PDA

View Full Version : Snow Leopard versus Windows 7


MacBytes
Aug 29, 2009, 08:21 AM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: Mac OS X
Link: Snow Leopard versus Windows 7 (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20090829092151)
Description:: none

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

jav6454
Aug 29, 2009, 09:43 AM
Unsurprisingly, many of Windows 7 features seem to come from former big cat names. Right now, both OSes have almost the same features. However, the difference between them is that, one of them was innovated to this point, the other was well, photocopied in many aspects (not all).

Hence, I like the innovated and also virus free one.

By the way, I forgot to mention Windows 7 is not leaner as Snow Leopard is. With Snow Leo I got back 6GB in space, where as my partition in BootCamp shows me that just Windows 7 takes up 14GB (minimum) in a fresh install. That's 4GB storage space up from what Vista had before I upgraded it.

niuniu
Aug 29, 2009, 09:51 AM
So many of the 12 features of W7 in that article seems to come from Tiger and Leopard, just implemented a bit differently.

NoSmokingBandit
Aug 29, 2009, 09:56 AM
So many of the 12 features of W7 in that article seems to come from Tiger and Leopard, just implemented a bit differently.

A lot of Leopards features were copied from windows, namely Times Machine. But i suppose thats acceptable because "apple maed it leik betterz!"

niuniu
Aug 29, 2009, 09:58 AM
A lot of Leopards features were copied from windows, namely Times Machine. But i suppose thats acceptable because "apple maed it leik betterz!"

A lot? What else then?

mags631
Aug 29, 2009, 10:00 AM
A lot of Leopards features were copied from windows, namely Times Machine. But i suppose thats acceptable because "apple maed it leik betterz!"

Did not know that about Time Machine -- care to explain or post a link?

jav6454
Aug 29, 2009, 10:04 AM
A lot of Leopards features were copied from windows, namely Times Machine. But i suppose thats acceptable because "apple maed it leik betterz!"

Where in Windows do you find a Time Machine solution?

diamond.g
Aug 29, 2009, 10:22 AM
Where in Windows do you find a Time Machine solution?

I think they were implying that VSS was in Windows before TM. Although I don't consider VSS to be a similar solution. Mainly because VSS is incremental snapshots whereas TM is just a straight copy of the files that have change with hardlinks to those that haven't.

jaw04005
Aug 29, 2009, 10:23 AM
Where in Windows do you find a Time Machine solution?

You don't. What he's referring to is Previous Versions (or Shadow Copy or Volume Snapshot Service or VSS), a business/server backup feature that exists in Windows Vista Business and Ultimate. It was introduced with Server 2003.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Previous_Versions

Windows enthusiasts like to point to Previous Versions as the Microsoft equivalent of Time Machine. However, Microsoft does not consider it a consumer feature. That's why it doesn't ship it with Home Premium or Basic. The proper comparison would be between Windows Backup and Apple's Time Machine.

Windows Backup and System Restore both use Previous Versions to function.

jav6454
Aug 29, 2009, 11:05 AM
You don't. What he's referring to is Previous Versions (or Shadow Copy or Volume Snapshot Service or VSS), a business/server backup feature that exists in Windows Vista Business and Ultimate. It was introduced with Server 2003.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Previous_Versions

Windows enthusiasts like to point to Previous Versions as the Microsoft equivalent of Time Machine. However, Microsoft does not consider it a consumer feature. That's why it doesn't ship it with Home Premium or Basic. The proper comparison would be between Windows Backup and Apple's Time Machine.

Windows Backup and System Restore both use Previous Versions to function.

Thanks for that read. Yet, that doesn't mean NoSmokingBandit can come in and troll like that (no proof what naught).

brop52
Aug 29, 2009, 11:13 AM
Apple copied a Time Machine equivalent? I haven't heard that before. Especially considering such a complete solution doesn't exist in Windows.

nick9191
Aug 29, 2009, 11:15 AM
A lot of Leopards features were copied from windows, namely Times Machine. But i suppose thats acceptable because "apple maed it leik betterz!"
At least they actually made it better, instead of making it far, far worse (Flip 3D, Windows Sidebar, Start Menu search box).

