PDA

View Full Version : Mac OS X Shines In Comparison With Windows Vista


MacBytes
Jan 7, 2007, 06:50 PM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: Reviews
Link: Mac OS X Shines In Comparison With Windows Vista (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20070107195041)
Description:: none

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug

Compile 'em all
Jan 7, 2007, 06:59 PM
Printable version (http://www.informationweek.com/shared/printableArticle.jhtml?articleID=196800670), all in one page.

BenRoethig
Jan 7, 2007, 10:00 PM
Vista's only advantage is that your not limited to certain types of systems. OSX has it beat hands down in everything else.

Adamo
Jan 7, 2007, 10:17 PM
Vista's only advantage is that your not limited to certain types of systems. OSX has it beat hands down in everything else.
OSX feels much much slower, and has terrible web browsers and support (for the browsers). And MSN Messenger (even Adium) is naff too.

I'm looking forward to giving Vista a proper run (retail).

BenRoethig
Jan 7, 2007, 10:50 PM
OSX feels much much slower, and has terrible web browsers and support (for the browsers). And MSN Messenger (even Adium) is naff too.

I'm looking forward to giving Vista a proper run (retail).

Try it on the intel machines.

erockerboy
Jan 7, 2007, 10:50 PM
OSX feels much much slower

It does??

solvs
Jan 8, 2007, 02:45 AM
and has terrible web browsers and support (for the browsers).

I use FireFox on both. Works fine. The G5 optimized version is fast(ish) and the Intel one is awesome. Webkit on OS X is even faster.

IE 7 was so bad, I haven't updated my PC with it yet and don't intend to any time soon.

Alex Urchin
Jan 8, 2007, 03:28 AM
OSX feels much much slower, and has terrible web browsers and support (for the browsers). And MSN Messenger (even Adium) is naff too.

I'm looking forward to giving Vista a proper run (retail).

Total crap. OSX is far more efficient, run it on a machine with enough RAM and fast enough processor and it blazes.

Terrible web browsers? what a load of crap. Safari 2.0, Firefox, Camino. All miles better than IE6 and 7.

Adium is brilliant.

Vista however is a dog - Used it for a while, got sick of all the gut churning UI "features"

nagromme
Jan 8, 2007, 04:29 AM
Vista does sound pretty poor compared to Tiger, but... one correction:

"None of the Safari widgets show as active, while the Finder window, being active, has the "live" controls, and the window controls all have a unique color. It is far easier to tell at a glance which window is the "active" or front-most window, even if the positioning is not obvious."

He's wrong about Safari: it does the same thing IE does. The controls DO look live even when the window is not foreground. The reason his Safari controls are inactive is simply that no page is loaded.

Passante
Jan 8, 2007, 05:18 AM
Vista does sound pretty poor compared to Tiger, but... one correction:

"None of the Safari widgets show as active, while the Finder window, being active, has the "live" controls, and the window controls all have a unique color. It is far easier to tell at a glance which window is the "active" or front-most window, even if the positioning is not obvious."

He's wrong about Safari: it does the same thing IE does. The controls DO look live even when the window is not foreground. The reason his Safari controls are inactive is simply that no page is loaded.

I think his is talking about the red yellow and green buttons as indicating which window is active. Only the active window in OS X has them.

SPUY767
Jan 8, 2007, 07:13 AM
Did anyone else see this, the computer that he's running vista on, and got the screenies from, is running on a 2.66 GHz dual core processor, and Vista cites it as a 4.53 GHz? Wow, I guess that's to convince the user that vista is faster than XP.

And when he says something about the new UI, it reminds me of just how abominable the UI in Office '07 is.

Vista can use USB memory sticks as additional RAM? Are you kidding me, possibly the slowest storage media since the floppy and I'm going to use it as my RAM. Probably just a ploy to make more users think that they can run Vista when they should really stick with XP. I'll keep my virtual memory, thanks.

Killyp
Jan 8, 2007, 07:30 AM
I think this is actually a really fair comparison. He's hit the nail on the head most of the time...

thestaton
Jan 8, 2007, 07:37 AM
so basically Vista can not compare to Tiger, and will be blown out of the water by Leopard.

I sold all my windows computers and changed to mac in 2005 and there is no way I could ever see my self going back.

iJUNKY
Jan 8, 2007, 07:42 AM
i think the reviewer is very anti-MS.

Most of the problems he states are inherent in MS's approach and style - which sucks big time.

for example complaining about making little changes like reducing the size of the "close" and "minimise" buttons - is negligible compared to all the other more serious screw-ups. At that point i think he was picking holes.

what i'm more interested in was the fact they vista is, in many ways, a rip off of osx - when will MS learn to stop stealing! and come up with something original that works?

mkrishnan
Jan 8, 2007, 07:51 AM
I think this is actually a really fair comparison. He's hit the nail on the head most of the time...

