PDA

View Full Version : Windows 7 vs. Snow Leopard


Pages : [1] 2

MacBytes
Oct 22, 2009, 09:00 AM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: Videos
Link: Windows 7 vs. Snow Leopard (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20091022100000)
Description:: none

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

superted666
Oct 22, 2009, 10:16 AM
Dont agree with all the points but seems fair enough in overall scoring.
Windows has really caught apple up in some areas of OS design but i still think OSX has the edge.

Hopefully snow leopard is a base and 10.7 is a year away and will blow W7 away!

thejadedmonkey
Oct 22, 2009, 10:27 AM
I was surprised they game Windows the better score for stability, but then I thought about how many beach-balls I get in OS X, and how smooth Windows 7 runs, and I'm just shocked that Apple let Microsoft beat them.

KingYaba
Oct 22, 2009, 10:43 AM
Windows 7 KDE edition, you mean.

SeattleMoose
Oct 22, 2009, 10:45 AM
Well, Apple had better step up their QC. They have been getting away with releasing buggy SW lately. Ironic, that MS is now releasing relatively bug free SW and a better overall user experience.

MS "just works".....:eek:

andylyon
Oct 22, 2009, 10:47 AM
I can't believe he said Windows was more fun to use! :eek:

urbanslaughter
Oct 22, 2009, 11:13 AM
From reading all these comments I was under the impression that Windows had won. Not the case. Could someone please tell me how they could possibly keep from giving Snow Leopard the edge in design???:eek:

CrackedButter
Oct 22, 2009, 11:32 AM
What a dumbed down piece of reporting.

Eidorian
Oct 22, 2009, 11:34 AM
Windows 7 is getting good reviews all around.

LaDirection
Oct 22, 2009, 12:10 PM
Windows 7 is getting good reviews all around.

So did Vista the first week it came out.

andylyon
Oct 22, 2009, 12:19 PM
So did Vista the first week it came out.

Did it? I can't remember any good thorough reviews of Vista.

Eidorian
Oct 22, 2009, 12:23 PM
Did it? I can't remember any good thorough reviews of Vista.Reviews are being ludicrously thorough, as always, for Windows 7 and it's getting good reviews. :rolleyes:

someone28624
Oct 22, 2009, 01:07 PM
I'm very curious to try 7. I wonder when it will be compatible with Boot Camp.

Eidorian
Oct 22, 2009, 01:08 PM
I'm very curious to try 7. I wonder when it will be compatible with Boot Camp.What's stopping you from trying it right now?

Unprocessed1
Oct 22, 2009, 02:08 PM
What's stopping you from trying it right now?

There is no OFFICIAL support for Windows 7 right now for bootcamp. However, I'm sure you can get it to work without a problem. Note though that W7 will only work on Intel macs, not the older generations.

Parallels and VM will support W7 without a problem.

roadbloc
Oct 22, 2009, 03:16 PM
hmmm... windows 7 vs snow leopard.

I never thought id say this, but its close. I've just had a play wi windows 7 on my mate's laptop... some of the features are good.

It entirely depends on what you want from a computer. I want a computer that "just works" and os x is designed to do that. It runs my programs, it has some cool features, it does it's job, looks rather cool and does the what i want it to quickly. Thats why os x is good for me.

My mate likes to mess around with his themes, play games, and do all sorts of rubbish that i consider a waste of time with his laptop. I just do my music production, browse the web, play music and movies.

In my opinion, os x still has the edge. Despite windows overtaking osx in new features, we all know windows copied a lot of osx's features previously, windows still gets virus's and plenty of them and i rather like a computer that doesnt crash very often.

andylyon
Oct 22, 2009, 03:23 PM
windows still gets virus's and plenty of them and i rather like a computer that doesnt crash very often.

That's the thing though, read around, Win7 does not crash. I used it for 4 months before I converted, the RC, and it never crashed on me.

AnDy

Eidorian
Oct 22, 2009, 03:30 PM
There is no OFFICIAL support for Windows 7 right now for bootcamp. However, I'm sure you can get it to work without a problem. Note though that W7 will only work on Intel macs, not the older generations.

Parallels and VM will support W7 without a problem.No official support for Windows 7? I'm sure we're scared. :p

That's the thing though, read around, Win7 does not crash. I used it for 4 months before I converted, the RC, and it never crashed on me.

AnDyFlawless for 6 months under the RC here. My router is dying so my wireless was acting up. Though flashing it with dd-wrt has fixed everything. So my router isn't dying anymore? :rolleyes:

Frankie.
Oct 22, 2009, 03:58 PM
The price alone makes Snow Leopard better.

DMann
Oct 22, 2009, 04:03 PM
The price alone makes Snow Leopard better.Better performance doesn't hurt either:

http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/bto/20090902/Time-based_610x374.jpg

Frankie.
Oct 22, 2009, 04:11 PM
I wouldn't pay nearly $200 more for W7 for that small difference.

DMann
Oct 22, 2009, 04:14 PM
I wouldn't pay nearly $200 more for W7 for that small difference.(Shorter bars are better)

Frankie.
Oct 22, 2009, 04:16 PM
Even better then haha. I don't W7 will get the job done but for the prices, I'll pass. Of course, I'm getting a $30 student copy.

carniver
Oct 22, 2009, 05:11 PM
Better performance doesn't hurt either:

http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/bto/20090902/Time-based_610x374.jpg

What bench is this? iTunes multimedia benchmark?

BongoBanger
Oct 22, 2009, 05:28 PM
Better performance doesn't hurt either:

http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/bto/20090902/Time-based_610x374.jpg

Nice. Those are the figures that Dong Ngo did for CNET and which he got the piss taken out of him on every message board, right?

For those who don't realise these bars come from a test on a Macbook Pro running Apple software (Quicktime - different versions - and iTunes). DMann seems to have omitted the graph showing Windows 7 comfortably beating Snow Leopard on Call of Duty and Cinebench - written by a third parties - though.

Mind you, we can always look at how OS X compares to Windows 7 on hardware it's optimised to. Let me just get a Lenovo and...

...

Oh wait. We can't.

Eidorian
Oct 22, 2009, 05:38 PM
Nice. Those are the figures that Dong Ngo did for CNET and which he got the piss taken out of him on every message board, right?

For those who don't realise these bars come from a test on a Macbook Pro running Apple software (Quicktime - different versions - and iTunes). DMann seems to have omitted the graph showing Windows 7 comfortably beating Snow Leopard on Call of Duty and Cinebench - written by a third parties - though.

Mind you, we can always look at how OS X compares to Windows 7 on hardware it's optimised to. Let me just get a Lenovo and...

...

Oh wait. We can't.I'm amazed how many people use that chart without doing any research into it.

BongoBanger
Oct 22, 2009, 05:53 PM
I'm amazed how many people use that chart without doing any research into it.

Sadly I'm not.

Kristenn
Oct 22, 2009, 05:57 PM
Blah! Of COURSE Mac OS X runs better on a Mac than Windows 7! And of course Apple software runs faster in OS X than in Windows! No brainer there.

I personally agree with a lot of points. I never really USED USED Windows as my main OS. But Windows 7 is faster... more stable AND reliable than Vista in BETA form. I'm not sure if its more stable than Mac OS X. But, I can't be... becuase I've only used it for maybe a week. It took me 8 months to get my first kernel panic in Mac OS X. My fault too... stupid really. And its the same with Windows I think. If its not a bad driver... its a users bumble stumble.
And I think Windows 7 looks smexy. All those custom themes and custom sounds to go with themes. One of those themes brought tears to my eyes. I'm serious! Its not Windows I have a problem with. Its most of those cheap laptops out there that feel like they are going to break. Sure... I have tons of options... but... I have to sift through cheap budget junk to find a good one!

BTW. Can someone recommend the best laptop brand? Comparable to Apple if possible? You can send me a PM, I don't want to derail the topic :o

Eidorian
Oct 22, 2009, 06:04 PM
Sadly I'm not.Perhaps I think to highly of peope around here.

zweigand
Oct 22, 2009, 06:13 PM
I'm waiting for the massive Ars review.

Oh, and apple just stated today that official Win7 support is coming to boot camp later this year.

It will be interesting to see how fast people adopt it. (and how many businesses) I'm also patiently waiting for the upgrade horror stories. :D

muxbox
Oct 22, 2009, 06:44 PM
I'm using Windows 7 now in my iMac 24inch.

I must say im impressed. It easier to navigate winodws than a mac not requiring you to click to view hidden windows when you have lots on the display.


Also Snow Leopard keeps on slowing down with the spinny disc wheel making multiple guest appearances whereas windows 7 seems to be glitch Free.

Perhaps not a fair test as Snow Leopard is an upgrade and Windows 7 is a Fresh install using boot camp. Managed to get boot camp drivers working and it runs pretty slick.

Now i'm off for a game of Left4Dead, i still can't do that in OS X although i use OS X for all my other needs.

cwt1nospam
Oct 22, 2009, 08:30 PM
The problem with any review of 7 at this point is that they're all done on very new installs of Windows. The fact is that Windows 7 still has a registry, and performance is very likely to suffer over time. That's why you can't take reviews of Windows vs OS X performance seriously: who's using a fresh install of their OS every couple of months? Compare two systems that have been in daily use for 6 months and then you'll have something meaningful.

DMann
Oct 22, 2009, 08:37 PM
Nice. Those are the figures that Dong Ngo did for CNET and which he got the piss taken out of him on every message board, right?

For those who don't realise these bars come from a test on a Macbook Pro running Apple software (Quicktime - different versions - and iTunes). DMann seems to have omitted the graph showing Windows 7 comfortably beating Snow Leopard on Call of Duty and Cinebench - written by a third parties - though.Research? Now message boards suffice as research?

Interesting, it seems you're alright mentioning the results of Call of Duty and Cinebench, when it's in favor of W7 - this part is not flawed for you, then.

felt.
Oct 22, 2009, 08:37 PM
just installed windows 7 on my main machine today after testing it extensively on my mbp for the last months, I think its just as good as osx, I'm getting everyone I know to upgrade to it, and they love it too :D

Frankie.
Oct 22, 2009, 08:49 PM
I just bought Windows 7 with a student discount for 29.99

TH3D4RKKN1GH7
Oct 22, 2009, 10:15 PM
I used Windows 7 Beta and RC1 for several months before getting my Mac and switching to OSX. Windows 7 is a great OS and a tremendous upgrade from Vista. I think it's a solid OS and no longer miles behind OSX. They seem to fall pretty close to one another. I still feel OSX is easier to navigate as far as layout.

Shunnabunich
Oct 22, 2009, 11:17 PM
Research? Now message boards suffice as research?

Interesting, it seems you're alright mentioning the results of Call of Duty and Cinebench, when it's in favor of W7 - this part is not flawed for you, then.

Yeah...it's sort of tough to make even comparisons between the two operating systems when Apple's software is optimized for OS X and decidedly not so for Windows, and serious games like CoD are, by definition, Windows-only, requiring them to run in a ****-tastic virtualization layer with half-absent hardware support when on OS X. So that leaves...Cinebench...one test with all the rest essentially being distracting fluff. (Though I haven't used Cinebench, so I don't know how even-handed it is...is it?)

PCMacUser
Oct 23, 2009, 12:28 AM
The problem with any review of 7 at this point is that they're all done on very new installs of Windows. The fact is that Windows 7 still has a registry, and performance is very likely to suffer over time. That's why you can't take reviews of Windows vs OS X performance seriously: who's using a fresh install of their OS every couple of months? Compare two systems that have been in daily use for 6 months and then you'll have something meaningful.

This is a fair statement, presuming that all Windows users install and uninstall lots of programs. Otherwise the registry mostly remains unchanged. And there are a lot of Windows users out there who, just like OS X users, tend to simply install the programs they are going to use and nothing else.

andylyon
Oct 23, 2009, 01:03 AM
The price alone makes Snow Leopard better.

The reviewers took that into account though didnt they? Not that it was a thorough review.

BongoBanger
Oct 23, 2009, 02:01 AM
Research? Now message boards suffice as research?

Interesting, it seems you're alright mentioning the results of Call of Duty and Cinebench, when it's in favor of W7 - this part is not flawed for you, then.

Absolutely. The whole test is flawed and meaningless.

Glad we agree.

DMann
Oct 23, 2009, 02:48 AM
Absolutely. The whole test is flawed and meaningless.

Glad we agree.Boot times and shut down times, then, were also unfairly optimized, Hmmm? :rolleyes:

marzy
Oct 23, 2009, 03:50 AM
I think the whole windows thing is stupid. Vista was crap when it was first released but some of the final versions are fine. Still the biggest problems I have with vista are still the same in win 7. Adding things like printers or changing network setting. What a pain, it's like 4 to 5 different windows so you can change the network settings.

Personally I hate the look but I think thats because I'm used to os x.

And it's funny when something like the guest account bug happens on os x, every one is like OMG macs are crap, well thats because it such an uncommon event it shocks us when it happens. Windows computers fail left right and centre but there used to it.

I used windows 7 once and it was to install a printer for a friend, it felt no different to vista they had on the same laptop and why would it. All it is, is vista with a few more features thrown in and all the patches included.

BongoBanger
Oct 23, 2009, 05:15 AM
Boot times and shut down times, then, were also unfairly optimized, Hmmm? :rolleyes:

Nope - they're fine, just not that significant.

Mind you we don't know how quickly SL will boot and shut down on a Lenovo do we so perhaps not? I think it'll be faster, just not enough to make any real difference.

cwt1nospam
Oct 23, 2009, 07:34 AM
This is a fair statement, presuming that all Windows users install and uninstall lots of programs. Otherwise the registry mostly remains unchanged. And there are a lot of Windows users out there who, just like OS X users, tend to simply install the programs they are going to use and nothing else.
That's not my experience with Windows or Mac users. People are constantly adding/deleting small applications. Maybe not every day, but enough that many Windows users seem to be in the habit of reinstalling their OS periodically to bring it back up to speed, while the rest just suffer through to their next computer. It seems this will not change with Windows 7.

Winni
Oct 23, 2009, 09:32 AM
There is no OFFICIAL support for Windows 7 right now for bootcamp.