FightTheFuture
Aug 29, 2009, 01:30 PM
don't feed the troll guys. the logic behind their explanations usually compare the functionality of winamp to iTunes.

i had a photoshop class recently where everyone kept whining that the machines didn't use windows. even after using the machines for 8 weeks, they still complained at the end of the class. it just shows you how close minded we've become where we are no longer afraid to learn something new, but be completely opposed to it.

my prius uses a variable transmission. i didn't complain that i had to use something new or different. i embraced the difference and adapted.

anyway - it's always great to see side by side screenshots like this. i haven't used windows since xp so i never had a chance to mess around with vista. the system requirement (http://windows.microsoft.com/systemrequirements)s for windows 7 are very low-end so it really puts the pressure on Apple, since all of the intel machines that run Snow Leopard are 3 years old at 1.5GHz Core Solo. all of my macs are PPC but SL really urges me to upgrade.

Snow Leopard may be the most important upgrade for the mac yet - but if people embrace Windows 7 it'll change how we look at the OS landscape completely.

ravensfan55
Aug 29, 2009, 01:44 PM
I had previously used Vista for 2+ years before I got my MBP. I made a Boot Camp partition for 7, installed it, and played with it for a while. It has nothing big, just a slightly changed GUI and some revamped features. I ended up deleting the partition and making an XP partition since I need to use a few Autodesk programs that are Windows-only, and I'd rather not hassle with any glitches in Windows 7.

thejadedmonkey
Aug 29, 2009, 01:54 PM
A lot? What else then?

How about the whole expose per program? I think Windows 7 has a feature (which was publicly unveiled before WWDC) where you can place your mouse over a running program and see all of the open windows from that program.

NT1440
Aug 29, 2009, 02:01 PM
Snow Leopard may be the most important upgrade for the mac yet - but if people embrace Windows 7 it'll change how we look at the OS landscape completely.

Why exactly? It seems like windows will just gain back a bit of credibility. There is nothing game changing about SL or 7.

The next set of OS's though, watch out, neither company can have another refinement OS immediatly after this round.

bobsentell
Aug 29, 2009, 02:37 PM
I love how you fanboys assume everything Microsoft does must be because they copied Apple. Both of these companies have been working on these OS's for years. These operating systems are nothing but the result of market research.

As for the "much maligned" Vista, it has 21% market share compared to Mac OS's 7%. True while Vista wasn't as popular as XP (which has been out for 8freaking years), it appears to be more popular than the "much ignored" Mac OS.

Brien
Aug 29, 2009, 02:53 PM
Man, OS X and Windows are looking more similar than I remember.

yettimillan
Aug 29, 2009, 02:59 PM
I know one big difference.

Windows comes pre loaded with viruses, thats what secretly screws the system up!!!

FightTheFuture
Aug 29, 2009, 03:01 PM
Why exactly? It seems like windows will just gain back a bit of credibility. There is nothing game changing about SL or 7.i think the way to look at it, is that Snow Leopard is the most complete iteration of osx. as if this is what 10.0 was supposed to be - a fully optimized overhaul without the legacy code of os9 or ppc, with all of the features leading up to it. whereas windows 7 is the 'true' successor of xp. that's how i see it - then again i might just be blowing smoke. :o

diamond.g
Aug 29, 2009, 03:47 PM
I had previously used Vista for 2+ years before I got my MBP. I made a Boot Camp partition for 7, installed it, and played with it for a while. It has nothing big, just a slightly changed GUI and some revamped features. I ended up deleting the partition and making an XP partition since I need to use a few Autodesk programs that are Windows-only, and I'd rather not hassle with any glitches in Windows 7.

Just a note, with Win7 Ultimate/Pro/Enterprise actually has a mode that runs XP as a vm (think classic mode) and it allows you to run XP programs much like how Parallels Coherence works.

shadow1
Aug 29, 2009, 03:55 PM
My view is the core internals of windows 7 and especially Vista is very poor. If you compare any task with the same computer with Vista Mac OSX is faster and smoother. To fix Windows you need to start afresh.

MacMonster1985
Aug 29, 2009, 04:48 PM
My view is the core internals of windows 7 and especially Vista is very poor. If you compare any task with the same computer with Vista Mac OSX is faster and smoother. To fix Windows you need to start afresh.

Are you sure about that? Someone in the photoshop benchmark thread in the mac pro subforum posted running times for some photoshop and handbrake benchmarks and the same operation was much faster in Vista than on OSX.

Speedy2
Aug 29, 2009, 04:50 PM
As for the "much maligned" Vista, it has 21% market share compared to Mac OS's 7%. True while Vista wasn't as popular as XP (which has been out for 8freaking years), it appears to be more popular than the "much ignored" Mac OS.

If you consider that Vista came with each and every PC in the last 2.5 years that is an abysmal number. Did you know that Microsoft counts corporate XP licenses that were sold in the last 2.5 years as Vista licenses because you always get Vista along with XP, even if you didn't want it and will never use it.