If anything, it's maybe slightly generous to OS X. But they do a really good job of looking beyond the eye candy (OMG!11!!!111 look at me flip through open windows in Aero) and look at how the features can actually be used.

But then a lot of it was very IT-centric. Like most home users are not constantly needing to discover their IP address. It does demonstrate the Microsoftness of the interface, though. With WM5, there was a very similar thing, in that WM5 is a *gorgeous* operating system, but it's still very MS. :o

And lol I can see a small but angry minority on MR furious at the fact that they find the multiple window looks in OS X to still have good visually consistency (I agree, too! :p )!

SPUY767
Jan 8, 2007, 08:13 AM
And lol I can see a small but angry minority on MR furious at the fact that they find the multiple window looks in OS X to still have good visually consistency (I agree, too! :p )!

I don't think it's a visual so much as ergonomic, if you will, consistency. The windows may look different, but they are laid out, and function the same. If you know one, you know them all.

mkrishnan
Jan 8, 2007, 08:16 AM
I don't think it's a visual so much as ergonomic, if you will, consistency. The windows may look different, but they are laid out, and function the same. If you know one, you know them all.

The ergonomic aspect is definitely the biggest, I totally agree. I find that, even visually, they look good together. I am very rarely jarred by the fact that so many looks are used. In contrast, to, say, if a Win95 style window popped up in XP or an XP window in Vista? It would be quite noticable!

The only time I'm ever really bugged by it is that I find a few companies do make rather bad use of the Apple themes... particularly there are some egregious usages of brushed metal. But for the most part, I like the look on my Mac. :)

clevin
Jan 8, 2007, 09:03 AM
a review from macbytes.com ? maybe read more from betanews.com or microsoftwatch would compensate the biased views.

Good or bad, we don't use vista, and why bother hopping on something u even lack of first hand experience? wanna make windows users switch? maybe first analysis why they use windows, respectfully, if u couldn't think a single advantage windows has, then u pretty much only trolling rather than helping.

Chundles
Jan 8, 2007, 09:07 AM
a review from macbytes.com ? maybe read more from betanews.com or microsoftwatch would compensate the biased views.

Good or bad, we don't use vista, and why bother hopping on something u even lack of first hand experience? wanna make windows users switch? maybe first analysis why they use windows, respectfully, if u couldn't think a single advantage windows has, then u pretty much only trolling rather than helping.

Bloody hell clevin, you do realise macbytes.com isn't a review site, it's basically a search engine that finds any recent articles with a remote connection to Apple and gathers them together in one place. :rolleyes:

The actual review is from informationweek.com

BenRoethig
Jan 8, 2007, 09:51 AM
a review from macbytes.com ? maybe read more from betanews.com or microsoftwatch would compensate the biased views.

Good or bad, we don't use vista, and why bother hopping on something u even lack of first hand experience? wanna make windows users switch? maybe first analysis why they use windows, respectfully, if u couldn't think a single advantage windows has, then u pretty much only trolling rather than helping.

Hey that would make too much sense. Rationality hasn't always been one of this platform's strong suits.

clevin
Jan 8, 2007, 10:01 AM
Bloody hell clevin, you do realise macbytes.com isn't a review site, it's basically a search engine that finds any recent articles with a remote connection to Apple and gathers them together in one place. :rolleyes:

The actual review is from informationweek.com

its an honest mistake, and i apologize for that,

anyway, have to wait, so many vista's reviews come out while the products aren't even in store yet. Its just so fascinating.

TBi
Jan 8, 2007, 10:11 AM
Until OSX handles network shares as easily and neatly as Windows (without locking up finder on me...) no amount of polish will get rid of that stain for me.

mkrishnan
Jan 8, 2007, 10:23 AM
Until OSX handles network shares as easily and neatly as Windows (without locking up finder on me...) no amount of polish will get rid of that stain for me.

There are a handful of small things like this for me too (I'd like Finder to get along better with WebDAV, whose ever fault the interoperability issues are; multisession burns in Finder; etc.). Network shares that are OS X native seem to be fine, though. You're not saying that loading up a network share that's on another Mac freezes your Finder, are you? Like I'm here at school off my home network, but if I try to load up the network share for my iMac at home, it takes a few seconds before the dialog with a cancel button comes up, but Finder remains operable during that time.

As for my WebDAV shares on the network here at school...well...at least you can access yours! :( I have to use that awful Goliath. :rolleyes:™

TBi
Jan 8, 2007, 10:50 AM
My problem is when you attach a network share (SMB/Windows in my case), then unplug the cable (usually this happens when i wake from sleep) without unmounting it (because i just close the laptop and don't want to have to worry about unmounting everything). Finder goes crazy if you click the little eject button then. It doesn't seem like something that should be hard to fix.