Apple does not officially support Boot Camp at all. If they would, they would have to really support Windows customers. Strangely enough, this does not keep any Intel Mac owners from installing Windows on their machines.

supmango
Oct 23, 2009, 10:17 AM
Windows 7 is pretty good. I have personally crashed it twice in three months, but perhaps my experience is an isolated incident. Snow Leopard certainly has a few bugs, but I expect them to be worked out by point release 3 or 4. My experience with Windows 7 reminds me a lot of what it was like with XP c. October 2001. It was great at first, snappy, clean, innovative. Then we had a few waves of viruses and about 250 security updates and a couple of service packs. Within a year or so it turned into what it is today (not awful, but not a Mac). For me and my experience with Microsoft, we will see how it compares after Windows 7 SP1. Microsoft has a nasty history of screwing up a good thing.

pigoz
Oct 23, 2009, 11:16 AM
On Windows you can get hardware accelerated video decoding (H264 and VC1) with pretty much any recent (=2 years old) video card.
That multimedia graph therefore is kinda wrong and misleading. At the moment Windows is THE best platform for media playback.

FX120
Oct 23, 2009, 01:16 PM
Boot times and shut down times, then, were also unfairly optimized, Hmmm? :rolleyes:

And what drivers was the author of the test using?


Oh, right! Apple has no Windows 7 drivers for their hardware.

Diseal3
Oct 23, 2009, 02:37 PM
I'm yet another who upgraded to windows 7 from windows. I just put the CD in the computer booted up, and actually hit the "Upgrade" Button that i ignored for years. The upgrade process was simple as pie and I didn't loose a thing as I thought i would with my massive 1 TB drive. MS has stepped up there game for the better. However instead of bashing these operating systems how about you make one yourself. I'm sick of all this fanboy crap. Its JUST an operating system. Nobody cares what you use and how you get your **** done!

FOXEO
Oct 23, 2009, 02:40 PM
Something is definitely wrong here.

I am a huge computer enthusiast. I've been using and abusing computers since I was around 12 years old, and I can remember the Commodore 64, old Apples, and my first real "PC," a Packard Bell desktop with the cheap speakers that attached to the side of the monitor. I remember when MIDI files were awesome cause I could download "music."

One thing remained consistent though... every single edition of Windows on every single machine that I used it on had problems. Not just a few, quite a lot. I ALWAYS found Windows to be quite unstable, frustrating, and prone to "breaking."

Now that I have Windows 7 installed on my machine, I can say the same is true, to a lesser extent. I went from one motherboard and graphics card to a different motherboard and graphics card, did a full reinstall, and I still run into classic Windows problems.

Slowness, random freezing for brief periods, programs that seem to load, but sit in the Task Manager without showing their windows, games that load up and then crash instantly, but work the next time I try, and random "glitches." The most recent glitch was when I was copying files to my desktop, and I couldn't find them. I tried to copy them again, and it asked me to overwrite them... but I didn't see them! I had to right-click and choose "Refresh" for it to show the new files, with each and every copy to desktop:eek:!

Then I ran Windows Update, and it "broke" my ethernet chipset. I couldn't connect to the internet, no matter what. I rebooted several times, but it remained inoperable. I had to use another computer to navigate to Gigabyte's website, find the drivers for the chipset, and then install them manually. My first attempt failed, because the installation just froze. Second attempt froze too, so I rebooted. I then gave it a third attempt, and it worked.

What's funny is that I have two very common and reputable pieces of hardware here... Gigabyte's EP45-UD3P, and nVIDIA's 9800GTX+. Before that, an Asus P5K-V and ATI Radeon HD 4850. Yet through it all, similar glitches and problems. I even tried installing on a different HDD, but my Mac OS X installation on this "Hackintosh" runs nearly flawlessly, while Windows 7 has issues that, although not terribly common, creep up far too much.

The honest truth? I run Windows 7 for games, basically. When I am running 7, all that I wish is that I could play the games in Mac OS X instead.

My vote? Snow Leopard all the way, and I am far from a fanboy. I criticized the poor implementation of Leopard on my iBook G4 and what it did to Spotlight, so I know that Macs are not flawless. I just wish they had the game selection Windows does :). Now that Apple is including competitive graphics cards in their machines, like the new iMac with ATI Radeon HD 4850, I hope to see more games get a Mac release.

macswitcha2
Oct 23, 2009, 02:48 PM
I have windows 7 winning!

supmango
Oct 23, 2009, 05:03 PM
At the moment Windows is THE best platform for media playback.

I would expect that to last five minutes.

PCMacUser
Oct 23, 2009, 05:11 PM
That's not my experience with Windows or Mac users. People are constantly adding/deleting small applications. Maybe not every day, but enough that many Windows users seem to be in the habit of reinstalling their OS periodically to bring it back up to speed, while the rest just suffer through to their next computer. It seems this will not change with Windows 7.

Yes, I suppose it depends on who you know. I work in the industry, so it's professionals and people who need to be productive with their computers that I deal with 99% of the time. So they don't tend to install or uninstall stuff. And if they do, I have to growl at them.

On the bright side though, the people who have to reinstall Windows on a regular basis increase their skill set considerably and also learn the value of backups. :D

strike1555
Oct 23, 2009, 06:18 PM
I have never seen somebody fail as badly as DMann did when posting the graph.

Were you skipping school in elementary school when they taught you how to read graphs?

Stay in school kids...or you might end up like DMann with no analytical ability to speak of!

Oh, and the news link is down.

Knowlege Bomb
Oct 23, 2009, 06:58 PM
I have never seen somebody fail as badly as DMann did when posting the graph.

Were you skipping school in elementary school when they taught you how to read graphs?

Stay in school kids...or you might end up like DMann with no analytical ability to speak of!

Oh, and the news link is down.

Sorry my friend but you're making yourself look like a fool. DMann was talking about Snow Leopard's performance being better, which the graph clearly illustrates (did you pay attention in elementary school??). :)

strike1555
Oct 23, 2009, 07:25 PM
Sorry my friend but you're making yourself look like a fool. DMann was talking about Snow Leopard's performance being better, which the graph clearly illustrates (did you pay attention in elementary school??). :)

http://skepticalteacher.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/facepalm.jpg

Wow. I'm in disbelief at this post. Read posts 24-49.

You must have been DManns classmate. Looks like you not only skipped during math, but also when they were teaching an even more important skill....how to read! Sigh....

DMann
Oct 23, 2009, 09:00 PM
Were you skipping school in elementary school when they taught you how to read graphs?Apparently, you never attended. Try re-reading the graph again, or hire a tutor who can hold your hand and walk you through it.

(hint-s-h-o-r-t-e-r bars are better)

Wow. I'm in disbelief at this post. Read posts 24-49.

You must have been DManns classmate. Looks like you not only skipped during math, but also when they were teaching an even more important skill....how to read! Sigh....What does post #49 have to do with the graph in question? Apparently, counting is not your forte, let alone interpreting a pretty obviously laid-out graph.

strike1555
Oct 23, 2009, 10:11 PM
Apparently, you never attended. Try re-reading the graph again, or hire a tutor who can hold your hand and walk you through it.

(hint-s-h-o-r-t-e-r bars are better)

And that, right there is your problem.


What does post #49 have to do with the graph in question? Apparently, counting is not your forte, let alone interpreting a pretty obviously laid-out graph.


http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/6233/16119430.jpg


Hey guys, my name is DMann and Windows is better! Never mind the fact that I pay absolutely no attention to the representation of the variables! But that doesn't matter, because:


(hint-s-h-o-r-t-e-r bars are better)

Right???



The moral of this story? Stay in school kids, or you'll end up like DMann. *shudder*

DMann
Oct 23, 2009, 10:22 PM
http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/6233/16119430.jpg


Hey guys, my name is DMann and Windows is better! Never mind the fact that I pay absolutely no attention to the representation of the variables! But that doesn't matter, because:



Right???



The moral of this story? Stay in school kids, or you'll end up like DMann. *shudder*Are you denying that you mis-read the graph and mis-counted the post numbers? Your actions are entertainingly asinine - keep it up.

powerbook911
Oct 24, 2009, 01:01 AM
I really don't understand these reviews.

I've used the Windows 7 beta off and on for a few months due to the buzz, and it's the same 'ole Windows. Besides the look, everything feels pretty much like XP. It's boring.

I mean, I don't even know what to do when I'm in Windows, it's like pointless.

I gave it an enthusiastic shot, but I don't need it. Mac delivers everything you need these days.

djellison
Oct 24, 2009, 03:59 AM
I've been using Win 7 properly on my workstation for a day or two. I'd previously tried the beta on a netbook. I've avoided Vista as I tried it and found it sluggish, clunky and annoying. So I've been on XP64 at home and work for a few years now. I also have a UBMB with SL (clean install, not upgraded)

Hand on heart honesty : I prefer Win 7.

Its faster - much snappier to navigate around. The GUI works better. It's tidier, I can do what I want with it, not what Steve Jobs THINKS I want. Combine it with Google Chrome and you have a browsing experience that honestly makes Safari feel like Netscape Gold.

If Powerpoint 2010 can do the one killer thing that 2008 can't that I use Keynote for currently....I'm dumping OS X and getting a PC Laptop.

PCMacUser
Oct 24, 2009, 06:56 AM
I've used the Windows 7 beta off and on for a few months due to the buzz, and it's the same 'ole Windows. Besides the look, everything feels pretty much like XP. It's boring.

I mean, I don't even know what to do when I'm in Windows, it's like pointless.

Um, Windows 7 is an operating system. The point of it is to provide a platform for programs to run in. My advice is to figure out what you do in OS X (email? web browsing? games? office apps?) and try to do those same things in Windows 7. Then you'll 'get it'.

Stiss
Oct 24, 2009, 07:46 AM
I've been using Win 7 properly on my workstation for a day or two. I'd previously tried the beta on a netbook. I've avoided Vista as I tried it and found it sluggish, clunky and annoying. So I've been on XP64 at home and work for a few years now. I also have a UBMB with SL (clean install, not upgraded)

Hand on heart honesty : I prefer Win 7.

Its faster - much snappier to navigate around. The GUI works better. It's tidier, I can do what I want with it, not what Steve Jobs THINKS I want. Combine it with Google Chrome and you have a browsing experience that honestly makes Safari feel like Netscape Gold.

If Powerpoint 2010 can do the one killer thing that 2008 can't that I use Keynote for currently....I'm dumping OS X and getting a PC Laptop.

Ok good luck with that one.

strike1555
Oct 24, 2009, 09:17 AM
Are you denying that you mis-read the graph and mis-counted the post numbers? Your actions are entertainingly asinine - keep it up.

Yet another straw man. Wow, where does it end?

I really don't understand these reviews.

I've used the Windows 7 beta off and on for a few months due to the buzz, and it's the same 'ole Windows. Besides the look, everything feels pretty much like XP. It's boring.

I mean, I don't even know what to do when I'm in Windows, it's like pointless.

I gave it an enthusiastic shot, but I don't need it. Mac delivers everything you need these days.

The problems not with Windows 7 - it's you (by your own admission).

DMann
Oct 24, 2009, 01:14 PM
Yet another straw man. Wow, where does it end?And now, a flagrant non-sequitur - keep it up, your ineptitude is shining through, with flying colors.

djellison
Oct 24, 2009, 01:42 PM
Ok good luck with that one.

Not sure exactly what the motive or meaning is behind your comment - but I've got my fingers crossed. If PPT '10 can do what I need, then I can go to:

a laptop that doesn't burn my lap when visiting youtube
a laptop that doesn't have a PSU design that breaks after a few months of regular travel
a laptop that doesn't require a £65 adaptor (that doesn't work) to connect to my 30" display
a laptop that has more than 2 USB ports...
..that can be used at the same time.
a laptop that has audio In AND audio Out
a laptop without a glowing baboons arse on the top of the lid
a laptop that doesn't spend it's evening with a blinking glow
a laptop with Blu-Ray
a browser that doesn't hang every time I visit a site with flash
a screen with a viewing angle that isn't pitiful.
and a resolution worthy of a production machine.
And save money!


Meanwhile - Dmann - can we have a link to the review from where that graph came please? Purely from a qualitative point of view of my own experience - Win 7 seems a far faster environment - and browsing, it smashes OSX into the bushes. It actually feels quite liberating.

DMann
Oct 24, 2009, 02:04 PM
Dmann - can we have a link to the review from where that graph came please? Purely from a qualitative point of view of my own experience - Win 7 seems a far faster environment - and browsing, it smashes OSX into the bushes. It actually feels quite liberating.

Yes:

Windows 7 vs. Snow Leopard (http://blogs.zdnet.com/gadgetreviews/?p=8586)

Which machine are you running W7 on? I have it running on a 24" iMac and an Asus TW100-E5 Workstation.

By my comparisons, SL feels faster and more responsive than W7 - YMMV.

djellison
Oct 24, 2009, 02:22 PM
Which machine are you running W7 on? .

A faster machine than my UBMB. But I'm not talking about pushing heavy weight polygons in rendering. Just basic getting around and browsing. Even on a 1.6ghz Atom, Win7+Chrome is a massively faster and more pleasant browsing experience than OS X + Safari on this UBMB. It doesn't hang like Safari. It fills out form properly unlike Safari. It doesn't choke with Flash like Safari.

Of course, a review that compares a review that compares and Apple OS and a Microsoft OS, with mainly Apple Apps isn't exactly the most impartial comparison you're going to get - even you would have to admit that. However I've long since stopped caring about benchmarks for anything other than 3DS Max rendering when choosing hardware. It's how it feels to use - how much of ones own time the OS ends up stealing from you. Win 7 steals less of my time than OSX.

ThatsMeRight
Oct 24, 2009, 02:31 PM
Probably shouldn't say this on a "pro-Apple" forum but here I go: Windows 7. I can't really compare because I don't use OS X very often but it's just because a lot of things are made for Windows (which aren't compatible on the Mac) and I'm more fimiliar with it. Actually is use OS X rarely.

And oh, comparing Windows 7 with SL on a Mac doesn't work. The hardware on a Mac is for build for Mac OS X, not Windows 7.

No, I don't have a Mac.
Yes, I'm thinking about buying a Mac but for now it's just too expensive for me and I'm not ready to take 'the step' yet. The most (not all) software is still made for Windows and/or works better on Windows. Yes, I'm seeing a world where there will be more operating systems in use (so maybe something like 50% Windows, 40% Mac and 10% other) but until then I'm not ready to 'take the step' yet. If it's that far, companies will be forced to build in support for kinda like every operating system but now a days there aren't which means more crappy software (but still less complaints because there are less Mac users than Windows users).

Oh, and yes, I do believe Apple can attract MUCH more people just by having lower prices. A lot if people just don't feel like trying something totally new, while Windows works pretty fine for them. Scared for the unknown, you know?