And we all (apart from you) know that market share isn't that important when those 7% are the share with the most profitability. Ask Dell.

MacMonster1985
Aug 29, 2009, 04:56 PM
Ask Dell.
Not sure what Dell has anything to do with it considering we are talking about OS's and MS probably has quite a high margin on their offerings.

macUser2007
Aug 29, 2009, 07:39 PM
Frankly, most of the comments against Windows 7 are silly.

I use Mac OS for daily computing, but had to go to Vista for HTPC (OS X was unusable for a decent HTPC).

I do prefer OS X for general use, and Snow Leopard is a nice evolutionary improvement. It is a very elegant system (more elegant than Window 7).

But, Windows 7 is good. And for that matter, Vista is perfectly fine, too. I still think that for HTPC, Windows is a considerably better choice than Mac OS.

I do miss a few things from Windows on my Macs: System Restore is one. The ability to uninstall applications is another.

simsandwhich
Aug 29, 2009, 08:31 PM
By the way, I forgot to mention Windows 7 is not leaner as Snow Leopard is. With Snow Leo I got back 6GB in space, where as my partition in BootCamp shows me that just Windows 7 takes up 14GB (minimum) in a fresh install. That's 4GB storage space up from what Vista had before I upgraded it.
Leaner as that's the way Apple decided to go. If Microsoft were to dedicate that much time on leaning up Windows, they too could go that route. But they decided on fixing the horrible mistake that was Vista...

But hey, if there wasn't a Vista there wouldn't be a Windows 7 :)

damnyooneek
Aug 29, 2009, 11:48 PM
Windows 7 is much better than Vista but blue screened on me twice in the last 2 weeks.

Pika
Aug 30, 2009, 12:24 AM
Windows 7 is much better than Vista but blue screened on me twice in the last 2 weeks.

Windows XP is better then Windows 7

jettredmont
Aug 30, 2009, 01:08 AM
How about the whole expose per program? I think Windows 7 has a feature (which was publicly unveiled before WWDC) where you can place your mouse over a running program and see all of the open windows from that program.

Ummm ... yeah, kind of like the single-app Expose mode that Apple didn't give us until ... Tiger.

FWIW, I have Windows 7 here (developer with a MSDN account); the per-app "expose" mode is nowhere near as useful as real Expose. On the other hand, it does fix the issue of Expose being useless when you have dozens of windows with just text in them which end up being indistinguishable from one another when shrunk down to all fit on the same screen (but, honestly, when I'm working in a dozen or more text windows I'd rather identify them in an alphabetically-sorted Window menu list than try to pick the right one out of a graphical line-up).

FightTheFuture
Aug 30, 2009, 01:36 AM
Ummm ... yeah, kind of like the single-app Expose mode that Apple didn't give us until ... Tiger.this was actually expose in OSX 10.3 Panther (2003).
If Microsoft were to dedicate that much time on leaning up Windows, they too could go that route.microsoft has to support as much legacy code as possible, or they risk not only alienating their consumer base but their corporate base as well. apple, on the other hand will drastically cut features to push trends forward at consumer protest, ie... Firewire 400, Express Card Slot.

Michael CM1
Aug 30, 2009, 02:07 AM
Why can't Microsoft just go fix the GUI? Take a look at Vista/7 screenshots and see how bloody big everything is. I mean each window has a border within a border within a border within...

One of my favorite things about Mac OS is how there isn't so much room wasted trying to put a huge, massive icon next to everything. I look up at the bar above me in Safari and notice how simple everything is in the toolbar. All of the buttons are pretty self-explanatory and so I'm not wasting desktop space on text telling me that the left arrow means back. Duh. Don't even get me started on the genius of the menu bar always being at the top and switching between apps instead of the Windows way of replicating that in EVERY window. You can only use one menu bar at a time, so Apple saves another mass of space with that.

Then of course you don't have 15,000 add-on toolbars in Safari or Firefox (that I know of in FF), whereas IE 7/8 are nothing but add-on toolbars. I think there are 70 rows of them on my mom's computer. I honestly can't find a damn thing in there a lot of the time.

If Microsoft wants to copy Apple, they should REALLY COPY APPLE. I'm pretty sure that XP was much closer to the minimalistic ways of Mac OS than Vista, which is also why I'm pretty sure I about puked when setting up my mom's Dell.

One last thing that I can't re-iterate enough: Microsoft would do well to start with Windows 8 right now and dump support for any pre-XP software. Stop trying to run every crappy application ever written for Windows. Apple saved GIGABYTES of space doing something similar with PPC support.

gothamm
Aug 30, 2009, 03:13 AM
Frankly, most of the comments against Windows 7 are silly.

