be buying Vista until I have little choice. Even now, I still have ~ 1/3 of my installed base running Windows 2000 Pro.

Licensing MS products has become a royal pain. They have made it so complicated, with few attractive options, I just hate doing business with them. I hear this sentiment echoed by all of my colleagues. This is the end result of allowing one company to become so dominate and castrate all of the competition.

I do not see MS making any serious attempt to forsake their predatory practices and become a customer oriented company. Rather, I see them just trying to 'weather the storm', and continue business as usual. I really think this is a major mistake. They have some serious competitors now. Apple and Linux have been battle tested. They both have attractive alternatives to MS, especially Apple.

I introduced Mini's into my company almost a year ago. Our business applications, which are MS based, are run in a Citrix terminal session. The users love the Macs! I am now developing my 2nd phase integration. I am installing a Xserve/Xraid solution to replace the MS file servers. It is cheaper (much cheaper with licensing), and easier to manage.

Vista..who needs it? Not our company.

[Croatian]

you ask, stupid, stupid questions my friend. It is like asking, Ford Vs BMW ... i mean how do u compare the two, one craps out on you every year, one u look like ur worth million dollars and it lasts u longer.

First off .. Vista will and is mimicing many features of Apple's Tiger OS, so lets not even go any further there, i mean how can u say Vista is better if it is mimicing the previous mac os x, u wanna be better come up with something new.

Second off ... In Vista My Documents and My Computer are now Computer and Documents as they are in mac os tiger, i mean if thats not enough the interface in vista is aero in mac is aqua.

Also i have noticed in Vista the search icon is same as the spotlight just looking other way around. Also Vista will use a new universal format called Metro, based on XML, for viewing and printing files. The aim is consistency of documents on screen and in print witch mac os x users have seen for many years but just in PDF format. How will XML work for windows i guess time will tell.

So to answer your question ... u should be asking Vista or Tiger because it doesn't seem like Vista has done anything new that Apple hasn't done already or will do better then they.

Maybe u should call Bill Gates and tell him to Wake up, come up with his own ****, not to copy other ides and make it look fancy and call it new technology

[savanahrose]

bigboy, you sure opened up a can of worms there didn't you?

My brother had gotten a copy of Vista and he put it on his computer.
He said it was ok but nothing to write home about.

I have yet to work with an actual os x so I don't really know the difference. But that is going to change real soon.

But I definitely would not put my money on Vista, I work as a computer operator and some of my co workers have read about and they are mixed in their feelings towards it.

It has to beat XP (hopefully) i think xp sucks big time. I prefer ME over XP!!

[iJaz]

Windows fanboy Thurrott calls Vista a train wreck, I think that's a pretty good reason to stay as long away from Vista as you can.

[dpaanlka]

Windows fanboy Thurrott calls Vista a train wreck, I think that's a pretty good reason to stay as long away from Vista as you can.

Yes... reading his blog article again was amusing.

[Xenesis]

Leopard will run well on computers that are 5-6 years old. I can't imagine Vista running on a computer older than 2.

[Scarlet Fever]

Leopard will run well on computers that are 5-6 years old. I can't imagine Vista running on a computer older than 2.

by the looks of the specs, it won't run on some brand new computers!

Leopard vs Vista? Is that even a question? You know the right answer, don't get us to tell you. :p

[Markleshark]

It has to beat XP (hopefully) i think xp sucks big time. I prefer ME over XP!!

and I prefer 98SE over them all. The only good thing to ever come out of Microshaft (Baring the Xbox and Xbox 360... Of course) and they stopped supporting it. They will never learn...

[killmoms]

and I prefer 98SE over them all. The only good thing to ever come out of Microshaft (Baring the Xbox and Xbox 360... Of course) and they stopped supporting it. They will never learn...
Eh, if I had to use a Windows, I'd take XP. Any NT-kernel based Windows is better than the unstable house of cards that was the 9x line (which culminated in ME, an OS so unstable that it'd crash if you looked at it funny). If you know what you're doing, securing XP isn't that big a deal (especially if you're just keeping it around to play some games, which is my plan once I get a Mac Pro).