ThatsMeRight
Oct 24, 2009, 02:48 PM
And oh, for the 'normal persons' in this word it's just internetting, emailing, typing some documents and sharing some pictures. When that's the case, Windows is a good operating system which does what it has to do for a cheap price if you compare it to a Mac.

More technical people want to do more with their PC so they get problems much sooner than the 'normal person in this world'.

Conclusion: both the Mac and the PC have its cons and pros.

someone28624
Oct 24, 2009, 02:49 PM
What's stopping you from trying it right now?

I should upgrade RAM first. I only have 1.5 gb.

Eidorian
Oct 24, 2009, 02:53 PM
I should upgrade RAM first. I only have 1.5 gb.It'll run fine. :p

But more RAM if you can afford it is always better.

DMann
Oct 24, 2009, 03:13 PM
A faster machine than my UBMB. But I'm not talking about pushing heavy weight polygons in rendering. Just basic getting around and browsing. Even on a 1.6ghz Atom, Win7+Chrome is a massively faster and more pleasant browsing experience than OS X + Safari on this UBMB. It doesn't hang like Safari. It fills out form properly unlike Safari. It doesn't choke with Flash like Safari.

Of course, a review that compares a review that compares and Apple OS and a Microsoft OS, with mainly Apple Apps isn't exactly the most impartial comparison you're going to get - even you would have to admit that. However I've long since stopped caring about benchmarks for anything other than 3DS Max rendering when choosing hardware. It's how it feels to use - how much of ones own time the OS ends up stealing from you. Win 7 steals less of my time than OSX.

Agreed - Safari notwithstanding, I find SL easier to navigate, more responsive, and less convoluted. The act of simply dropping apps into the Dock in OS X

is leagues easier than the multiple clicking/pinning required to do so with the Task Bar, which won't even allow folders or documents to be 'pinned.'

The excessive animation in Aero leaves much to be desired, as it is not nearly as smooth, elegant, or as subtle as Core Animation/Graphics, and the

"In Your Face" UI of W7 grows tiresome quickly. The organization of menus and substructures in W7 leaves much to be desired - take a look at the Control Panel.

I prefer the ease of Quick Look to Aero Peek, and the flexibility of Exposé and Spaces to the Task Bar functions - not to mention, having to deal with The Registry,

DLLs, DRM, and other archaic Windows carry overs. Safari needs work, I do agree. That said, I'm greatly looking forward to testing SL out on a new Quad-Core i7 27" iMac

when it is released. Hopefully, with the gradual development, implementation, evolution of apps which will take advantage of GCD and Open CL, performance will reach an even higher level.

And oh, comparing Windows 7 with SL on a Mac doesn't work. The hardware on a Mac is for build for Mac OS X, not Windows 7.

The hardware on a Mac is pretty much identical to that of a PC - when booting into Windows on a Mac, it is essentially a PC.

Eidorian
Oct 24, 2009, 03:16 PM
Agreed - Safari notwithstanding, I find SL easier to navigate, more responsive, and less convoluted. The act of simply dropping apps into the Dock in OS X

is leagues easier than the multiple clicking/pinning required to do so with the Task Bar, which won't even allow folders or documents to be 'pinned.'

The excessive animation in Aero leaves much to be desired, as it is not nearly as smooth, elegant, or as subtle as Core Animation/Graphics, and the

"In Your Face" UI of W7 grows tiresome quickly. The organization of menus and substructures in W7 leaves much to be desired - take a look at the Control Panel.

I prefer the ease of Quick Look to Aero Peek, and the flexibility of Exposé and Spaces to the Task Bar functions - not to mention, having to deal with The Registry,

DLLs, DRM, and other archaic Windows carry overs. Safari needs work, I do agree. That said, I'm greatly looking forward to testing SL out on a new Quad-Core i7 27" iMac

when it is released. Hopefully, with the gradual development, implementation, evolution of apps which will take advantage of GCD and Open CL, performance will reach an even higher level.Why are you hashing in system fundamentals together with the GUI aspects?

It sounds like you've used Windows 7 but not all the facts are there. You also omit some things about OS X.

DMann
Oct 24, 2009, 03:22 PM
Why are you hashing in system fundamentals together with the GUI aspects?

It sounds like you've used Windows 7 but not all the facts are there. You also omit some things about OS X.In response to "Steals less of my time than..." it is all pertinent, and is my overall impression.

Eidorian
Oct 24, 2009, 03:24 PM
In response to "Steals less of my time than..." it is all pertinent, and is my overall impression.Well I'll keep my knowledge to myself then. I don't see a need to waste my time correcting misconceptions and omissions about either operating system.

ThatsMeRight
Oct 24, 2009, 04:08 PM
Hm, maybe not the best place to ask but what about this laptop: Acer Aspire 5738PG-664G32MN to run with Windows 7?

ElEstratega
Oct 24, 2009, 04:28 PM
Why would anyone take a good OS release by MSFT as a personal threat? I am happy for all the positive reviews Win7 is getting because as a PC user it seems I am able to move now to an improved OS. As a Mac user I am happy too because more competition means Apple can't rest on its laurels and will be pushed to both innovate and offer their products at more affordable prices. The consumer wins, and that's all of us. Cheer up! :D

djellison
Oct 24, 2009, 05:23 PM
The act of simply dropping apps into the Dock in OS X

is leagues easier than the multiple clicking/pinning required to do so with the Task Bar, which won't even allow folders or documents to be 'pinned.'

The excessive animation in Aero leaves much to be desired, as it is not nearly as smooth, elegant, or as subtle as Core Animation/Graphics, and the

"In Your Face" UI of W7 grows tiresome quickly. The organization of menus and substructures in W7 leaves much to be desired - take a look at the Control Panel.

...

DLLs, DRM, and other archaic Windows carry overs. .


Registry, DLL's, DRM. Registry - I've never had to look at it. I don't care about it. I've seen people telling me to 'repair permissions' to Fix safari ( doesn't work). I've spent more time in <3 years of OS X using the terminal - than I've spent in 15 years of windows in the Registry. DRM? Like iTunes?

Control Panel? Win 7's seems better than OS X's. OS X's is clunky. Win 7's is far snappier - functionally, they're quite similar.

You can drop apps into the task bar. Stacks has never offered what it promised in that first Leopard keynote - it's a messy way of finding many files. It takes 21 seconds for iPhoto to load. With the same amount of photos, the windows alternative is a lot faster. By a factor of 4x.

As for look/feel/ease of use - that's a judgement call. My judgement is that I find Win 7's interface a little noisier in general - there is more stuff, but I find it far quicker to get around - and that's the KEY point for me. How can I get to what I want, as quick as possible. How can I do what I want, as quick as possible. When I want to do ONE thing - I maximise, and that's it. With OSX there's always hints of the OS around, stuff on your desktop hiding each side of the dock, the dock itself. I find I am far more aware of the existence of OSX (in your face) than Win 7.

It's a judgement call - but I'm very glad Win 7 has taken XP and moved it on after that catastrophic false start that was Vista.

At the moment, OS X has one killer feature - Keynote - that does things I can't do without. But it's clinging on by it's fingernails. Next spring will be by next Laptop purchasing time, and right now - it'd be a Mac still. But that may change the moment I try Office 2010.

MythicFrost
Oct 24, 2009, 06:47 PM
I thought the article/video was pretty bad, they left things out on OSX particularly in the features section, I saw no Time Machine, Spaces etc..
I'm not sure if they left anything out for Windows 7, wouldn't surprise me if they did.

They even said there isn't a full version of OSX and you needed leopard to install it (iirc), they failed to mention there is a full version (that's no difference from the upgrade) that comes w/ iLife & iWork 09.
It comes down to using the OS that does the job better for you than any other OS. My experience is OSX pwns Windows 7...

Everything from booting up, logging in, having the dock with all my applications I use often there w/ auto hide on, I've never used the auto hide in Windows because it has a tiny little bit of the taskbar that is still visible - it bugs me.
I like how applications bounce when they require my attention, and how a dialog comes up and OSX speaks it, "Photoshop requires your attention", and the way the Finder is structured, having the applications folder on the side (even an applications folder at all), same with the pictures/downloads, it's just not the same or not as good with Windows Explorer.

I love Expose, there is no equivalent to this (not that I know of anyway) it's just fantastic, when not working in Windows (on OSX) I probably use it a few up to 15 times every 5 minutes.
Spaces is awesome, it's great for managing lots of Windows, I have all work windows in one - CS4 and so on, iTunes/Mail/iCal/iPhoto etc.. in another space, each Windows OS has it's own space in full screen mode (Parallels 4.0).

I LOVE software updates, on Windows I don't particularly like software updates, on OSX I love it it checks for updates for almost all of my software.

Dashboard is awesome, did they even mention that?? meh they forgot Widgets for Windows 7 too iirc.
I'd say System Preferences is way better than the Control Panel, better looking, simpler, easier to find stuff, and snappier.

I love Time Machine.

Like I said, it comes down to what it does for you, but personally I'd have trouble getting over going back to Windows indefinitely.

UltraNEO*
Oct 24, 2009, 09:46 PM
Well... I've been using Win7 beta for ages and to tell the truth, I've even invested good money into building a PC box just for windows and games. I've had it about a year now and you know what? It's a p*ssin' waste of good money. Seriously... I don't use it. I actually use that display more for Mac than windows. The OS still feels kinda clunky and monthly driver updates annoy the sh*te outta me.

$200 on windows update? No thanks, I'd sooner spend it on Beer.

thermodynamic
Oct 24, 2009, 10:29 PM
Dont agree with all the points but seems fair enough in overall scoring.
Windows has really caught apple up in some areas of OS design but i still think OSX has the edge.

Hopefully snow leopard is a base and 10.7 is a year away and will blow W7 away!

Without the registry, OS X beats Windows by miles... ditto for OS X not using FAT32 or NTFS... :D

PCMacUser
Oct 25, 2009, 12:50 AM
From what I've read in this thread, there is little to distinguish preferences between Windows 7 and Snow Leopard. It is now a matter of personal taste, and prior software investment.

Thank goodness I run both on my MBP. :)

supmango
Oct 25, 2009, 09:00 AM
You can argue back and forth about the "fairness" of the comparison till you are blue in the face. Ultimately, all that matters is what the consumer chooses and uses. My money is on SL. I was an avid Windows user for many years prior to Vista. I would even qualify as a PC fanboy in those days. I switched to Mac and now, it really doesn't matter what Microsoft does, I expect them to screw it up in a few months. Windows 7 might be great now (especially considering many people are coming to it directly from Vista), but I know from experience that in about 6 months there will be enough "patches" out to make it as sluggish as XP. So switching to Windows 7 is hardly worth the cost savings. Most people who switched with my same experience will agree. Windows 7 has to get a lot better from here before I will consider it.

brbubba
Oct 25, 2009, 09:24 AM
From reading all these comments I was under the impression that Windows had won. Not the case. Could someone please tell me how they could possibly keep from giving Snow Leopard the edge in design???:eek:

Yeah that was the one ridiculous benchmark. Windows 7 has come a long way, but it still doesn't compare.

There is no OFFICIAL support for Windows 7 right now for bootcamp. However, I'm sure you can get it to work without a problem. Note though that W7 will only work on Intel macs, not the older generations.

Parallels and VM will support W7 without a problem.

I've been running Windows 7 RC in boot camp for months, works fine.

All that being said, Windows 7 is basically just a polishing up of Vista. All the same flaws in Vista seem to be present in Windows 7 with regards to navigation, convoluted control panels, etc. They still have all of these "dumbed" down features which completely screw people who know what they are doing over. I just want straight forward control panels, easy file sharing where permissions work properly and act system wide, user account control that wasn't built for idiots, etc. Of course networking on both platforms is still complete crap and both companies need a major overhaul of their file sharing and lan networking controls.

On Windows you can get hardware accelerated video decoding (H264 and VC1) with pretty much any recent (=2 years old) video card.
That multimedia graph therefore is kinda wrong and misleading. At the moment Windows is THE best platform for media playback.

Newer Macs have this feature too, it's just not advertised very well.

BongoBanger
Oct 25, 2009, 09:35 AM
You can argue back and forth about the "fairness" of the comparison till you are blue in the face. Ultimately, all that matters is what the consumer chooses and uses. My money is on SL.

You obviously like long odds. Even with Vista Windows OEMs outsell Macs by a factor of 25.

Windows 7 might be great now (especially considering many people are coming to it directly from Vista), but I know from experience that in about 6 months there will be enough "patches" out to make it as sluggish as XP.

Don't really get you there - Vista's service packs and patches actually made it better and considerably quicker in some functions.

muxbox
Oct 25, 2009, 10:17 AM
Without the registry, OS X beats Windows by miles... ditto for OS X not using FAT32 or NTFS... :D

Question: If apple does not contain a registry. How come i can still make my mac and iPhone grind to halt by installing lots of stuff on there then deleting it afterwards?

This is surely the same problem that Windows suffers from due to overgrown registry? but what is causing the same effect on OS X? Especially the iPhone?

haravikk
Oct 25, 2009, 05:45 PM
Windows 7 is sweeping things up with a strange bubble of positive thinking mainly achieved by the fact that it looks pretty. It has a nice gloss on it, but when it comes down to it the UI is obtrusive, which is exactly what OS X has been getting away from over the years, by toning things down and making them more functional. Unfortunately people don't see this, they look at Windows 7 and think "ooh shiny", they look at OS X and think "oh, grey". But when it comes down to it Windows 7's interface is distracting, and frequently annoying, while OS X's you forget it's there until you need it to do something in a couple of clicks. I've yet to find any of my common tasks as easy to achieve on Windows 7 as in OS X, as I find myself have to take all kinds of annoying extra steps.

The underpinnings of Windows 7 are ultimately the same, and are based on the same flawed components that have been there since Windows 95, possibly even earlier! They removed a load of bloat from Vista, and that's great, but really it should never have been there in the first place.

Functionality wise, productivity-wise etc. they have made little to no real progress at all, it's all eye-candy and fluff. What have they done that could really matter in the long-run? Snow Leopard has added great new technologies onto a heap of great new technologies, that Windows, C#, and .NET simply don't have. But what's more, many of these great new technologies are open-source, not proprietary, or anti-competitive.

And I don't see how Windows 7 wins on stability, as I've seen it lock-up three or four times on a clean-install, doing nothing really out-of-the-ordinary. That's lock up the entire system, not just a program ceasing to respond (which is the program's fault not the OS). I've also had it randomly crash during start-up!