I use Mac OS for daily computing, but had to go to Vista for HTPC (OS X was unusable for a decent HTPC).

I do prefer OS X for general use, and Snow Leopard is a nice evolutionary improvement. It is a very elegant system (more elegant than Window 7).

But, Windows 7 is good. And for that matter, Vista is perfectly fine, too. I still think that for HTPC, Windows is a considerably better choice than Mac OS.

I do miss a few things from Windows on my Macs: System Restore is one. The ability to uninstall applications is another.

+1

DMann
Aug 30, 2009, 04:17 AM
Windows XP is better then Windows 7XP feels faster, and more responsive - W7 feels all the more sluggish after using SL. W7 is such a click intensive environment, sporting a Fisher Price GUI, slow to start up, slower to shut down, or wake up, and one still can't manage one's own files on one's own Hard Drive. Some windows open too small for their contents (control panel) while others open unnecessarily to full-screen by default.(Microsoft Office) Microsoft seems to be trying to make everything look like it is in a web browser, even when the interface is inappropriate. A design-by-committee potpourri - Arby's serves up a more refined user experience.


http://img128.imageshack.us/img128/3752/windows76519controlpaneuu6.jpg

Povilas
Aug 30, 2009, 06:18 AM
+1

+1? For what? For not making sense? Good job ...

BongoBanger
Aug 30, 2009, 08:03 AM
Unsurprisingly, many of Windows 7 features seem to come from former big cat names. Right now, both OSes have almost the same features. However, the difference between them is that, one of them was innovated to this point, the other was well, photocopied in many aspects (not all).

Sure. You could also argue that Snow Leopard is copying Windows by going fully 64 bit but that would be silly too.

Hence, I like the innovated and also virus free one.

Which applies to both unless you can point out the viruses that affect W7 - and let's not confuse worms and trojans which require user intervention because they can hit any OS.

Reading some of the comments here just makes me shake my head. Windows 7 and Snow Leopard are both fine operating systems. Which one you use will be down to personal preference and needs.

Also anyone who thinks XP is better than Windows 7 is delusional. Unless you have mission critical applications that run under XP you should be looking to get rid of it as soon as possible.

Rodimus Prime
Aug 30, 2009, 11:11 AM
Windows 7 is much better than Vista but blue screened on me twice in the last 2 weeks.

Sounds like you are having hardware issues. Windows only blue screens now when it is having hardware issues or something hardware wise screws up. On XP I was having blue screen issues when my graphic card was failing. Replace it and the next time I ran into issues was when one of my DVD drives was failing and then I disconnected it.

Since then the only blue screen issues I have had have been was when I was messing around of the areas of the OS that I should not of been messing with.

Please note my computer is over 5 years old, the DVD drive lasted 4 years and was a cheap one back when I got it. The graphic card fan was failing and then got a power surge that finished it off.

parapup
Aug 30, 2009, 11:39 AM
By the way, I forgot to mention Windows 7 is not leaner as Snow Leopard is. With Snow Leo I got back 6GB in space, where as my partition in BootCamp shows me that just Windows 7 takes up 14GB (minimum) in a fresh install. That's 4GB storage space up from what Vista had before I upgraded it.

That's because you don't understand how Windows deals with file system space - it reserves a good % of space for what is called "Shadow Storage" which is counted as used space but really is freed up when real space is required for user data.

You can resize that shadow storage to some low number or totally disable it. On top of that if you enable file compression (on the fly decompression - it just works in the background) - you will get back most of your space and it will be as lean as you want it to be - Free utility condenses Windows Vista from 15GB to 1.4GB (http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9060378/Free_utility_condenses_Windows_Vista_from_15GB_to_1.4GB)

chris200x9
Aug 30, 2009, 11:55 AM
OEM's install windows with pre loaded with crapware, thats what secretly screws the system up!!!

fixed that for you ;)

ct2k7
Aug 30, 2009, 12:49 PM
I haven't had a bluescreen on Windows 7, had one on Vista when I accidentally pulled out my memory stick... reaching for something else :(.

7 took under 10GB of space for me, around 5-7 iirc.

The last time I had a virus was on XP.

Currently 7 is faster than XP.

Both Windows 7 and OS X are not competitors in their own right, but they competitors in others, they have different goals to achieve, with different markets.