But yes, concerning the OP's query, it's like comparing apples and oranges. From an tech point of view, Microsoft are really playing catch-up to OS X Tiger, and Leopard has a number of exciting new technologies that Microsoft can't even begin to match in this oft-delayed release. Don't get me wrong, if Vista really can improve on XP's miserable security situation (and/or games start demanding DX10) I'll install it... but not until I have some absolute reason to.

[Hobofuzz]

If you absolutely have to use Windows, stick with XP.

XP is, in my opinion, better than Vista in every way.
Since I'm typing this while ignoring a C++ lecture, I'm going to leave out why..

Since getting my Macbook Pro, my XP machine has become the primary file/print server. I got my Mac in the end of August, and my XP machine has rarely been used since then (only for my parents' web browsing needs and my horrible week away from my mac while one of the keys I accidently smashed was being repaired) and it's been running nonstop. For over 2 months it's been running without a hitch. XP's a damn good operating system now, and there's no way in hell I'm going to mess up my server with Vista.

And I won't be buying Leopard right away. Gonna wait a while for all the bugs to get worked out first.
I'm very excited about the new interface builder though. About time Apple modernized the thing.

[knome]

1. Vista will cost 350+ just for the personal version.
2. Vista will not support iso mounting
3. Vista already stole many feature from the last release of oxx
4. visa will only allow 1 hardware change before you have to buy a new license
5. Vista has windows media 10, which has taken away all music rights
6. Vista will not run on any new computers well, even core 2 duos are having problems running it.
7. Since vista stole all the features from the last release of osx the next release should put it in the dust again.

[Hobofuzz]

Microsoft turned to crap when Balmer took over.

Except for their game studios. Those are cool.

[bearbo]

4. visa will only allow 1 hardware change before you have to buy a new license

you can change your hardware as many times as you want to, i believe, you cannot, however, install windows on multiple computers

[knome]

nope, http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061030-8104.html

[enigma51]

Easy for me
I can run leapord on my G4 quicksilver 1.25 1G memory and all the office products!

I cant run vista on my (actualy my wives!) two year old windows machine.

Very simple realy all about cost!

[Carguy172]

This is not a good forum to post this in you know what the answer will be go post it in a forum thats not biased to windows vs.mac.

[dpaanlka]

This is not a good forum to post this in you know what the answer will be go post it in a forum thats not biased to windows vs.mac.

Wow where's that forum at!

[Xenesis]

by the looks of the specs, it won't run on some brand new computers!

Leopard vs Vista? Is that even a question? You know the right answer, don't get us to tell you. :p

True, true. I guess I was being overly generous. I'm still awed by the speed that my brother's brand new Macbook boots Tiger, compared to my G3 iBook.

Seriously...a few seconds..it's crazy. The fact that apple optimises their releases rather than relying on new technology to pick up the slack for sloppy coding is more than enough.

[jessep28]

Wow where's that forum at!

COBOL forum? :)

just kidding

[bmcgrath]

To be honest Vista is not worth it. I've used it a good bit on my PC and yes I have to admit it runs smoothly and fast. And it's gotten better looking than XP but it's just a tad tacky. It's copied OS X and gone overboard with the graphics. And i'm only new to Macs, and to be honest Macs really are the better option. Out of the box you pretty much have everything you need that a basic user would need. Yes Vista has IE and OE and Media but thats just not enough when your spending over 300€ or more on the OS. I certainly wont be getting it. I'll stick with XP for any of the stuff I need to do on Windoze.

[QuarterSwede]

1. REGISTRY
2. Security
3. DLL's
4. User Maintenance
5. Installing/Unistalling (blah!)
6. No easy drive mounting (love the .dmg)

Not to mention having to reformat every 6 months or so (oh the hated windows slow down).