IJ Reilly
Jan 8, 2007, 11:55 AM
I think the real take-away from this article is that Microsoft and Apple really do have distinct and different philosophies of design, and that they haven't changed much over the years. Microsoft continues to design its software on the assumption that the user is an ape. Windows is fine for people who don't mind being asked whether they really want to do the thing they've just done. Apple instead strives to make the results of user actions clear, such that they don't have to be exposed to needless, chatty "assistance" or an endless series of confirmations.

This is probably never going to change. But I was really surprised to read that Microsoft came up with such a boneheaded non-solution to security issues, when the better answer was right in front of their faces.

BuzWeaver
Jan 8, 2007, 12:03 PM
OSX feels much much slower, and has terrible web browsers and support (for the browsers). And MSN Messenger (even Adium) is naff too.

I'm looking forward to giving Vista a proper run (retail).

I'm still scratching my head over why I can't sort by name with FireFox on the Mac. I even used a two button mouse to try and get the context menu with no luck. I had to export/send my links to my PC, then export/send them back to my mac at work. Safari, you can't sort at all.

bousozoku
Jan 8, 2007, 12:08 PM
This is one huge reason why I hate dealing with Windows:

Windows is...well, Windows is very eager to tell you what's going on. Constantly. Plug something in, and you get a message. Unplug something and you get a message. If you're on a network that's having problems staying up, you'll get tons of messages telling you this. It's rather like dealing with an overexcited Boy Scout...who has a lifetime supply of chocolate-covered espresso beans. This gets particularly bad when you factor in things like the user-level implementation of Microsoft's new security features.

I'm trying to get something done and it continues to interrupt me. Mac OS X stays out of the way. The only reason for all the information is that Microsoft wants to make sure that you have enough information to debug the problem. "Well, what were you doing?" "I was reading the 40th 'it's working tooltip." Ugggh.

mkrishnan
Jan 8, 2007, 12:10 PM
My problem is when you attach a network share (SMB/Windows in my case), then unplug the cable (usually this happens when i wake from sleep) without unmounting it (because i just close the laptop and don't want to have to worry about unmounting everything). Finder goes crazy if you click the little eject button then. It doesn't seem like something that should be hard to fix.

Does Windows really not give you static for doing this? I know that when USB volumes such as flash drives are unmounted in a dirty way like that, Wiindows throws a hissy fit. As it should... unfortunately, the way these technologies are designed, doing what you do is a really bad idea for volume integrity. You shouldn't be unplugging drives from your computer without unmounting them. I wouldn't mind seeing new technology that deals with this in a better way, but I don't think it's anything easy to fix with the current hardware.

dsnort
Jan 8, 2007, 12:10 PM
OSX feels much much slower,

I don't know about Vista, but son's brand new XP box is a dog compared to either of my Macs

I'm still scratching my head over why I can't sort by name with FireFox on the Mac.

I'm scratching my head over what it is you want to sort by name. Could you clarify?

IJ Reilly
Jan 8, 2007, 12:11 PM
Aw come on, you really do want to clean up your unused desktop shortcuts. You do, don't you? If not why not? :)

BuzWeaver
Jan 8, 2007, 12:17 PM
I don't know about Vista, but son's brand new XP box is a dog compared to either of my Macs



I'm scratching my head over what it is you want to sort by name. Could you clarify?

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=265800

TBi
Jan 8, 2007, 12:23 PM
Does Windows really not give you static for doing this? I know that when USB volumes such as flash drives are unmounted in a dirty way like that, Wiindows throws a hissy fit. As it should... unfortunately, the way these technologies are designed, doing what you do is a really bad idea for volume integrity. You shouldn't be unplugging drives from your computer without unmounting them. I wouldn't mind seeing new technology that deals with this in a better way, but I don't think it's anything easy to fix with the current hardware.

These are network shares, not physical drives that i pull out. Plus Windows throws a fit of warnings for USB removal but still works, OSX finder just hangs with a SBOD. Sometimes i have to hold the power button to force off the machine to get the finder back. It's insane in this day and age that OSX can't just time out the failed "dismount", throw an error and continue on knowing that the user knows best.

Actually talking about USB drives, I hate (usually in windows) how you can't force unmount them sometimes. I know nothing is accessing it, i'm finished with it but the OS still tells me it's in use. Well i don't care what the OS thinks and i don't care what is using it, just stop the drive anyway. I know best, i'm a l33t user! Instead you have to either reboot, or more usually just yank the thing out and risk data loss (although I use a lovely winternals program called Sync.exe to sync data to the drive before i yank it out).

mkrishnan
Jan 8, 2007, 12:32 PM
Aw come on, you really do want to clean up your unused desktop shortcuts. You do, don't you? If not why not? :)

Awww, you don't want to? Are you sure? How about if Paperclip™ cleans one up, you'll clean one up? You wouldn't want Paperclip™ to do all the work himself, would you? That would be just mean. So come on. Pitch in a hand. Join the social! :D

bousozoku
Jan 8, 2007, 01:26 PM
...
Actually talking about USB drives, I hate (usually in windows) how you can't force unmount them sometimes. I know nothing is accessing it, i'm finished with it but the OS still tells me it's in use. Well i don't care what the OS thinks and i don't care what is using it, just stop the drive anyway. I know best, i'm a l33t user! Instead you have to either reboot, or more usually just yank the thing out and risk data loss (although I use a lovely winternals program called Sync.exe to sync data to the drive before i yank it out).