DMann
Oct 25, 2009, 06:11 PM
Registry, DLL's, DRM. Registry - I've never had to look at it. I don't care about it.
The problem I have with The Registry is that it needs to be in sync with the filesystem - if you delete an application

without "uninstalling," you're basically up ****** creek. If ever you want to move an application to a different path on your machine,

or perhaps to a different machine altogether, good luck extracting the relevant settings for that one particular application from The Registry,

as any given application typically has dozens of settings strewn all over it. In OS X, apps are self-contained packages - they can be run

outside of a folder, and deleted by simply dumping them into the trash. This cannot be done in Windows without wreaking havoc on the system.

DRM? Like iTunes? iTunes has been DRM free since January '09.

Control Panel? Win 7's seems better than OS X's. OS X's is clunky. Win 7's is far snappier - functionally, they're quite similar.

The W7 Control Panel is convoluted, cluttered, and poorly structured when compared to the System Preferences Pane, which I find more responsive,

and better organized in an hierarchic fashion:

http://www.blogsdna.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/windows-7-control-panel.png

http://files.myopera.com/lizard_kanta/blog/Snow-Leopard-2.jpg


You can drop apps into the task bar. Stacks has never offered what it promised in that first Leopard keynote - it's a messy way of finding many files. It takes 21 seconds for iPhoto to load. With the same amount of photos, the windows alternative is a lot faster. By a factor of 4x.

With the TaskBar, If the application you want to pin is already running,

you need to:

Right click on its icon

Choose “Pin this program to taskbar”

To remove a pinned application from the taskbar:

Right-click on its icon

Choose “Unpin this program from the taskbar”.

This is hardly more convenient than the Dock's solution, which allows me to drop in folders and documents directly. The new Stacks is a neat and

logical way to find large amounts of files, being able to view folders within folders, and with a multitude of viewing options.

iPhoto opens in 4.5 seconds with a photo library of over 2,000 - not any slower than Windows Photo Viewer.

As for look/feel/ease of use - that's a judgement call. My judgement is that I find Win 7's interface a little noisier in general - there is more stuff, but I find it far quicker to get around - and that's the KEY point for me. How can I get to what I want, as quick as possible. How can I do what I want, as quick as possible. When I want to do ONE thing - I maximise, and that's it. With OSX there's always hints of the OS around, stuff on your desktop hiding each side of the dock, the dock itself. I find I am far more aware of the existence of OSX (in your face) than Win 7.

To each, his own:

http://www.windows7taskforce.com/uploads/afm.jpg

It's a judgement call - but I'm very glad Win 7 has taken XP and moved it on after that catastrophic false start that was Vista.

Many of my Windows clients decided to stick with XP after using the W7 RC, as they see no compelling reasons to upgrade - I have a feeling that XP will be

'good enough' for the majority of corporations as well.

supmango
Oct 26, 2009, 12:16 AM
You obviously like long odds. Even with Vista Windows OEMs outsell Macs by a factor of 25.

The fact that Microsoft feels the need to acknowledge (through advertising) that they are loosing ground to Apple is all the proof I need.

Don't really get you there - Vista's service packs and patches actually made it better and considerably quicker in some functions.

My experience with ALL Microsoft products is that "security updates," although necessary at some level to fix vulnerabilities (which are endless:D), only serve to slow down the overall operation of the computer.

My experience with Apple has been the opposite. Each point update makes it faster and more efficient (although not by a lot). But most importantly, Apple's updates don't slow things down. This was a nice refreshing experience when I came from Windows Vista.

I was a PC fanboy and avid Windows user from 1995 to 2008. I have only used Apple products since 2008 and I have never had a problem with my Mac since I bought it (slight exaggeration, but I don't count having to restart once in a while). Certainly could never say that about any version of Windows; multiple restarts in a day, sometimes in an hour, plus countless clean installs. I was lucky to get 6 months on any version of Windows without a clean install. So, while Windows 7 is much more aesthetically appealing than previous versions of Windows (I have been running an RC copy in boot camp for three months, insert yawn smiley here), its really not worth giving up the stability. And stability will be the downfall of 7. Prophetic? Not really, considering this is always the case with Windows. To Microsoft's credit, it certainly has a better crash recovery experience than previous versions; it almost makes crashing fun;) (especially when you aren't relying on it for any real productivity).

I obviously posses a bias, but Microsoft is like the good old dog that bit me; probably not going to trust it again any time soon. And, like I said, 6 months (maybe a year) of security updates and patches will provide some proof of its true stability either way.

supmango
Oct 26, 2009, 12:21 AM
Question: If apple does not contain a registry. How come i can still make my mac and iPhone grind to halt by installing lots of stuff on there then deleting it afterwards?

This is surely the same problem that Windows suffers from due to overgrown registry? but what is causing the same effect on OS X? Especially the iPhone?

Your iPhone probably locks up because you fail to do a hard reset after making such changes. You obviously don't own a Mac (or are running a version prior to Leopard), as I install/uninstall things all the time and have no issues.

supmango
Oct 26, 2009, 12:23 AM
And I don't see how Windows 7 wins on stability, as I've seen it lock-up three or four times on a clean-install, doing nothing really out-of-the-ordinary. That's lock up the entire system, not just a program ceasing to respond (which is the program's fault not the OS). I've also had it randomly crash during start-up!

It seems so few of us have bothered to try the competition. I am glad you have had a similar experience to me. I was beginning to think everyone else must be running some kind of special version of Windows 7 I can't seem to find.

MorphingDragon
Oct 26, 2009, 02:47 AM
I'm amazed how many people use that chart without doing any research into it.

Statistics can be morphed to suit anybodys dark desires.

BongoBanger
Oct 26, 2009, 05:36 AM
The fact that Microsoft feels the need to acknowledge (through advertising) that they are loosing ground to Apple is all the proof I need.

Actually it's more consolidation than anything else. OS X has made some strides but it's still a bit part player and likely to remain so.

My experience with ALL Microsoft products is that "security updates," although necessary at some level to fix vulnerabilities (which are endless:D), only serve to slow down the overall operation of the computer.

Mine isn't. Each to their own I suppose.

I was a PC fanboy and avid Windows user from 1995 to 2008. I have only used Apple products since 2008 and I have never had a problem with my Mac since I bought it (slight exaggeration, but I don't count having to restart once in a while). Certainly could never say that about any version of Windows; multiple restarts in a day, sometimes in an hour, plus countless clean installs.

My experience with Vista and Leopard has been that they both require restarts about the same number of times over the last six months. I'm still not entirely clear why OS X requires a restart when all it's doing is installing Safari though.

I was lucky to get 6 months on any version of Windows without a clean install. So, while Windows 7 is much more aesthetically appealing than previous versions of Windows (I have been running an RC copy in boot camp for three months, insert yawn smiley here), its really not worth giving up the stability.

Im not sure what you've been doing to your machines because that isn't typical. I reinstalled Vista once and that was because I switched from x86 to x64.

And stability will be the downfall of 7. Prophetic? Not really, considering this is always the case with Windows.

Really? Can you show me the documented evidence of Vista's instability after SP1? I'd love to see the figures and their comparison to Leopard.

To Microsoft's credit, it certainly has a better crash recovery experience than previous versions; it almost makes crashing fun;) (especially when you aren't relying on it for any real productivity).

And yet the vast majority of the world does rely on Windows for productivity and do not have the problems you have.

I obviously posses a bias, but Microsoft is like the good old dog that bit me; probably not going to trust it again any time soon. And, like I said, 6 months (maybe a year) of security updates and patches will provide some proof of its true stability either way.

Maybe that's your experience and I'm glad you've found something that works for you. Personally I detest XP and I would agree that it did exhibit a lot of the issues you mention - although in hindsight I think you're perhaps exaggerating a little - Vista, despite it's faults both actual and perceived, is an excellent OS, rock solid and without degredation. I expect Windows 7 to be even better. Time will tell.

Your iPhone probably locks up because you fail to do a hard reset after making such changes. You obviously don't own a Mac (or are running a version prior to Leopard), as I install/uninstall things all the time and have no issues.

Installing Open Office and Picasa 3 on OS X was messy for me. YMMV.

DMann
Oct 26, 2009, 05:55 AM
Actually it's more consolidation than anything else. OS X has made some strides but it's still a bit part player and likely to remain so.Yes, time will tell, won't it?

Mine isn't. Each to their own I suppose.

Mine is, as it is for droves of switchers - to each their own.

My experience with Vista and Leopard has been that they both require restarts about the same number of times over the last six months. I'm still not entirely clear why OS X requires a restart when all it's doing is installing Safari though.

My experience with Vista is that it is a resource hog and a laggard. XP is far more responsive and less bogged down than Vista, as over 60% of the global corporate market agree.

Im not sure what you've been doing to your machines because that isn't typical. I reinstalled Vista once and that was because I switched from x86 to x64.

It all depends on what processor intensive apps you are trying to run simultaneously - running Photoshop, Avid Media Suite, Pro Tools, and Finale, will cause more freezes and necessitate more restarts.

And yet the vast majority of the world does rely on suffers through Windows for productivity and do not have experiences the problems you have.

Maybe that's your experience and I'm glad you've found something that works for you. Personally I detest XP and I would agree that it did exhibit a lot of the issues you mention - although in hindsight I think you're perhaps exaggerating a little - Vista, despite it's faults both actual and perceived, is an excellent OS, rock solid and without degredation. I expect Windows 7 to be even better. Time will tell.

And this is why MS abandoned Vista altogether, admitting that it was more or less a failure.

Installing Open Office and Picasa 3 on OS X was messy for me. YMMV.

Not by much.

Trek2100
Oct 26, 2009, 08:12 AM
I do not doubt that WIN 7 is a good OS. I love my OS X SL and I'm sure I will like WIN 7 when I get my new Imac i7 since I have some software that cannot run on the Cat. However, I would love to see performance testing between SL and WIN 7 with all of the anti-virus software installed and running, like Norton 360, StopZilla and Uniblue Power suite, etc. If the tests are run using WIN 7 without anti-virus then the tests are somewhat misleading (IMHO). I don't know anyone who runs MS OS's without anti-virus software.

supmango
Oct 26, 2009, 09:53 AM
I do not doubt that WIN 7 is a good OS. I love my OS X SL and I'm sure I will like WIN 7 when I get my new Imac i7 since I have some software that cannot run on the Cat. However, I would love to see performance testing between SL and WIN 7 with all of the anti-virus software installed and running, like Norton 360, StopZilla and Uniblue Power suite, etc. If the tests are run using WIN 7 without anti-virus then the tests are somewhat misleading (IMHO). I don't know anyone who runs MS OS's without anti-virus software.

It would be interesting, however I would suggest running the test with anti-virus on both platforms, to keep everyone happy. The test should still be very revealing.

YMark
Oct 26, 2009, 10:20 AM
The problem with any review of 7 at this point is that they're all done on very new installs of Windows. The fact is that Windows 7 still has a registry, and performance is very likely to suffer over time. That's why you can't take reviews of Windows vs OS X performance seriously: who's using a fresh install of their OS every couple of months? Compare two systems that have been in daily use for 6 months and then you'll have something meaningful.

SPOT ON. Plus malware, viruses, trojans, etc.

A fresh install on Windows should run fast. It won't run as fast tomorrow, guaranteed. And it gets slower every day.

Eidorian
Oct 26, 2009, 10:37 AM
A fresh install on Windows should run fast. It won't run as fast tomorrow, guaranteed. And it gets slower every day.This never seemed to happen under 7 even after months of use.

SeenJeen
Oct 26, 2009, 10:55 AM
For me, Microsoft closed the gap between Windows and OS X with Windows 7. At this point of my life I'm relatively satisfied with Snow Leopard (for the most part), but if Apple started slipping up and future releases become unreliable, I wouldn't mind switching over to Windows 7 as a full time OS. It's nothing for me to convert over my CS Master Collection serials to Windows. My main computer is a MBP 13", and I have a homebrew computer as well as a Toshiba laptop running W7, and its awesome.

jamalk
Oct 26, 2009, 11:14 AM
i'd love to see what apps are running without pressing more than a button(or even without pushing any button)

you know, maybe the reviewer counts on the new features that se7en has. ok i admit it, se7en has many features but SL has 0 new features, remember?

anyhow

"The rumors of OS X loss have been greatly exaggerated"

supmango
Oct 26, 2009, 12:25 PM
This never seemed to happen under 7 even after months of use.

It did for me, although certainly less pronounced than with XP. And I wasn't really using it that much (except for testing). Security updates will surely cause even more slow downs over time. This has always been Microsoft's Achilles heel.

Eidorian
Oct 26, 2009, 12:28 PM
It did for me, although certainly less pronounced than with XP. And I wasn't really using it that much (except for testing). Security updates will surely cause even more slow downs over time. This has always been Microsoft's Achilles heel.I've been beating 7 senseless in my testing.

There have been users here that have barely touched 7 but are still making some rather large claims.