So a big fat NO is in order. I hated using it and I won't go back because OS X has none of those problems.

[NewSc2]

Are you seriously asking this question in a Mac forum?

Personally I'm not going to say which is better. Microsoft has slowly been getting better over the years, except for the debacle that was ME. 98SE < 2kPro < XPPro, and I'm hopeful that Vista would be good to me too.

OSX and XP both suck. If it weren't for Apple taking over Emagic I'd probably still be using PCs.

To everybody above -- yeah Vista will cost more than Leopard, but Apples cost more than PCs. The only good point somebody made was that awful Windows slowdown which causes you to reformat every 9 months. Which doesn't take too long if you've partitioned and backed everything up correctly.

[Ti_Poussin]

-BSD Unix Core
-core Animation, Audio, Image, video
-xCode with interface builder
-32/64 bits one OS
-Network Location
-Exposé
-Spotlight
-AppleScript, Cron, Automator
-Print to PDF
-iLife( iPhoto especially )
-Driver Install, only to add features
-DLL mess
-Time Machine
-Spaces

[Marble]

There's also that clean feeling you get because you're supporting a company that has a mission that includes aesthetics, innovation, and quality experience over simply profiting as efficienty and ruthlessly as possible.

[imacintel]

I have to say, that I do care for Vista. Being a Beta tester, its pretty good for a Beta. Although I hate the fact that it is just introducing features Mac OS X has had since the beginning of OS X.

[drummerbooker14]

because leopard doesn't look like it just got back from the gay pride rally

[SMM]

Why go with Leopard?
Why not Vista?

What does/will Leopard have that Vista doesn't? and are these reason good enough?

I want to see the enthusiasts rip apart Vista.

How would you convince someone to use Leopard?

Let's go!

If I had the inclination, I could go back a short while and find your similar question, and same format style on a previous post and under a different name. Stirring the pot here lad?

[Hobofuzz]

Are you seriously asking this question in a Mac forum?

Personally I'm not going to say which is better. Microsoft has slowly been getting better over the years, except for the debacle that was ME. 98SE < 2kPro < XPPro, and I'm hopeful that Vista would be good to me too.

OSX and XP both suck. If it weren't for Apple taking over Emagic I'd probably still be using PCs.

To everybody above -- yeah Vista will cost more than Leopard, but Apples cost more than PCs. The only good point somebody made was that awful Windows slowdown which causes you to reformat every 9 months. Which doesn't take too long if you've partitioned and backed everything up correctly.

FTW, I have never, in all my years of using Windows, experienced this mystical slow down.

[trainguy77]

It really is ugly too... translucent inactive windows? Didn't we, like, have that already, and remove it because it was way too distracting, unattractive, and evens slightly confusing to the eye?

61074
Mac OS X 10.0

Well MS has not figured that out its still in office 2004 for mac......the formatting palette.

[steelfist]

windows vista is SO expensive. http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-6130136.html

clearlly microsoft is desprate for money. they are losing money in xbox sales, the mp3 market isn't much either, and their primary source of revenue is running dry (win xp).

dispite this, i gladly welcome their new operating system and i plan to use it on my old pcs.

[JFreak]

Why go with Leopard? Why not Vista?

Best reasons are the most simple ones;

1) Leopard will work out of the box, Vista won't.
2) Leopard will be beautiful, Vista will be a badly done copy.
3) Leopard will run my applications more stable than Vista.

Although, I have to give some respect to MS who has come up with a very clever and informative name:
V.iruses
I.nfections
S.pyware
T.rojans
A.dware

[QuarterSwede]

FTW, I have never, in all my years of using Windows, experienced this mystical slow down.
If you rarely installed/uninstalled programs then you would never notice a slow down. It really happens when so much junk gets written to the registry/system folders from installs that it really does slow Windows down. Its no myth.