StarRaider
Aug 30, 2009, 12:50 PM
After all the Wintel controversy of years ago, Apple has finally put the last nail in the coffin and sold itself to the Intel Devil. Ha, Ha. What a world. By the way I use both Windows and Mac and I don't see why all the jealousy and fighting, why not have the best of both worlds. Sure the Mac is beautiful and extremely stable, almost virus free, etc, on the other hand Windows has a zillion more programs, go figure, and if you look carefully Apple did also steal many features from Windows in the MAc OS X. I guess the stealing game works both ways, but why not, if the competition is going to make either platform a better one.

NT1440
Aug 30, 2009, 12:54 PM
<snip> A design-by-committee potpourri - Arby's serves up a more refined user experience.



Now, I will NOT sit here and have you lie to us like that. Arby's is absolutely terrible :p.

armoguy94
Aug 30, 2009, 12:57 PM
fixed that for you ;)

oem's don't install crapware.

TuffLuffJimmy
Aug 30, 2009, 12:58 PM
How about the whole expose per program? I think Windows 7 has a feature (which was publicly unveiled before WWDC) where you can place your mouse over a running program and see all of the open windows from that program.

That's been there since Exposť was introduced. This is nothing new in Snow Leopard.

NT1440
Aug 30, 2009, 01:06 PM
oem's don't install crapware.

If my understanding of the label OEM is correct, what are you talking about?

Ever fire up a brand new Dell or Gateway? I have, one a week ago and the gateway two days ago. Tons of trialware, and the worst of the worst as far as im concerned, the 60 day trials of both Norton and Office.

Thats as crap as crapware gets in my book

bruinsrme
Aug 30, 2009, 01:09 PM
If my understanding of the label OEM is correct, what are you talking about?

Ever fire up a brand new Dell or Gateway? I have, one a week ago and the gateway two days ago. Tons of trialware, and the worst of the worst as far as im concerned, the 60 day trials of both Norton and Office.

Thats as crap as crapware gets in my book

yes very recently to 2 dells, Deleted two programs Antivirus and MS office.

NT1440
Aug 30, 2009, 01:11 PM
yes very recently to 2 dells, Deleted two programs Antivirus and MS office.

what about the trialwares hidden all about the system?

DMann
Aug 30, 2009, 01:15 PM
oem's don't install crapware.This is true, it materializes virally through Wi-Fi connections and security updates.

bruinsrme
Aug 30, 2009, 01:19 PM
Windows XP is better then Windows 7

How so?

bruinsrme
Aug 30, 2009, 01:28 PM
what about the trialwares hidden all about the system?

Oh yeah those:rolleyes:

What are you talking about? Are they hidden and only pop up when the moon aligns with mars.
Do you have some program names and I will scan my computers for those programs..

DMann
Aug 30, 2009, 01:31 PM
Now, I will NOT sit here and have you lie to us like that. Arby's is absolutely terrible :p.Yet, still....

NT1440
Aug 30, 2009, 01:34 PM
Oh yeah those:rolleyes:

What are you talking about? Are they hidden and only pop up when the moon aligns with mars.
Do you have some program names and I will scan my computers for those programs..

I dont have any of those computers at my disposal currently, but a few things such as trialware games (polar bowler comes to mind) are what makes me HATE setting up peoples new computers for them. Cleaning out all the crap is what takes the majority of the time, rather than the setup itself.

I did notice considerably less on the Dell, but the Gateway, my god, you couldn't start the system without at least 5 things popping up asking you to register for this, try a free trial of this, set up this useless thing, etc etc

youpey
Aug 30, 2009, 01:40 PM
back when i used a pc, i would format the computer and just install windows no bloatware on my old pc's

its nice that mac doesnt have this garbage

PinkyMacGodess
Aug 31, 2009, 10:58 AM
You don't. What he's referring to is Previous Versions (or Shadow Copy or Volume Snapshot Service or VSS), a business/server backup feature that exists in Windows Vista Business and Ultimate. It was introduced with Server 2003.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Previous_Versions

Windows enthusiasts like to point to Previous Versions as the Microsoft equivalent of Time Machine. However, Microsoft does not consider it a consumer feature. That's why it doesn't ship it with Home Premium or Basic. The proper comparison would be between Windows Backup and Apple's Time Machine.

Windows Backup and System Restore both use Previous Versions to function.

But 'previous versions' isn't 'Time Machine' at all... Close but not the same. It encourages people to put their 'previous versions' on the same drive. How much sense does that make?

If anything, Time Machine is what VSS should have been...

PinkyMacGodess
Aug 31, 2009, 11:01 AM
I dont have any of those computers at my disposal currently, but a few things such as trialware games (polar bowler comes to mind) are what makes me HATE setting up peoples new computers for them. Cleaning out all the crap is what takes the majority of the time, rather than the setup itself.