Pika
Oct 26, 2009, 01:18 PM
Windows 7 is sweeping things up with a strange bubble of positive thinking mainly achieved by the fact that it looks pretty. It has a nice gloss on it, but when it comes down to it the UI is obtrusive, which is exactly what OS X has been getting away from over the years, by toning things down and making them more functional. Unfortunately people don't see this, they look at Windows 7 and think "ooh shiny", they look at OS X and think "oh, grey". But when it comes down to it Windows 7's interface is distracting, and frequently annoying, while OS X's you forget it's there until you need it to do something in a couple of clicks. I've yet to find any of my common tasks as easy to achieve on Windows 7 as in OS X, as I find myself have to take all kinds of annoying extra steps.Just because I like the shininess doesn't mean it was my main reason for upgrading my laptop. And yes there's extra steps. But you know why, because that's the most you can really do to impliment "security" besides patches for the stupid people. And don't start with secureness again, it's been pointed out how easy it is to **** up a mac.The underpinnings of Windows 7 are ultimately the same, and are based on the same flawed components that have been there since Windows 95, possibly even earlier! They removed a load of bloat from Vista, and that's great, but really it should never have been there in the first place.Last I checked Macs and Linux still use the same underpinnings as ages ago "Baw new kernel". Well here's the thing. Windows 7's underpinning isn't Windows 95 but WindowsNT. And yes there is a difference, 95, 98, and Me were not based on NT.Functionality wise, productivity-wise etc. they have made little to no real progress at all, it's all eye-candy and fluff. What have they done that could really matter in the long-run? Snow Leopard has added great new technologies onto a heap of great new technologies, that Windows, C#, and .NET simply don't have. But what's more, many of these great new technologies are open-source, not proprietary, or anti-competitive.Little? Well if we go back to your example, Windows 95, seen as that's the same "underpinnings" hmm? There's been vast changes, from Vista? Not really no, as said earlier, it was just a massive fix to Vista. And Baw open-source. In fairness I don't give a **** about open-source, just because Apple are more "open" doesn't mean they're any better than MS. Allowing Open-source just lets a company look good, that's it. Sides, last I checked youcan do open-source on Windows. All you do is right a program and leave it in public domain, isn't that what Firefox is? *Shrugs*And I don't see how Windows 7 wins on stability, as I've seen it lock-up three or four times on a clean-install, doing nothing really out-of-the-ordinary. That's lock up the entire system, not just a program ceasing to respond (which is the program's fault not the OS). I've also had it randomly crash during start-up!That's bizarre. No really, not having a dig at you here or anything. From a standpoint of a out of date system (And I mean, out of date, most computers aren't even sold with 1GB of RAM anymore), the only "lock-up" I've encountered was Windows Live Messenger, and we all know how bitchy that particular program is *rolls eyes* And I've been pushing it to the limits of it's RAM, and I've yet to actually experence more than one program not responding.Unfortunately, it probably will at least bring out people to question SL over Win 7. Those people are generally inept and rely on simple statements like this to make computing decisions. However, if people are smart they'll test both and see what happens you know?Smart people also know which system is better for them in the long run. Windows may be "****" compared to Macs, but it all depends on standpoint. Macs can run better, so what? Unless you're making some extremely precise measurements over a extremely-short time, I somehow doubt the small fractions of difference that 7 and SL have will make much of a difference if you want to type up a document.Is SL unstable? I don't know. In my limited user experience on three very different machines I have not found SL to be unstable.*cough*bugthatwipesyourprimaryaccount*cough*#Windows 7-running computers with problems/# of total computers with Windows 7 installed

Vs.

#Snow Leopard-running computers with problems/# of total computers with Snow Leopard installed
Yes there's a smaller percentage on SL's side, or is there? Hmm. Technically you'd have a smaller number on the 7 side due to the fact it's More/A lot more against Not much/Not much more. That kind of ratio is a bit, biased against macs in some cases.give your win7 registry a month or two of use and come back here and try to claim that win7 is more stable than OSX. you'll be singing a different tune.

even the best maintained systems fall victim to MS' registry inefficiencies at some point in my experience.
Inefficiency or not, MS' higgledly piggledly Registry doesn't have that huge of an effect, okay sure. There's som slowdown as time goes by. But last I checked, that happens to both Macs and Linux too. Not denying MS has a crap registry, it really does, but don't act like it's MS exclusive.*

daflake
Oct 26, 2009, 01:28 PM
I have one Windows box at the house and it now has Windows 7 loaded on it (Home Premium). I have to say that so far I am impressed. It is much more stable than Vista was from day one. I loaded Vista up on the same machine and had three blue screens just in a day. This seems to be solid so far. That being said, MS has a way of BETA testing on its users. 2000 -> XP and VISTA -> Windows 7. At least this is a move in the right direction for them as they are working with the vendors instead of ignoring them.

AAPLaday
Oct 26, 2009, 01:40 PM
Most of the reviews i have read have said that windows 7 is the best OS Microsoft have ever made. Looks to be the one to have for any gamers out there as well. Certainly more-so than Vista.

pigoz
Oct 26, 2009, 02:11 PM
Newer Macs have this feature too, it's just not advertised very well.

You get hardware decoding only with the 9400M integrated video card, which is equipped only on laptops and low end desktops. On Windows through DXVA they support hardware acceleration even for old low end cards. For example the ATi 2600 coming with my iMac would work with Windows DXVA. Even Linux + mplayer has a better support for video decoding acceleration.

If you by chance wanted to have hardware acceleration with mplayer on OSX you can't because Apple did not implement the feature in their video drivers (by the way they should just let ATi and nVidia take care of the drivers, and let Sun take care of the JVM because OSX video drivers are a lot slower than video counterparts).

Moreover you can't use components with QuickTimeX, so we lost even the horrendous support for the matroska container that Perian had (btw it is not fault of the guys from Perian that the matroska demuxer is ****).

At the moment QuickTimeX need to travel a long way to be up to par with the alternatives offered by other platforms.

TL;DR: Apple is getting its ass kicked in the media segment.

Teddy's
Oct 26, 2009, 02:16 PM
Meh. I just can't believe the amount of crap postings in this page loathing Snow Leopard. Oh well, it's your right to post.

At home I tend to avoid Win (Obviously I am not a gamer) I use OpenSuse pc's and Macs.

It is just something not right in windows. I tried win7... yes I did. My screen flickered and almost died everytime it came back from sleep. The battery life was shortened from 3 hours (Linux) to ****** 30 min (Win7) Plus, I am not a fan of the security features like, UAC... anybody?
To name a few.

Also, I sincerely dislike bullies like Egghead Ballmer.

FX120
Oct 26, 2009, 10:01 PM
And this is why MS abandoned Vista altogether, admitting that it was more or less a failure.

Do you read what you type after punching the keys?

Three years after releasing Vista, developing a new version is considered abandonment of the previous?

Please.

DMann
Oct 26, 2009, 10:56 PM
Do you read what you type after punching the keys?

Three years after releasing Vista, developing a new version is considered abandonment of the previous?

Please.

FYI, As soon as Vista was released, Dell, with MS's blessings, began selling XP as the OEM instead. If this isn't abandonment, I don't know what is.

Microsoft began pushing news of Windows 7 less than a year after Vista was released, promising that it would fix the problems that plagued Vista.


Daniel Robinson, October, 2008Microsoft Admits Vista 'Failure'

"Speaking at Microsoft's Professional Developer Conference (PDC) in Los Angeles, senior vice president for Windows Steven Sinofsky conceded that Vista had not

gone as well as the company hoped, and said things would be different with Windows 7. "The ecosystem wasn't as ready for the launch of Vista as we would have liked.

Drivers weren't there, application compatibility wasn't there," he admitted. Although Microsoft has not yet specified system requirements for Windows 7, Sinofsky said the

company was "pleased with performance even on low-end netbooks with an Atom processor and 1GB memory".


Steve Ballmer, April, 2008

"Windows Vista: A work in progress. [Laughter, applause.] A very important piece of work, and I think we did a lot of things right, and I think we have a lot of things we

need to learn from. Certainly, you never want to let five years go between releases. Can we just sort of kiss that stone and move on? Because it turns out many things become

problematic when you have those long release cycles."


Straight from the horses mouth, Bill Gates (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6qIETRCxbw) on Vista.


Next time, read into the actual unfolding of events before making such accusatory statements.

habubauza
Oct 27, 2009, 04:13 AM
I have used W7 for a week now on a 3 year old HP laptop. It is faster than my Black Macbook 2.4 GHz running SL. I don't know if it's SL or what, but I frequently get the spinning ball when multi tasking. I love my macbook, but I have to give credit where credit is due and Microsoft has done a nice job with W7.

To me it seems as though they actually took a page out of the Linux playbook as opposed to copying anything Mac OS X is about. Yeah, I think it's that stable.

I agree with previous posters that Windows has closed the gap with Apple as far as OS's are concerned, and when combined with the price gap, it's going to be harder to convince people to spend $1,000+ on a new Apple computer.

Apple had better be paying attention. The recent release of the white polycarbonate macbook which sees the removal of firewire and NO SD Card slot is just stupid. Come on Apple, what the hell are you thinking? SD Card slots are now considered industry standard. Even underpowered Netbooks have them!

Avro
Oct 27, 2009, 06:05 AM
Did it? I can't remember any good thorough reviews of Vista.

Yes, even some Mac magazines were saying that Vista had knocked OS X for 6. Deja Vu?

John C Dvorak (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2354784,00.asp) has said today that a year from now Windows 7 will be slowed to a crawl.

In the meantime, patches for Windows 7 will begin to roll out. Most of these will be security patches. Each one will slow down the OS until it's a complete dog by 2011, and then Microsoft will roll out SP1 to "fix everything." The pundits will rave about how great Windows 7 SP1 is, while complaining about how long it took for Microsoft to deliver it.

Ask students who bought the Windows 7 download, it was corrupt (http://www.techspot.com/news/36698-microsoft-acknowledges-problem-with-windows-7-student-upgrades.html). Microsoft apparently is offering refunds.

jamalk
Oct 27, 2009, 09:56 AM
yeah i've heard my friend praising on w7's performance on notebooks..but i've never heard from desktop user (should i write "yet" ?)

supmango
Oct 27, 2009, 11:03 AM
I've been beating 7 senseless in my testing.

There have been users here that have barely touched 7 but are still making some rather large claims.

You have been using your copy as someone who knows what they are doing. I have been careful to do some things I have seen people who do not know what they are doing do. Many home users will try to fix their own problems, and if they do not know that deleting or modifying a registry key will sometimes cause serious issues, they might do it thinking it is the right thing to do since someone on the internet told them to do it (I have seen it all too often). Now that it is publicly available, I will see it more and get to troubleshoot it for others. And we (or at least I) will see what kinds of things people end up doing to their machines.

Here is an excerpt from John Dvorak on PC Magazine's site (link provided by Avro above). It pretty much outlines my experience and reasons for switching to Mac.

"Windows 7 put Microsoft back on track. So where do we go from here? Well, if all goes according to Microsoft's traditional pattern, the company will pre-announce the next OS, codenamed something stupid and obscure like Loganberry, Pygmy, or Seagull. Microsoft execs will promise all sorts of fantastic new features that we've all been waiting for. Development on the OS will have already been underway for a year, and the results will be touted as being better than anything that came before. Microsoft will promise the OS for 2013, and it will be delivered in 2014, with most of the promised features missing.

In the meantime, patches for Windows 7 will begin to roll out. Most of these will be security patches. Each one will slow down the OS until it's a complete dog by 2011, and then Microsoft will roll out SP1 to "fix everything." The pundits will rave about how great Windows 7 SP1 is, while complaining about how long it took for Microsoft to deliver it.

In other words, here we go again."

BongoBanger
Oct 27, 2009, 11:11 AM
You have been using your copy as someone who knows what they are doing. I have been careful to do some things I have seen people who do not know what they are doing do. Many home users will try to fix their own problems, and if they do not know that deleting or modifying a registry key will sometimes cause serious issues, they might do it thinking it is the right thing to do since someone on the internet told them to do it (I have seen it all too often). Now that it is publicly available, I will see it more and get to troubleshoot it for others. And we (or at least I) will see what kinds of things people end up doing to their machines.

I doubt most home users know how to access the registry let alone edit it.

Eidorian
Oct 27, 2009, 11:14 AM
You have been using your copy as someone who knows what they are doing. I have been careful to do some things I have seen people who do not know what they are doing do. Many home users will try to fix their own problems, and if they do not know that deleting or modifying a registry key will sometimes cause serious issues, they might do it thinking it is the right thing to do since someone on the internet told them to do it (I have seen it all too often). Now that it is publicly available, I will see it more and get to troubleshoot it for others. And we (or at least I) will see what kinds of things people end up doing to their machines.I'll just continue testing as I have for months and not make my judgments from a passing glance then.

Here is an excerpt from John Dvorak on PC Magazine's site (link provided by Avro above). It pretty much outlines my experience and reasons for switching to Mac.

"Windows 7 put Microsoft back on track. So where do we go from here? Well, if all goes according to Microsoft's traditional pattern, the company will pre-announce the next OS, codenamed something stupid and obscure like Loganberry, Pygmy, or Seagull. Microsoft execs will promise all sorts of fantastic new features that we've all been waiting for. Development on the OS will have already been underway for a year, and the results will be touted as being better than anything that came before. Microsoft will promise the OS for 2013, and it will be delivered in 2014, with most of the promised features missing.

In the meantime, patches for Windows 7 will begin to roll out. Most of these will be security patches. Each one will slow down the OS until it's a complete dog by 2011, and then Microsoft will roll out SP1 to "fix everything." The pundits will rave about how great Windows 7 SP1 is, while complaining about how long it took for Microsoft to deliver it.

In other words, here we go again."I hope you've read Dvorak's other works in the past.

FX120
Oct 27, 2009, 12:01 PM
FYI, As soon as Vista was released, Dell, with MS's blessings, began selling XP as the OEM instead. If this isn't abandonment, I don't know what is.

Microsoft began pushing news of Windows 7 less than a year after Vista was released, promising that it would fix the problems that plagued Vista.


Daniel Robinson, October, 2008Microsoft Admits Vista 'Failure'

"Speaking at Microsoft's Professional Developer Conference (PDC) in Los Angeles, senior vice president for Windows Steven Sinofsky conceded that Vista had not

gone as well as the company hoped, and said things would be different with Windows 7. "The ecosystem wasn't as ready for the launch of Vista as we would have liked.

Drivers weren't there, application compatibility wasn't there," he admitted. Although Microsoft has not yet specified system requirements for Windows 7, Sinofsky said the

company was "pleased with performance even on low-end netbooks with an Atom processor and 1GB memory".


Steve Ballmer, April, 2008

"Windows Vista: A work in progress. [Laughter, applause.] A very important piece of work, and I think we did a lot of things right, and I think we have a lot of things we

need to learn from. Certainly, you never want to let five years go between releases. Can we just sort of kiss that stone and move on? Because it turns out many things become

problematic when you have those long release cycles."


Straight from the horses mouth, Bill Gates (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6qIETRCxbw) on Vista.


Next time, read into the actual unfolding of events before making such accusatory statements.

Right, but I don't see how any of that constitutes abandonment. Maybe you need to go pick up a dictionary and look at the definition of "abandon".

Microsoft never stopped selling Vista. They never stopped supporting Vista.

Continuing to develop 7 while (at the OEM's request) offering XP as well does not constitute abandonment.

FOXEO
Oct 27, 2009, 12:21 PM
I've been beating 7 senseless in my testing.

There have been users here that have barely touched 7 but are still making some rather large claims.

I set my Leopard installation aside and used the Win7 RC1 for approximately two months, and then after that have been using it on and off with Mac OS X Leopard/Snow Leopard. I installed a variety of programs on Windows, and ran all sorts of games as well.

I don't intentionally try to "test" OSes in general. I just "use them." The goal, for me, is to see what it is like for me to actually use the OS, what my real world experience is doing what I do on computers.