[steve_hill4]

Best reasons are the most simple ones;

1) Leopard will work out of the box, Vista won't.
2) Leopard will be beautiful, Vista will be a badly done copy.
3) Leopard will run my applications more stable than Vista.

To be fair, on point 1, Vista is having to contend with a much wider range of hardware support issues than OSX ever will. If you see the various projects to hack OSX, you begin to see the difficulties and man hours required to get OSes to run seemlessly on any hardware.

Still, that's the price MS wants to pay. Vista will still have features though we will probably never see in OSX, or Apple will eventually, silently add. Applications though, they just work going from Jaguar to Panther to Tiger to Leopard. You rarely see the same level of issues as the betas and RCs of Vista have shown up.

[MacBoobsPro]

V.iruses
I.nfections
S.pyware
T.rojans
A.dware

I thought it stood for:

Various
Improvements
Similar
To
Apple

[Kolind]

Writing this on a pc running Vista RC1, and there are some things which have improved greatly since XP, and others which have become worse. Some of the "new" *cough*Tiger*cough* features are nowhere near as good as the OS X equivalent. Vista's search is a joke compared to Spotlight, and there is a bad attempt to do something a bit like Exposé, but it's not really useful.

That being said Vista was able to find all the necessary drivers for my PC, very impressive considering the time it takes me to install all my drivers after reinstalling XP. There is also a nice feature that shows a small window with the program when you mouse-over in the task bar. It looks better than XP, but it's still "too much" somehow.

It's less intuitive, and to be honest it does not seem as if it's been built from the ground up. For instance the "Install new font"-feature still looks exactly like it did in win 95 (almost 3.11) - that thing hasn't changed in any version of Windows!

Of course the gamers will like DirectX 10...

I wont start comparing Vista to Leopard, as it doesn't even hold up to Tiger the way I see it.
I for one am looking forward to getting my Macbook Pro, so that I can get back on OS X.

[Frisco]

What Vista (http://youtube.com/watch?v=b9ifQvQCO7Y) should have been in 2003!

[QuarterSwede]

What Vista (http://youtube.com/watch?v=b9ifQvQCO7Y) should have been in 2003!
Amen. This is why I particularly don't care for what Microsoft has done to Windows. The PDC '03 preview was far, far, far better. It would have actually been a next generation OS (surpassing OS X in my opinion).

[Nym]

Ok, I've owned a Windows based PC for all my life, 3 years ago (when I entered college) I started working with Mac OSX and immediately thought:
Why the hell so many people still use Windows if someone has already made an OS like this?? (and it was 10.2 I guess)

I bought my first Mac only a week ago so I'm pretty sure I'm not biased to OSX or Windows since I know from experience the strengths and weaknesses of each OS. Anyway, all this to ask:

Don't you think that Mr.Paul here is kinda biased to Windows?
Being a Windows fan doesn't have to make you a bad and wrongful reviewer right?
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/macosx_leopard_preview.asp

Sounds like he got it all backwards, I hope the Leopard hidden features kick Vista's ass out of the face of the earth because although there are many Mac-Biased individuals (even in this forum) I'm just tired that Windows users
never admitting that Mac OSX is a better OS, starting from the core :mad:
And if he thinks Apple's advertisements and affirmed facts are lies, we should stop by www.microsuck.com and read about his favorite company strategic decisions over time.

[MacBoobsPro]

What Vista (http://youtube.com/watch?v=b9ifQvQCO7Y) should have been in 2003!

Let me get this straight... 4 years later and they are bringing out something that is nothing like the preview and from all accounts quite crap.

I have to admit that preview did look pretty funky but from what Vista looks like today it looks a totally different product i.e. crap.

:confused:

[QuarterSwede]

Let me get this straight... 4 years later and they are bringing out something that is nothing like the preview and from all accounts quite crap.

I have to admit that preview did look pretty funky but from what Vista looks like today it looks a totally different product i.e. crap.