I did notice considerably less on the Dell, but the Gateway, my god, you couldn't start the system without at least 5 things popping up asking you to register for this, try a free trial of this, set up this useless thing, etc etc

We wipe new systems and reinstall just Windows because of the crap that these companies push onto people. HP's and Dell's 'helpful' programs that mung things up. BLEECH! Toss the crap!

MagnusVonMagnum
Aug 31, 2009, 12:00 PM
Unsurprisingly, many of Windows 7 features seem to come from former big cat names. Right now, both OSes have almost the same features. However, the difference between them is that, one of them was innovated to this point, the other was well, photocopied in many aspects (not all).

Hence, I like the innovated and also virus free one.


I like the one that plays hundreds, even thousands of games, has hardware accelerated video support for all major GPUs and has support for Blu-Ray HD movies. In other words, the OS that has full support for state-of-the-art of entertainment, not 10 year old DVDs and sub-DVD quality MP4 files. I mean such an OS would be the state-of-the-art one and the one that only handles 10+ year old technology would the out-of-date and behind the times one, right? Isn't that only logical? That state-of-the-art operating system is OS X, right??? :confused:

SnowLeopard2008
Aug 31, 2009, 12:04 PM
We wipe new systems and reinstall just Windows because of the crap that these companies push onto people. HP's and Dell's 'helpful' programs that mung things up. BLEECH! Toss the crap!

Problem is, companies don't include OS restore disks without those said programs. And sometimes, there's no disk at all. Dell, for example, uses a recovery partition and Norton Ghost to "reinstall" the OS. Once restored, it still contains the crapware from Day 1. If your HD goes poof! or decides to pass into HD Heaven, you're screwed. My Mom's Dell is a perfect example. Her HD died after 5 years but luckily I had an XP disc lying around.

Apple? Older discs have Office/iWork trials on them, but you can choose not to install those in the installer.

alent1234
Aug 31, 2009, 12:18 PM
you can get plain OS CD's from Dell. my Inspiron from 5 years ago gave the option to burn it once and i had Dell send me a copy as well. Nice thing is they are customized just enough that they come with all the drivers for the laptop on the CD.

My HP Compaq 8510p laptop came with plain OS DVDs as well

i tried running it with the crap HP software and hated it. i'm currently running Windows 7 x64 on it. good speed, stable and i don't see a reason to pay a premium Mac price. my iphone works on it. itunes works on it. if i decide i want blu-ray, i just buy the drive and watch the movies. no need to beg Steve Jobs to let me do it

Unsurprisingly, many of Windows 7 features seem to come from former big cat names. Right now, both OSes have almost the same features. However, the difference between them is that, one of them was innovated to this point, the other was well, photocopied in many aspects (not all).

Hence, I like the innovated and also virus free one.

By the way, I forgot to mention Windows 7 is not leaner as Snow Leopard is. With Snow Leo I got back 6GB in space, where as my partition in BootCamp shows me that just Windows 7 takes up 14GB (minimum) in a fresh install. That's 4GB storage space up from what Vista had before I upgraded it.

starting with Vista, WIndows now puts all the installation files on your hard drive so that if you need to add a feature you don't need to find your disc. last i read that SL got rid of some features and you have to install them off the DVD.

and Apple decided to join the hard drive makers and lie about hard drive space in SL so most of that space is imaginary

mabaker
Sep 1, 2009, 01:50 AM
Windows 7 is a most welcome improvement BUT what every knowledgeable user will notice, especially one that goes beyond the reviews of Windows Site and CNET and the likes, that the more you dig into the submenus of Windows 7/Vista the more it becomes apparent that its menu structure and the menu clutter is just all the same taken from Windows XP and earlier.

Of course any speed improvement is nice. And Windows 7 = definitely speed improvement BUT hardly anyone is noticing the fact that MS is competing against its own Windows XP in terms of speed... The users want to have a speedy snappiness but they will get it only with Snow Leopard and Windows 7 is just merely reverting to Windows XP in a nice shell.

All the reviews around the net WANT desperately to love Windows 7 but it's just that... Windows after all. Solid and it grows bigger with every application you install.

BongoBanger
Sep 1, 2009, 03:37 AM
Windows 7 is a most welcome improvement BUT what every knowledgeable user will notice, especially one that goes beyond the reviews of Windows Site and CNET and the likes, that the more you dig into the submenus of Windows 7/Vista the more it becomes apparent that its menu structure and the menu clutter is just all the same taken from Windows XP and earlier.