Windows 7 drove me nuts, and made me want OS X more and more. Here is a short list of some of the problems I encountered despite doing two full reinstalls and changing out hardware:

* Firefox would launch OK, then if I tried to shut it down, it would appear to shut down. However, an attempt to launch it again would pop up a window saying it's already running, and it appeared in the Task Manager despite the window being unavailable. Had to End Task on it to run it again.

* When copying files from one location to another, the destination location would show nothing. I had to right click and choose "Refresh" for the items to show up.

* When launching Halo while using dual monitors, it would reset my resolution to a lower one, the music would play, I could hear my mouse moving over options on the screen, but I could only see my desktop. Had to End Task. Never got it working without unplugging the second monitor.

* When launching Fallout 3 with dual monitors, the game would crash instantly. Did this for about a month or so. Now it doesn't do that, nothing has changed as far as I know.

* When launching a number of other games, including Bioshock, Mass Effect, and others, the program would hang in the Task Manager without showing any windows. After several attempts it would generally start up.

* A lot of general slowness. Many apps, games, and system navigation seem to take much longer than they should.

* A Windows Update disabled my ethernet. Had to find the proper drivers manually with another computer, then attempt two installs, a reset, another install, and a reset before the problem was solved.

* And much more :p

Funny thing is, I've read through this entire thread, and I have found a number of contradicting statements. One person says Control Panel is snappier and easier to use, another says the same thing about System Preferences. One person says the whole GUI is snappier in SL, another says the same of Windows 7. One says Windows 7 is more responsive and easier to navigate, another, SL.

A lot of opinion involved, but it seems that people cannot agree which is "snappier."

Eidorian
Oct 27, 2009, 12:38 PM
* Firefox would launch OK, then if I tried to shut it down, it would appear to shut down. However, an attempt to launch it again would pop up a window saying it's already running, and it appeared in the Task Manager despite the window being unavailable. Had to End Task on it to run it again.I had similar problems with FireFox and was unable to replicate it in any other browser. I think it has something to do with the Flash plug-in. I've even tried no add-on installs and it would still just crash. Chrome, Safari, and Internet Explorer 8 never had any problems.

* When copying files from one location to another, the destination location would show nothing. I had to right click and choose "Refresh" for the items to show up.Finder under Tiger was prone to this to the point where users created Relaunch Finder buttons. It's less common under Leopard or Snow Leopard but it still does happen.


* When launching Fallout 3 with dual monitors, the game would crash instantly. Did this for about a month or so. Now it doesn't do that, nothing has changed as far as I know.Fallout 3 in general is crash prone.


* A Windows Update disabled my ethernet. Had to find the proper drivers manually with another computer, then attempt two installs, a reset, another install, and a reset before the problem was solved.I take it that it was a Realtek adapter?

FOXEO
Oct 27, 2009, 01:06 PM
I had similar problems with FireFox and was unable to replicate it in any other browser. I think it has something to do with the Flash plug-in. I've even tried no add-on installs and it would still just crash. Chrome, Safari, and Internet Explorer 8 never had any problems.

Finder under Tiger was prone to this to the point where users created Relaunch Finder buttons. It's less common under Leopard or Snow Leopard but it still does happen.


Fallout 3 in general is crash prone.


I take it that it was a Realtek adapter?

Yup, Realtek issue.

I have experienced none of these issues in Snow Leopard or Leopard. I've been using Mac OS X much more than Windows 7 too, running lots of apps including Final Cut Studio 2 and now 3.

Even with dual monitors on my Hackintosh, it still runs virtually flawlessly, so far beating the pants off Windows 7. My only complaint is a direct result of running a Hackintosh: I cannot recover from Sleep properly.

I like reading about benchmarks and whatnot, but for me, the only valid experience is my own. I cannot verify anyone else's, nor do I care what benchmarks say if I don't literally see and feel that speed when using the OS myself. My standard is simple and what most people won't admit: if *I* don't personally see the speed and personally enjoy the features, I don't like it.

I like Snow Leopard. I don't really like Windows 7. I like it better than Vista or XP, however.

Eidorian
Oct 27, 2009, 01:11 PM
Well I've had to use OS X 10.3 to 10.5 in many different situations that most users wouldn't have. You learn a few things and pray with the rest of your IT staff that Apple might fix a current gamebreaker in the next version or OS X.

I'm still not sold on Snow Leopard due to the nonsense changes. That's besides the problems and inconsistencies I've been having with it. I can't find any reason to deploy it further than my test bed. That really bothers me because we're going to run out of 10.5 Leopard machines eventually.

djrobsd
Oct 27, 2009, 01:37 PM
To me, Windows 7 is a HUGE fail. Most computers will not qualify for an upgrade path and will have to do custom. If you don't believe me, what a pain it is to upgrade from XP to Windows 7, just check out this link:

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows7/help/upgrading-from-windows-xp-to-windows-7

Why couldn't Microsoft have made it easier? They want you to download a migration tool, plug in an external hard drive, copy all your data, and then do a fresh install of 7 which erases your entire computer?

That is such a joke, I can't stop laughing!!!

I guess they are in cahoots with the PC manufacturers to try and discourage people from upgrading and get them to buy a new computer.... FAIL!

In defense of Microsoft, I do have to say Apple has it made, they only have to deal with ONE set of hardware, Microsoft is dealing with hundreds of different network cards, video cards, modems, sound card, motherboard chipsets, and even processors (AMD/Intel)...

So, even though M$ is a big pain, I can see why they might have more difficulty making the upgrade process as seemless as Apple does.

FOXEO
Oct 27, 2009, 01:39 PM
Well I've had to use OS X 10.3 to 10.5 in many different situations that most users wouldn't have. You learn a few things and pray with the rest of your IT staff that Apple might fix a current gamebreaker in the next version or OS X.

I mean no offense, but unless you provide more than "trust me, I know," your statements are meaningless.

Anyone can play that game and it doesn't lead to any meaningful conversation.

"Trust me, I use the system in ways you don't, and it's got problems."

OK... how, and what? How do you use that others don't, and what are the problems? It's not that I don't believe you, it's that I have no reason to believe you. I'm all for the facts coming out, but cheap shots are cheap shots. I provided a list of particular issues to back up my conclusions.

Eidorian
Oct 27, 2009, 01:40 PM
I guess they are in cahoots with the PC manufacturers to try and discourage people from upgrading and get them to buy a new computer.... FAIL!I think you should take a look at Snow Leopard first and see what isn't supported because you don't have the hardware to do it or just isn't supported even though you do have the hardware.

Full 64-bit support is still mostly a joke at retail launch.

I mean no offense, but unless you provide more than "trust me, I know," your statements are meaningless.

Anyone can play that game and it doesn't lead to any meaningful conversation.

"Trust me, I use the system in ways you don't, and it's got problems."

OK... how, and what? How do you use that others don't, and what are the problems? It's not that I don't believe you, it's that I have no reason to believe you. I'm all for the facts coming out, but cheap shots are cheap shots. I provided a list of particular issues to back up my conclusions.You don't happen to be using LDAP authentication and network mounting home directories over NFS?

Adobe has also confirmed the Open and Save file dialog problems as well even in non-Adobe applications.

FOXEO
Oct 27, 2009, 01:53 PM
You don't happen to be using LDAP authentication and network mounting home directories over NFS?

No. Is this mainly a one-issue problem? Some people really need or want their computer to do one thing in particular that has problems, and it is a deal-breaker for them.



Adobe has also confirmed the Open and Save file dialog problems as well even in non-Adobe applications.

What are these problems? My wife is a graphic design artist running the Adobe suite, and she has no idea what you're referring to.

Eidorian
Oct 27, 2009, 02:05 PM
No. Is this mainly a one-issue problem? Some people really need or want their computer to do one thing in particular that has problems, and it is a deal-breaker for them.There have been a lot of minor issues over the years. Right now it's the Open/Save problems and application compatibility which I can't completely blame Apple for.

The solutions from Tiger to Leopard still work for what problems we had then.

What are these problems? My wife is a graphic design artist running the Adobe suite, and she has no idea what you're referring to.http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/506/cpsid_50654.html

The note is here and it was mentioned in their blog. I can get this to happen on the local file system though. I have three test machines and my own Macbook. I've tried using different install media as well. I've already ranted enough on what problems I have with my own Macbook and trying to run Snow Leopard.

supmango
Oct 27, 2009, 02:30 PM
I hope you've read Dvorak's other works in the past.

Past works are not relevant. We agree on this point.

Eidorian
Oct 27, 2009, 02:31 PM
Past works are not relevant. We agree on this point.Please elaborate.

supmango
Oct 27, 2009, 02:32 PM
I doubt most home users know how to access the registry let alone edit it.

Sure they do, I see it all the time. It's not rocket science, its Windows.

supmango
Oct 27, 2009, 02:34 PM
Please elaborate.

What is there to elaborate on? Read what Dvorak said about Windows and know that we agree on that point. His experience with the software parallels my own.

Eidorian
Oct 27, 2009, 02:36 PM
His experience with the software parallels my own.Go on...

supmango
Oct 27, 2009, 02:42 PM
Go on...

Since you obviously have a hard time locating the post, I will re-quote what Dvorak said.

"Windows 7 put Microsoft back on track. So where do we go from here? Well, if all goes according to Microsoft's traditional pattern, the company will pre-announce the next OS, codenamed something stupid and obscure like Loganberry, Pygmy, or Seagull. Microsoft execs will promise all sorts of fantastic new features that we've all been waiting for. Development on the OS will have already been underway for a year, and the results will be touted as being better than anything that came before. Microsoft will promise the OS for 2013, and it will be delivered in 2014, with most of the promised features missing.

In the meantime, patches for Windows 7 will begin to roll out. Most of these will be security patches. Each one will slow down the OS until it's a complete dog by 2011, and then Microsoft will roll out SP1 to "fix everything." The pundits will rave about how great Windows 7 SP1 is, while complaining about how long it took for Microsoft to deliver it.

In other words, here we go again."

As I said before, it is not relevant what Dvorak has said or not in the past, but this summary parallels my own experience with the company since 1995. There is nothing to elaborate on.

Eidorian
Oct 27, 2009, 02:44 PM
Since you obviously have a hard time locating the post, I will re-quote what Dvorak said.

"Windows 7 put Microsoft back on track. So where do we go from here? Well, if all goes according to Microsoft's traditional pattern, the company will pre-announce the next OS, codenamed something stupid and obscure like Loganberry, Pygmy, or Seagull. Microsoft execs will promise all sorts of fantastic new features that we've all been waiting for. Development on the OS will have already been underway for a year, and the results will be touted as being better than anything that came before. Microsoft will promise the OS for 2013, and it will be delivered in 2014, with most of the promised features missing.

In the meantime, patches for Windows 7 will begin to roll out. Most of these will be security patches. Each one will slow down the OS until it's a complete dog by 2011, and then Microsoft will roll out SP1 to "fix everything." The pundits will rave about how great Windows 7 SP1 is, while complaining about how long it took for Microsoft to deliver it.

In other words, here we go again."

As I said before, it is not relevant what Dvorak has said or not in the past, but this summary parallels my own experience with the company since 1995. There is nothing to elaborate on.Repeating it isn't going to change my knowledge and opinions about John C. Dvorak.

Just leave it at that.

supmango
Oct 27, 2009, 02:52 PM
Repeating it isn't going to change my knowledge and opinions about John C. Dvorak.

Just leave it at that.

Since you prefer Microsoft technology to Apple technology, it is likely that you do not like what he has to say. I honestly do not know what he has said in the past, since I am not an avid reader of PC Magazine. But, as Eleanor Roosevelt said:

“Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.”

Thus, my opinion of Dvorak (as a person) should be less important than the content (or idea) of his message.

Eidorian
Oct 27, 2009, 03:14 PM
I honestly do not know what he has said in the past, since I am not an avid reader of PC Magazine. I don't read PC Magazine either.

But, as Eleanor Roosevelt said:

“Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.”

Thus, my opinion of Dvorak (as a person) should be less important than the content (or idea) of his message.Alright. (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1923144,00.asp)

That's just one of many things over the years. Pessimism, sensationalism, outrage, and what you might as well consider trolling are standard fare from him.

I suggest you check out his column, ChannelDvorak, CrankyGeeks, and www.dvorak.org/blog.

Richard1028
Oct 27, 2009, 03:14 PM
To me, Windows 7 is a HUGE fail.

Why couldn't Microsoft have made it easier? They want you to download a migration tool, plug in an external hard drive, copy all your data, and then do a fresh install of 7 which erases your entire computer?

That is such a joke, I can't stop laughing!!!

Yuk it up fanboy. How long have you been here on the forums?

There are all kinds of threads here telling mac users to do the same type of "clean" install just going from 10.5 to 10.6.

BongoBanger
Oct 27, 2009, 04:26 PM
Sure they do, I see it all the time. It's not rocket science, its Windows.

Nah, sorry. Not buying that.

Most computer users wouldn't know a command line if it hit them in the face.

supmango
Oct 27, 2009, 04:27 PM
I don't read PC Magazine either.

Alright. (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1923144,00.asp)

That's just one of many things over the years. Pessimism, sensationalism, outrage, and what you might as well consider trolling are standard fare from him.

I suggest you check out his column, ChannelDvorak, CrankyGeeks, and www.dvorak.org/blog.

And yet, you are quite aware of what he has said. Of course he is extreme, that is what our society has come to demand over the last 10 years or so. If you are not extreme, no one listens. As such, the article was entertaining, but not proof that he has invalid points in all of his writing. Many here who switched from PC to Mac will echo the point made in his article about Windows 7.

Heck, I have friends and colleagues who haven't switched, and may not switch, who will echo what he said in his article.

supmango
Oct 27, 2009, 04:28 PM
Nah, sorry. Not buying that.

Most computer users wouldn't know a command line if it hit them in the face.

Of course, you are right. I have been hallucinating all these years.

BongoBanger
Oct 27, 2009, 04:51 PM
Of course, you are right. I have been hallucinating all these years.

Reading some of your posts that actually isn't too difficult to believe.

Eidorian
Oct 27, 2009, 04:54 PM
And yet, you are quite aware of what he has said.You're preaching to the choir. (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/a-different-look-at-apples-stock-drop?dist=TQP_Mod_mktwN) It just boggles my mind that you'd tell me to disregard his other writings and my past knowledge of him.