What I've seen suggests that Windows is still using 26 year old DOS code to detect the insertion and removal of media. They apparently tried to fix the problem and that's why they refuse to let go of certain media but still let you pull out a CD-ROM without a notice. It seems completely haphazard to me.

I don't like the way Mac OS X handles certain detachments but overall, it's better to know that things are connected at all times. Networked devices should be a bit different. Who knows when a network will fail?

mkrishnan
Jan 8, 2007, 01:33 PM
TBi -- I'm sorry, too, I misunderstood you. When you were talking about pulling plugs, I got a bit confused. I understand what you mean now. Yes, definitely, as Bousozoku points out, network failures are unpredictable and that should be handled better. Although my memory is that if you just ignore the desktop icon, at least with AFS shares, it will just disappear on its own. But then I don't think the system locks up like you describe for AFS in any event.

IJ Reilly
Jan 8, 2007, 01:35 PM
Awww, you don't want to? Are you sure? How about if Paperclip™ cleans one up, you'll clean one up? You wouldn't want Paperclip™ to do all the work himself, would you? That would be just mean. So come on. Pitch in a hand. Join the social! :D

Makes me think of a new version of Windows, "Windows YM" (Your Mother): "When are you going to clean up your desktop? It's a pigsty!"

popelife
Jan 8, 2007, 02:22 PM
Just watched the first bit of Gates' keynote at CES. Decided to take a look to see what innovations Microsoft have for us. Seems only fair to get both sides of the story.

Gates gives a 15 minute speech about how the future will see the integration of PCs and servers and digital devices (snore), then hands over to some lackey whose job it is to demo Vista.

Lackey rattles off yet more boring sales spiel before finally showing the audience a few "tricks" in Vista.

One is the ability to go back to previous versions of a document. He restores an old version of a MS Word using some new utility (don't remember the name, just looked like a dialog box to me).

And as he restores it, two more nasty modal alerts come up which he quickly OK's to get them off the screen.

One probably says "You are about to restore an older version of this document. Are you sure?"

The other one probably says "Are you sure you're sure?"

Then this chap has the audacity to say "this is far better than Going Back In Time..."

Muted titters from the audience members that get it.

Don't expect to see the guy appearing at the Comedy Store any time soon.

Haven't watched the rest of the keynote yet, because it seems the Windows Media stream isn't actually a stream at all. I paused it to get something to eat, and when I came back it wouldn't continue playing. So I reloaded the page and tried dragging the playback cursor to roughly where I left off. Nope, that doesn't work. Evidently more of a dowload than a stream. Had to wait for the whole of the first 20 minutes to play thru all over again.

Jeez. I'm glad I use a Mac.

solvs
Jan 8, 2007, 11:11 PM
Networking got better in 10.4.8, but it still has a way to go. Leopard's supposed to be better, and some of the Finder issues will be fixed (some, not all). Never have a problem with disconnecting USB or FW stuff though. Windows used to throw a fit, but now I just get a dialog box in XP and Tiger. Click ok, it goes away. Never tried it in Vista, so if it has taken a step back, point for Leopard, which is the same as Tiger with disconnects.

With Networking, Windows seems to take awhile to notice disconnects (if it even does, sometimes you have to click on it before it can even tell) but yeah, OS X beachballs forever. Both need work IMO. Finder and Explorer have frozen and/or crashed on me thanks to wake from sleep and network disconnects.

Khryz
Jan 12, 2007, 07:39 PM
I just loved how nobody actually seemed like they wanted to clap, just that they felt required to do so after 3 seconds of awkward silence.

Chef Medeski
Jan 12, 2007, 08:48 PM
Biased against XP.

Mac OS X has become known for its consistency and within its last year for its inconsistency. Almost every app has different UI except for Finder and Safari. Really these kind of baised articles is what gets all of us discredited as fanboys, anything I say about Mac OS X instantly has to be taken witha pound of salt even if I'm being realistic. Yes... sometimes a codec or two is hard to find, but its not that bad = he has a problem every week.

valdore
Jan 12, 2007, 08:53 PM
I suppose it's a nice thing that OSX isn't tiered all to hell like Windows is. The tiering only gets worse with Vista.