Of course any speed improvement is nice. And Windows 7 = definitely speed improvement BUT hardly anyone is noticing the fact that MS is competing against its own Windows XP in terms of speed... The users want to have a speedy snappiness but they will get it only with Snow Leopard and Windows 7 is just merely reverting to Windows XP in a nice shell.

All the reviews around the net WANT desperately to love Windows 7 but it's just that... Windows after all. Solid and it grows bigger with every application you install.

I'm sorry. I do know what I'm talking about and, quite frankly, your post is the biggest load of nonsense I've read for some time.

Windows 7 is nothing like XP - which is horrible - and doesn't even share the same basic kernel. Neither does W7 have a bigger installation footprint than Vista.

You really need to understand what you're talking about before posting.

DMann
Sep 1, 2009, 03:43 AM
Windows 7 is a most welcome improvement BUT what every knowledgeable user will notice, especially one that goes beyond the reviews of Windows Site and CNET and the likes, that the more you dig into the submenus of Windows 7/Vista the more it becomes apparent that its menu structure and the menu clutter is just all the same taken from Windows XP and earlier.

Of course any speed improvement is nice. And Windows 7 = definitely speed improvement BUT hardly anyone is noticing the fact that MS is competing against its own Windows XP in terms of speed... The users want to have a speedy snappiness but they will get it only with Snow Leopard and Windows 7 is just merely reverting to Windows XP in a nice shell.

All the reviews around the net WANT desperately to love Windows 7 but it's just that... Windows after all. Solid and it grows bigger with every application you install.+1+1+1

Not to mention the enormou$ incentive$ M$ front$, across the board, for favorable reviews.

DMann
Sep 1, 2009, 03:58 AM
I'm sorry. I do know what I'm talking about and, quite frankly, your post is the biggest load of nonsense I've read for some time.

Windows 7 is nothing like XP - which is horrible - and doesn't even share the same basic kernel. Neither does W7 have a bigger installation footprint than Vista.

You really need to understand what you're talking about before posting.FYI, mabaker neither mentioned the kernel, nor the installation footprint. He described the archaic menu structure and clutter, which happen to be true.

chrono1081
Sep 1, 2009, 05:37 AM
A lot of Leopards features were copied from windows, namely Times Machine. But i suppose thats acceptable because "apple maed it leik betterz!"

I really hope your being sarcastic cause thats completely false.

BongoBanger
Sep 1, 2009, 06:13 AM
FYI, mabaker neither mentioned the kernel, nor the installation footprint. He described the archaic menu structure and clutter, which happen to be true.

No, he states that "Windows 7 is just merely reverting to XP in a nice shell" which implies it's moving back to that horrible OS which clearly it isn't.

The point about the installation size is that W7 is less cluttered than Vista just as Snow Leopard is less cluttered than Leopard and why they should both be viewed as streamlined evolutions of the relevant previous OS.


Not to mention the enormou$ incentive$ M$ front$, across the board, for favorable reviews.

Or maybe it actually is that good. Time will tell.

chrono1081
Sep 1, 2009, 06:26 AM
Oh yeah those:rolleyes:

What are you talking about? Are they hidden and only pop up when the moon aligns with mars.
Do you have some program names and I will scan my computers for those programs..

Omg for real? Dell's have them EVERYWHERE.

Trust me I just unpacked about 150 of them for our company. Its rare if I turn them on I usually reimage them as soon as they get here with the standard image our company uses for that model.

But, if you let them boot into windows before reimaging they have all kinds of crap installed.

rekhyt
Sep 1, 2009, 06:40 AM
We wipe new systems and reinstall just Windows because of the crap that these companies push onto people. HP's and Dell's 'helpful' programs that mung things up. BLEECH! Toss the crap!

Yeah. I was really disappointed that I couldn't upgrade from the Beta to the RC. And then to the RTM/"official version". :\

Rodimus Prime
Sep 1, 2009, 07:58 AM
I'm sorry. I do know what I'm talking about and, quite frankly, your post is the biggest load of nonsense I've read for some time.

Windows 7 is nothing like XP - which is horrible - and doesn't even share the same basic kernel. Neither does W7 have a bigger installation footprint than Vista.

You really need to understand what you're talking about before posting.

Something I learned about this site is many memebers do not care about the truth. All they see is Windows = crap and bash every chance they get.

Comon lies and false statements I see is "Windows always crashes" "Windows always gets viruses" and so on.

Hell they love to bash Vista. Vista is not as bad as everyone says it is. At launch it was a huge mess but after SP1 and some others it really was cleaned up. Most of Vista problems related to compatibility errors which since well 3rd parties have caught up. W7 is more the next step and a huge improvement. Vista was nothing more than a stepping stone linking windows 7 to XP. If windows 7 came out first it would be the same problems as vista but since vista cleaned all that up and took the heat windows 7 is going to be a lot better.