Since you prefer Microsoft technology to Apple technology, it is likely that you do not like what he has to say.This little sweet one did make me laugh out loud. Please, don't get trolled by Dvorak. He's paid to write this stuff. He's my favorite tech journalist regardless of what he says.

maccadoodle
Oct 27, 2009, 06:46 PM
I must admit that my relatively fresh macbook (snowleppard and 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 duo with 2GB 1067 Mhz DDR3) Comes up with slightly too many beach balls for my liking but somehow it seems it has always to do with Word for Mac, so Windows problem after all...:apple:

FOXEO
Oct 28, 2009, 03:16 PM
Sure they do, I see it all the time. It's not rocket science, its Windows.

Many programs would underhanded hide data in the registry, whether it was to help prevent abuse of Shareware or some other reason.

No reason is valid IMO. It is malware, and should be treated as such by anti-virus programs.

Another reason I hate the registry, and dislike Windows in general.

PCMacUser
Oct 29, 2009, 01:23 AM
I must admit that my relatively fresh macbook (snowleppard and 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 duo with 2GB 1067 Mhz DDR3) Comes up with slightly too many beach balls for my liking but somehow it seems it has always to do with Word for Mac, so Windows problem after all...:apple:

Hmm, your post demonstrates that you don't even know what Windows is. :rolleyes:

Markleshark
Oct 29, 2009, 01:43 AM
Hmmm, it would seem as if my dad was wrong.

You can polish a turd.

taxcifsa
Oct 29, 2009, 01:58 AM
Hmmm, it would seem as if my dad was wrong.

You can polish a turd.

I'm very interested! I would love to find out more.

DMann
Oct 29, 2009, 02:02 AM
Michael DeAgonia just published a comprehensive and comparative review of W7 and SL, entitled:

Smackdown: Windows 7 takes on Apple's Snow Leopard (http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9139904/Smackdown_Windows_7_takes_on_Apple_s_Snow_Leopard?taxonomyId=125&pageNumber=1)

It's worth the read, as it clarifies as well as confirms concerns about the Windows Registry, as well as other underlying issues. This is the conclusion:

Conclusion

"In terms of pure interface, Microsoft has raised the bar for Windows users. Windows 7 is the best-looking OS out of Redmond, Wash., yet. But let's not confuse that with "innovation."

Many of these features aren't new at all, and many have been available on Mac OS X for years. While Windows 7 closes the gap with Snow Leopard, it does so only at a superficial level. At first, I was impressed with the interface changes and got caught up in the beauty of the Aero themes and sleek look. But after a few weeks of use, reality began to set in. After a Registry issue prevented me from installing an app, I realized Windows 7 is still Windows. Prettier, a little snappier than Vista, perhaps more stable. But at some point, you still face many of the underlying issues that have made Windows a pain to use in the past.

Microsoft's main enemies here aren't really Mac OS X or Linux. What Microsoft needs to worry about are the users and sysadmins who think the hardware and OS already on their desks works just fine. If you're still using XP after all these years, the slick interface and modest under-the-hood changes may not tempt you to spend money on Windows 7.

A friend of mine who works in IT for a major corporation explained it this way: The biggest problem Microsoft has is that after all these years, XP still works for many businesses. "What will force us to move [to Windows 7] is when Microsoft stops releasing security updates [for XP]," he told me. I believe that if Windows 7 appears to be solid right out of the gate, companies may move toward adoption quickly. XP is, after all, nearly a decade old.

If you're still using XP or are finally fed up with Vista, by all means check out Windows 7. It's certainly the best version of Windows yet -- just as it's equally true that Snow Leopard is the best version of Mac OS X. That's why you'd be well advised to check out Snow Leopard before shelling out money for Microsoft's latest.

As an IT professional, I support both operating systems at work. But I have Macs at home; after all, who wants to troubleshoot computer problems on their own time?

My final verdict in this smackdown? It's not even close: Snow Leopard is the better OS."

Kristenn
Oct 29, 2009, 02:05 AM
Well you can polish a turd all you want. Its still a turd right? Windows 7 is awsome. Viruses? not a problem for me =O What makes Windows still a turd to me? The registry. My friend hates it. It must rub off.

ViciousShadow21
Oct 29, 2009, 02:10 AM
Yuk it up fanboy. How long have you been here on the forums?

There are all kinds of threads here telling mac users to do the same type of "clean" install just going from 10.5 to 10.6.

yes but not when just simply upgrading the OS. when i installed SL i didnt have to do any of that. just put the disc in and after 45mins it was updated. didnt have to do all the other steps that djrobsd mentioned.

this doesnt really have anything to do with a being a fanboy. doesnt mean that one OS is better than the other because the upgrade process is simpler on one and not the other. so please lets keep this "discussion" as friendly as possible.

BongoBanger
Oct 29, 2009, 02:52 AM
I sometimes wonder if people actually know what the registry is and does based on the comments here, why it sometimes gets cluttered and how easy it is to declutter it.

I like DeAgonia - he's always good for a laugh though.

DMann
Oct 29, 2009, 02:58 AM
I sometimes wonder if people actually know what the registry is and does based on the comments here, why it sometimes gets cluttered and how easy it is to declutter it.

I like DeAgonia - he's always good for a laugh though.

Nah, everyone's just making it up - The Registry is just fine - just delete away - no problem.

BongoBanger
Oct 29, 2009, 07:53 AM
Nah, everyone's just making it up - The Registry is just fine - just delete away - no problem.

Now why would you do that? Tsk.

There are issues with the registry just as there are issues with using ini and config files. Both have trade offs.

I just find it bizzare that people talk about constant Windows reinstalls when in a corporate setting we installed XP (ugh) three years ago on 10,000+ machines and haven't had to do a reinstall yet.

Of course the reason is that the registry gets cluttered because people install badly coded programs that don't have uninstallers or put themselves in as start ups - you know, like Quicktime does. Fortunately there are increasingly few of these to contend with and in a corporate environment we lock the install function down anyway.

The reason I find it baffling is that a few people state that it's security updates and patches that slow Windows down and that you need to do a clean install to sort it out. Well fine, until you realise that the first thing the reinstall will do will be to reinstall those patches and upadates and that after it's done so the OS is still fast so that they're not the reason at all.

Registry bloat will still happen - as will bloat due to rogue config and ini files - but that can be obviated by the use of an excellent free utility like CCleaner. You could argue that you shouldn't have to but if you move to a central database like structure you'll always have the issue of badly coded applications causing clutter so it's a useful thing to have.

That's whay I fin DeAgonia funny and why I wouldn't quote him as a standalone source for the same reason I wouldn't quote Paul Thurrot on this matter. They both have their own agendas.

Richard1028
Oct 29, 2009, 08:19 AM
yes but not when just simply upgrading the OS. when i installed SL i didnt have to do any of that.Ok. You didn't have problems so nobody else did. (I get so tired of these, "My mac works therefore everybody else is stupid" comments).

just put the disc in and after 45mins it was updated. didnt have to do all the other steps that djrobsd mentioned.It took me 35 minutes. You should've left out the extra printer support and language packs.

this doesnt really have anything to do with a being a fanboy. doesnt mean that one OS is better than the other because the upgrade process is simpler on one and not the other. That's basically what I said to the person I was replying to. Why aren't you telling him?

And there are no fanboy comments here?!?! LOL!

so please lets keep this "discussion" as friendly as possible.Preaching to the choir kid, but plenty of mods here already... we don't need another.

DMann
Oct 29, 2009, 01:31 PM
Now why would you do that? Tsk.

There are issues with the registry just as there are issues with using ini and config files. Both have trade offs.

I just find it bizzare that people talk about constant Windows reinstalls when in a corporate setting we installed XP (ugh) three years ago on 10,000+ machines and haven't had to do a reinstall yet.

Of course the reason is that the registry gets cluttered because people install badly coded programs that don't have uninstallers or put themselves in as start ups - you know, like Quicktime does. Fortunately there are increasingly few of these to contend with and in a corporate environment we lock the install function down anyway.

The reason I find it baffling is that a few people state that it's security updates and patches that slow Windows down and that you need to do a clean install to sort it out. Well fine, until you realise that the first thing the reinstall will do will be to reinstall those patches and upadates and that after it's done so the OS is still fast so that they're not the reason at all.

Registry bloat will still happen - as will bloat due to rogue config and ini files - but that can be obviated by the use of an excellent free utility like CCleaner. You could argue that you shouldn't have to but if you move to a central database like structure you'll always have the issue of badly coded applications causing clutter so it's a useful thing to have.

That's whay I fin DeAgonia funny and why I wouldn't quote him as a standalone source for the same reason I wouldn't quote Paul Thurrot on this matter. They both have their own agendas.

The fact that one needs to:

Curb one's choices of software over concerns of The Registry.

Waste hard drive space by having to retain droves of application installer/uninstallers.

Run the risk of ruining the Registry through improper use of CCleaner.

Be mindful or concerned about 'Registry Rot' and Registry bloat at all.


And


The fact that one cannot:

Move an application to a different path on one's machine, or perhaps to a different machine altogether.

Extract the relevant settings for one particular application from The Registry.

Freely trash applications at will. In OS X, apps are self-contained packages - they can be run outside of a folder, and deleted
by simply dumping them into the trash. This cannot be done in Windows without wreaking havoc on the system.


All of this makes The Registry a liability and handicap which is simply not worth dealing with, at all. After one factors in the vigilance

required for running anti-virus scans/programs/updates on top of this, the whole scenario becomes even more dismal and unattractive,

the trade off being that one actually can manage to balance 'a house of cards' if one is diligent enough - been there, done that - no thank you.

ThatsMeRight
Oct 29, 2009, 02:01 PM
It's now just a matter of preference. And I stay with Windows, just because like the whole world uses it and everything is created for Windows. When Apple has the majority I will move to Mac OS X because than everything will be created for the Mac.

BongoBanger
Oct 29, 2009, 03:21 PM
The fact that one needs to:

Curb one's choices of software over concerns of The Registry.

How so? As I mentioned it's only badly written software. The good stuff has installers.

Waste hard drive space by having to retain droves of application installer/uninstallers.

Net total a few meg. About the size of a few mp3 files and irrelevant in the days of terrabyte storage.

Run the risk of ruining the Registry through improper use of CCleaner.

Nope. CCleaner is really good because it doesn't let you do that.

Be mindful or concerned about 'Registry Rot' and Registry bloat at all.

Or rogue configs and inis.


The fact that one cannot:

Move an application to a different path on one's machine, or perhaps to a different machine altogether.

Yes, this is a weakness. Partly overcome in Vista but an issue if you want to move them. Of course you cold just install the application on the other machine.

Extract the relevant settings for one particular application from The Registry.

Yup. You can but it's difficult and unnecessary task.

Freely trash applications at will. In OS X, apps are self-contained packages - they can be run outside of a folder, and deleted
by simply dumping them into the trash. This cannot be done in Windows without wreaking havoc on the system.

Not strictly true. Dragging well written software will remove it from a Mac but it suffers from the issue of residuals where this isn't the case which requires the use of an unistaller, an application like AppZapper or a manual trawl. However, unistalling by dragging and dropping is safer on a Mac than on a PC.

All of this makes The Registry a liability and handicap which is simply not worth dealing with, at all.

No it doesn't. It demonstrates the disadvantages of a registry - which are much reduced on NT variant Windows compared to 9x - without taking account of the advantages a centralised database gives.

After one factors in the vigilance required for running anti-virus scans/programs/updates on top of this, the whole scenario becomes even more dismal and unattractive

How so? These are automated real time low maintenance processes which can also be scheduled.

the trade off being that one actually can manage to balance 'a house of cards' if one is diligent enough - been there, done that - no thank you.

It's easy enough. The vast majority of computer users have few issues. YMMV.

DMann
Oct 29, 2009, 04:38 PM
How so? As I mentioned it's only badly written software. The good stuff has installers.

Yes, in a similar sense, the good stuff (OSs) can have apps installed and trashed without hassle or concern, can operate

apps outside of their folders, all without dealing with the 'ball of tar' called The Registry.

Net total a few meg. About the size of a few mp3 files and irrelevant in the days of terrabyte storage.

More unnecessary clutter to sift through, hardly worth defending.

Nope. CCleaner is really good because it doesn't let you do that.

Famous last words.

Dangers of Using CCleaner (http://en.onsoftware.com/the-dangers-of-using-ccleaner/)

"Beware of CCLEANER. I tried it and it ruined my registry. I had to use RESTORE to get back what CCLEANER erased. Use with caution.
You will be prompted to accept or decline certain files. Novices don't know better between important files and those that are harmful or unnecessary."

Yes, this is a weakness. Partly overcome in Vista but an issue if you want to move them. Of course you cold just install the application on the other machine.

And if you don't happen to have the install disk handy, you're screwed.

Yup. You can but it's difficult and unnecessary task.

No you cannot, without deciphering unintelligible code. Unnecessary task? Speak for yourself.

Not strictly true. Dragging well written software will remove it from a Mac but it suffers from the issue of residuals where this isn't the case which requires the use of an unistaller, an application like AppZapper or a manual trawl. However, unistalling by dragging and dropping is safer on a Mac than on a PC.

Any Application Support folders, plists, or preferences can be clearly identified and easily trashed without concern in OS X.

Unix also allows different versions to be present in the same directory, whereas Windows does not.

No it doesn't. It demonstrates the disadvantages of a registry - which are much reduced on NT variant Windows compared to 9x - without taking account of the advantages a centralised database gives.

And yet, this remains a poor attempt at defending this archaic puddle of continually rotting rice pudding, a-disaster-waiting-to-happen which is completely avoidable within the OS X environment.

How so? These are automated real time low maintenance processes which can also be scheduled.

More distraction, more attention being diverted from productivity - it all adds up.

It's easy enough. The vast majority of computer users have few issues. YMMV. Again, speak for yourself - for a vast number of users and IT specialists, Their Mileage Varies Greatly.

BongoBanger
Oct 30, 2009, 08:13 AM
Famous last words.

Dangers of Using CCleaner (http://en.onsoftware.com/the-dangers-of-using-ccleaner/)

"Beware of CCLEANER. I tried it and it ruined my registry. I had to use RESTORE to get back what CCLEANER erased. Use with caution.
You will be prompted to accept or decline certain files. Novices don't know better between important files and those that are harmful or unnecessary."

Actually, the author advises:

Perhaps I should have started this post by stating that I think CCleaner is an excellent product and that this was the first time I’d ever had a problem which may or may not have been connected to it. I also made it more than clear that the problem may have been my fault. I conceded in the post that I was “over zealous” in my cleaning, that the problem may have been caused by “something that I uninstalled” and that “it is possible I accidentally removed something related to the session manager.”

In other words it wasn't a quick registry scan, it was an attempt to delete multiple applications and clean up and he's not actually sure what he did. Not indicative of general usage.