:confused:
Exactly. If they would have stayed the course, it would have even changed the way the web looks and works. The only thing I like better about Vista, as opposed to the PDC preview, is the look of the UI (ie. glass)

[gloss]

What Vista (http://youtube.com/watch?v=b9ifQvQCO7Y) should have been in 2003!

That's...impressive.

[Vidd]

The preview from 3 years ago looks better than the nearly finished product.

[MacVault]

Vista, or XP for that matter, is not perfect. And I love Apple and OS X. However, in a business network envirmonment Microsoft really has an advantage with Active Directory, Group Policies, Exchange, etc. Microsoft has put a lot into these technologies and Apple does not seem to have/promote anything comparable.

[Hobofuzz]

Vista, or XP for that matter, is not perfect. And I love Apple and OS X. However, in a business network envirmonment Microsoft really has an advantage with Active Directory, Group Policies, Exchange, etc. Microsoft has put a lot into these technologies and Apple does not seem to have/promote anything comparable.

One acronym for you.

LDAP

Active Directory is based on LDAP. It's hardly an innovation.

Exchange is just fancy email that doesn't work with anything but windows.
Group Policies have been in Unix since the beginning.

Mac OS X has FAR more usage in a business environment than Windows. FAR MORE. Businesses just don't like making huge changes.

[chatin]

Microsoft has setup this strange upgrade site where a user inputs a COA - yet another number hidden on the label for Vista upgradeable Windows XP stickers.

I tried a serialized upgrade coupon. The process was so confusing that when I went back to make a change (date of purchase) the site told me that my coupon had just been used.

What a mess! Vista is one of the biggest advertisements for OSX in the history of OS'!

:eek: ;)

https://upgradeweb.moduslink.com/Vista/ConsumerWebsite/(S(h3xrbef3ljykbu45tdtvbs45))/GlobalLandingPage.aspx

[clevin]

1. Vista will cost 350+ just for the personal version.
2. Vista will not support iso mounting
3. Vista already stole many feature from the last release of oxx
4. visa will only allow 1 hardware change before you have to buy a new license
5. Vista has windows media 10, which has taken away all music rights
6. Vista will not run on any new computers well, even core 2 duos are having problems running it.
7. Since vista stole all the features from the last release of osx the next release should put it in the dust again.
small corrections
1. vista home basic cost $199 http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/index.cfm?newsid=7529
4. Vista's hardware changing tolerance is better than XP, http://origin.arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061030-8104.html
5. Vista has wmp 11. not 10, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista#End-user_features i don't under stand your comment about wmp10 and music right tho?
6. Vista does have higher system requirement, which is bad, lol, but Core2Duo shouldn't have problem, can you show me some links about your statement?

[Dont Hurt Me]

I wouldnt compare Vista to Leopard, A better comparison might be Leopard to say Jaquar or the first OSX. I cant remember what the first one was called?

[clevin]

I wouldnt compare Vista to Leopard, A better comparison might be Leopard to say Jaquar or the first OSX. I cant remember what the first one was called?

Puma is 10.1
Cheetah is 10.0

[brad.c]

What I want to know is why Vista has such a high hardware requirement? It's just a bloody OS. I work with a MS fanboy who touts the minimum HW requirements like it's a badge of honour. All it reminds me of is the old Microsoft Bloat days of Office for Mac 4.2.1. I won't bother beating the drum regarding security, seat licencing, stability, ease of use (et al.) to argue in favour of OSX. I don't need to.

[clevin]

What I want to know is why Vista has such a high hardware requirement? It's just a bloody OS. I work with a MS fanboy who touts the minimum HW requirements like it's a badge of honour. All it reminds me of is the old Microsoft Bloat days of Office for Mac 4.2.1. I won't bother beating the drum regarding security, seat licencing, stability, ease of use (et al.) to argue in favour of OSX. I don't need to.

yes, the graphic card requirement is so unrealistic that M$ will have trouble selling it.

[TheBobcat]

If you like Tiger, you should like Vista. From what I hear they have a lot of the same features.