I have dug into W7 a little bit and dug into vista more. Slight learning curve from XP but many things are a huge improvement. The largest one I found was networking. XP is well old and on networking and wireless networking it is being demanded to do things it was never designed to handle.

JessicaD
Sep 1, 2009, 06:13 PM
Damnyooneek,

Microsoft does have an official Windows 7 RC Support Forum located here http://tinyurl.com/9fhdl5 . It is supported by product specialists as well as engineers and support teams. You may want to check the threads there for additional support with the blue screen issues you briefly mentioned.

Jessica
Microsoft Windows Client Team

contoursvt
Sep 2, 2009, 05:05 PM
Its funny that things like this always get glossed over.

Are you sure about that? Someone in the photoshop benchmark thread in the mac pro subforum posted running times for some photoshop and handbrake benchmarks and the same operation was much faster in Vista than on OSX.

DMann
Sep 4, 2009, 01:28 PM
No, he states that "Windows 7 is just merely reverting to XP in a nice shell" which implies it's moving back to that horrible OS which clearly it isn't.

The point about the installation size is that W7 is less cluttered than Vista just as Snow Leopard is less cluttered than Leopard and why they should both be viewed as streamlined evolutions of the relevant previous OS.Again, he neither mentioned the kernel, nor did he mention the installation size, which happens to outweigh SL significantly. He described the archaic menu structure and clutter of Windows, pointing out that the menu structure and menu clutter of both Vista and W7 are similar in nature to that of its predecessor, which happens to be accurate. Attempting to draw parallels to the streamlining of SL and the neutering of W7 does not address the issue here. Windows 7 is a most welcome improvement BUT what every knowledgeable user will notice, especially one that goes beyond the reviews of Windows Site and CNET and the likes, that the more you dig into the submenus of Windows 7/Vista the more it becomes apparent that its menu structure and the menu clutter is just all the same taken from Windows XP and earlier.

Of course any speed improvement is nice. And Windows 7 = definitely speed improvement BUT hardly anyone is noticing the fact that MS is competing against its own Windows XP in terms of speed... The users want to have a speedy snappiness but they will get it only with Snow Leopard and Windows 7 is just merely reverting to Windows XP in a nice shell.

All the reviews around the net WANT desperately to love Windows 7 but it's just that... Windows after all. Solid and it grows bigger with every application you install.

clevin
Sep 4, 2009, 04:04 PM
use whatever you like, there is no change in the situation. OSX still doesn't support as many games, still doesn't support as many hardwares, still doesn't support as many peripherals. still has 5% market share, still has less viruses, still attached to expensive macs.

what changed? I dont see any.

Hammy :)
Sep 4, 2009, 05:29 PM
i decided to give windows 7 a good testing, and quit using OSX for around 2 months, it was hard ;)

windows 7 certainly isnt a BAD os, much better than vista, however if i had to use it on a daily basis i would prefer xp.

win7 isnt as stable as i have liked it to be, or as safe, and even with anti virus software, i got a scareware.

i do like the new look of windows 7, it isnt much different, but the new icons and all windows collapsing into one icon reminded me of expose.

however in my opinion mac OSX is still the best out there.
:apple:

Kristenn
Sep 4, 2009, 06:09 PM
use whatever you like, there is no change in the situation. OSX still doesn't support as many games, still doesn't support as many hardwares, still doesn't support as many peripherals. still has 5% market share, still has less viruses, still attached to expensive macs.

what changed? I dont see any.

5%? More like 8 or 9... maybe 10%

In fact I think it goes something like this.

Windows 89%
Mac OS X 10%
Linux 1%

I still think Mac OS X has 7% rather then 10... but Im not sure. I do know it has more then 5%.

I never was a big gamer myself. I have better things to do with my computers I guess. But I always liked consoles better anyway

FightTheFuture
Sep 4, 2009, 11:26 PM
Its funny that things like this always get glossed over.noone really cares if photoshop can render a gaussian blur 0.25 seconds faster on vista then osx. if benchmark performance mattered to the end user then macs wouldn't be selling as well as they are.

Compile 'em all
Sep 4, 2009, 11:29 PM
Unsurprisingly, many of Windows 7 features seem to come from former big cat names. Right now, both OSes have almost the same features.

This must be a joke.

People serious about software use anything but Windows.

Gatteau
Sep 4, 2009, 11:34 PM
I still think that for HTPC, Windows is a considerably better choice than Mac OS.

I certainly do think the same.