And if you don't happen to have the install disk handy, you're screwed.

Unless, like the author of that article, you had a recovery partition which he used to recover his system.

And yet, this remains a poor attempt at defending this archaic puddle of continually rotting rice pudding, a-disaster-waiting-to-happen which is completely avoidable within the OS X environment.

Actually it isn't given your entire case appears to be built on one article quote mined about an application which has garnered universal praise and which the author admits may have had nothing to do with the issue at all.

Again, speak for yourself - for a vast number of users and IT specialists, Their Mileage Varies Greatly.

Do you have anything to back that up? And please, do not select anecdotal points from "the internets greatest hits", I would like demonstrations of proven reinstall rates for Windows boxes at individual and corporate level split between 9x and NT systems.

I can only talk from the personal experience of an IT Manager who has stats on 10,000 local installs of XP, none of which have required a reinstall for reasosn of Windows rot or registry malfunction.

The registry has it faults but it works fine unless you do stuff the average user isn't likely to do. This is the same of any operating system - if you start deleting etc folders and the likes on Linux or OS X you're going to have problems. However it works and it's easy to maintain which is one of the reasons Windows remains the corporate - and consumer - platform of choice.

There is a lot of vitriol expounded about the registry by people who don't really understand how it works and the benefits it offers as well as its drawbacks which is more than a little unfair. Really it's down to individual choice which is overwhelmingly - as professionals - to accept that the upside of Windows outweighs the downside and what the competition currently offers.

wrldwzrd89
Oct 30, 2009, 09:19 AM
My personal opinion on this matter is that Microsoft would be best served by using a "best of both worlds" approach in the next release of Windows, regarding how the registry is handled. Here's my proposal:
1. Maintain the central structure that is in place today.
2. Change the back-end storage model to compressed XML, instead of the binary blob used today.
3. Update all the registry commands to use this new back-end.
4. Introduce an XREG syntax for adding stuff to the registry, that is XML-based, while still preserving the old REG file method.
This would eliminate many of the Windows registry's disadvantages, while preserving its advantages. It would also introduce some new flexibility:
1. The Registry could be migrated from one machine to another, in its entirety, MUCH more simply.
2. Exporting only pieces of it, for example for individual application settings, would also become a lot easier.
3. This change would align Windows with the direction Office is moving in, which has synergistic implications.

AAPLaday
Oct 30, 2009, 01:13 PM
Ideally for me a perfect solution would be a mix of both OS's. Or maybe one day i will build a hackintosh. There are lots of people out there who game on a mac either through cider or bootcamp etc but the frustrating thing is surely the lack of upgradability of macs. My late 2007 iMac is still my main machine and the 2.4GHz cpu is more than powerful enough for my needs, the only thing i would change on it is the graphics card as it isn't great and even at the time wasn't all that.

I know that this wont change as Apple wants you to buy a new system rather than upgrade too many parts yourself but i cant justify spending £1000 every year or so to get a semi decent graphics card. And no a mac pro isn't an option as thats overkill.

I have yet to use Win 7 for more than a few minutes but it does seem a lot snappier than Vista and no matter if Snow Leopard is better or not it wont change the fact that most people who have a computer at home will be running windows, today, tomorrow and in 5 years time.

FOXEO
Oct 30, 2009, 01:47 PM
It's now just a matter of preference. And I stay with Windows, just because like the whole world uses it and everything is created for Windows. When Apple has the majority I will move to Mac OS X because than everything will be created for the Mac.

You know that not "everything" is made for Windows.

For example, there are two programs that are use more than others. Tensai, which wouldn't interest most people, and Final Cut Pro. Neither is available on any other platform other than the Mac. I have found no replacement that I consider suitable for either of these.

Believe it or not, some people won't leave Mac OS X behind because of software unavailable on Windows. I wouldn't leave Mac even if both of these apps were on Windows, because I have a laundry list of complaints about how Windows functions. Some are purely preference, and others are issues of stability and long-term system maintenance.

DMann
Oct 30, 2009, 04:23 PM
Actually, the author advises:

In other words it wasn't a quick registry scan, it was an attempt to delete multiple applications and clean up and he's not actually sure what he did. Not indicative of general usage.

This doesn't change the fact that you initially claimed:

Nope. CCleaner is really good because it doesn't let you do that.

Which, quite frankly, is BS.

If you feel compelled, by some valiant sense of duty, to defend the looming presence of this archaic Registry 'tar ball,' knock yourself out.

Unless, like the author of that article, you had a recovery partition which he used to recover his system.

So now you are telling me that it is possible to move an application to a different path on one's machine from a recovery partition?

Actually it isn't given your entire case appears to be built on one article quote mined about an application which has garnered universal praise and which the author admits may have had nothing to do with the issue at all.Many more claims exist on BBs about how using CCleaner resulted in making users' PCs non-functional. Yet you stated: "Nope. CCleaner is really good because it doesn't let you do that."

Perhaps we ought to assuage the pain of those who actually have had problems, with your flippant quote.

Do you have anything to back that up? And please, do not select anecdotal points from "the internets greatest hits", I would like demonstrations of proven reinstall rates for Windows boxes at individual and corporate level split between 9x and NT systems.

The four IT workers at Lincoln Center, who, despite their unanimous and continual contempt and distaste for Windows maintenance, (emergency maintenance, crashes, defragging - automatic or not,

reinstalls, re-starts, patching, etc.) concur that this is what keeps them in business. Incidentally, three of them prefer to use Macs at home - go figure.

I can only talk from the personal experience of an IT Manager who has stats on 10,000 local installs of XP, none of which have required a reinstall for reasosn of Windows rot or registry malfunction.

Nice to hear.

The registry has it faults but it works fine unless you do stuff the average user isn't likely to do. This is the same of any operating system - if you start deleting etc folders and the likes on Linux or OS X you're going to have problems. However it works and it's easy to maintain which is one of the reasons Windows remains the corporate - and consumer - platform of choice.

There is a lot of vitriol expounded about the registry by people who don't really understand how it works and the benefits it offers as well as its drawbacks which is more than a little unfair. Really it's down to individual choice which is overwhelmingly - as professionals - to accept that the upside of Windows outweighs the downside and what the competition currently offers.

In OS X, an entire application is contained inside of a single icon. This icon is not a folder, rather, it is the application itself. All associated files are neatly contained inside the "package".

Each program has its discrete preference file, arranged neatly in the Preferences folder; one can back-up any of them, carry them on a USB-stick, delete and reset them on demand, etc.

Now try doing that on a Windows PC. Windows is a complete mess by comparison, a hodgepodge of bad design ideas. It seems that they tidied up the filesystem structure a bit in Vista,

but they still haven't gotten rid of the god-awful, lame excuse of a data-base driven, vulnerable preference repository, that is The Registry. Perhaps they need to keep supporting it for

legacy purposes, but should have moved away from it internally, and pushed third party developers to follow suit, by now. Just imagine how different things would be had Windows NT 3.0 or

3.5 developers decided to turn off public access to the registry, and transparently redirected the public registry API calls so they followed simpler, UNIX-like filesystem storage conventions instead?

The Registry's faults and drawbacks far outweigh any 'imagined' benefits, and the sooner they restructure it, the better.

My personal opinion on this matter is that Microsoft would be best served by using a "best of both worlds" approach in the next release of Windows, regarding how the registry is handled. Here's my proposal:
1. Maintain the central structure that is in place today.
2. Change the back-end storage model to compressed XML, instead of the binary blob used today.
3. Update all the registry commands to use this new back-end.
4. Introduce an XREG syntax for adding stuff to the registry, that is XML-based, while still preserving the old REG file method.
This would eliminate many of the Windows registry's disadvantages, while preserving its advantages. It would also introduce some new flexibility:
1. The Registry could be migrated from one machine to another, in its entirety, MUCH more simply.
2. Exporting only pieces of it, for example for individual application settings, would also become a lot easier.
3. This change would align Windows with the direction Office is moving in, which has synergistic implications.

This would be, at least, a step in the right direction.

ViciousShadow21
Oct 31, 2009, 01:22 AM
Ok. You didn't have problems so nobody else did. (I get so tired of these, "My mac works therefore everybody else is stupid" comments).

It took me 35 minutes. You should've left out the extra printer support and language packs.

That's basically what I said to the person I was replying to. Why aren't you telling him?

And there are no fanboy comments here?!?! LOL!

Preaching to the choir kid, but plenty of mods here already... we don't need another.

well i guess you just think you know everything. good luck to you with that attitude.

djellison
Nov 7, 2009, 03:22 AM
All of this makes The Registry a liability and handicap which is simply not worth dealing with, at all..

I've never had to deal with it. It just sits there doing its thing. I don't care about it. I admin 8 XP workstations, 20+ XP Laptops, my own Win7 workstation at home, and a second Win7 machine. And not once - on any of them, has the registry given me any reason to notice it even exists, let alone give me a problem of any sort.

Repair permissions on OSX though? Been told to do that LOTS of times here.

roadbloc
Nov 7, 2009, 04:50 AM
It is all a matter of preference. I use a Mac because I generally like the idea of having a stable operating system with excellent hardware integration. I like not having virus's and I like that I don't need to change any default applications because they all work just fine. I also like the fact that there is brilliant support from Apple and that you don't have to spend hours trawling through millions of rubbish programs to get what you want.

Windows user's use Windows because Windows is initially cheaper, it actually looks attractive, they like to download software and updates constantly, they like gaming, and they like to mess with their hardware.

If I just used a computer for Facebook, MSN, bit of word processing and a couple of games, Windows would win any day. Because I'm doing that, PLUS some serious music production, thats why I'm a mac. I'd get about a week of latency if Windows tried doing what I do on my mac.

muxbox
Nov 7, 2009, 02:09 PM
Ok guys.

Conclusion.

Windows 7 is faster than Snow Leopard. I think apple have messed up snow leopard as i get pauses and spinning wheels when using any of my 3 different macs.

roadbloc
Nov 7, 2009, 05:00 PM
Ok guys.

Conclusion.

Windows 7 is faster than Snow Leopard. I think apple have messed up snow leopard as i get pauses and spinning wheels when using any of my 3 different macs.

i sure hope they were both fresh installs. with windows running anti-virus software, because it will need it. and they were on the same spec computer system.

MythicFrost
Nov 7, 2009, 06:50 PM
Windows 7 is faster than Snow Leopard. I think apple have messed up snow leopard as i get pauses and spinning wheels when using any of my 3 different macs.
Did you do a clean install with Snow Leopard, or just an upgrade?
If the latter, did you also upgrade Windows 7 from Vista, that would be a fair comparison imo.

I did an upgrade on my relatively young leopard OS (6 months) and it went great, my clean install on my SSD was great too.

<IMO>
Windows 7 is behind Leopard, it lacks features such as Expose, Spaces, Time Machine, and Quick Look (just to mention a few important ones).
I have SL and W7 on my SSD, I notice the speed improvement greatly with SL, particularly with opening applications, with W7 all I (think I) noticed was some games had better performance.
</IMO>

I had to pay roughly $450 AU for Windows 7 Ultimate, I paid $300 AU for the Mac Box Set with iLife & iWork 09 for up to 5 computers. I wanted iLife & iWork 09, otherwise it was $69 (IIRC) AU for just the upgrade (which you can still do a clean install with) :)

mac2x
Nov 7, 2009, 07:03 PM
As to dealing with the Registry and application preferences:

Would you rather deal with this?:

http://registrytopia.com/images/Windows-registry.jpg

Or this, a screen shot of Apple's Property List Editor, looking at Finder's plist?:

muxbox
Nov 8, 2009, 08:09 AM
Did you do a clean install with Snow Leopard, or just an upgrade?
If the latter, did you also upgrade Windows 7 from Vista, that would be a fair comparison imo.

I did an upgrade on my relatively young leopard OS (6 months) and it went great, my clean install on my SSD was great too.


I did an install on top of a 3 month old MAC that i am new to and have yet to install any meaningful software on apart from iWork and iPhone SDK.

The bottleneck i seem to be experiencing on a Mac is the HD access.

The MAC filesystem seems to be flawed and has also thrown up errors on 3 of my 5 macs that i tried to use bootcamp with.

XNine
Nov 8, 2009, 09:28 AM
Not sure that all the comments here are 100% accurate in their truthfulness.

I've been using OS X, every single version until Snow Leopard, since 2002. And I've used both Macs and Windows PC's my whole life.

Useful Advantages OS X:
-Simple UI. System Preferences, Contextual Menus, and the Menu Bar are all laid out smoothly, everything is where it should be.
- The Libraries are easy to navigate.
- Powerful Unix commands can wok wonders.
- Amazing Speed in reformatting HDD's.
- Drivers. Ooooh how I love plugging in a Camera that's never been plugged in and iPhoto pops up. Thank You Apple!
- Integration of applications and formats.
- Pro apps. Final Cut (nuff said). Adobe apps even feel much smoother.


Useful Advantages of Windows 7:
- Almost feels like OS X.
- The speed of reformatting drives has been brought up to par with OS X. It's about damn time.
- Better laid out Start Menu and Task Bar.
- Better handling of drivers than ever before.
- A vastly superior selection of hardware.
- Games (I love Steam)


Honestly, these two OS's, as far as the OS goes, are really about as on par with each other as they've ever been. And no matter which one you choose, both are good because it drives competition and innovation in the industry.

muxbox
Nov 8, 2009, 10:37 AM
Not sure that all the comments here are 100% accurate in their truthfulness.

I've been using OS X, every single version until Snow Leopard, since 2002. And I've used both Macs and Windows PC's my whole life.

Useful Advantages OS X:
-Simple UI. System Preferences, Contextual Menus, and the Menu Bar are all laid out smoothly, everything is where it should be.
- The Libraries are easy to navigate.
- Powerful Unix commands can wok wonders.
- Amazing Speed in reformatting HDD's.
- Drivers. Ooooh how I love plugging in a Camera that's never been plugged in and iPhoto pops up. Thank You Apple!
- Integration of applications and formats.
- Pro apps. Final Cut (nuff said). Adobe apps even feel much smoother.


Useful Advantages of Windows 7:
- Almost feels like OS X.
- The speed of reformatting drives has been brought up to par with OS X. It's about damn time.
- Better laid out Start Menu and Task Bar.
- Better handling of drivers than ever before.
- A vastly superior selection of hardware.
- Games (I love Steam)


Honestly, these two OS's, as far as the OS goes, are really about as on par with each other as they've ever been. And no matter which one you choose, both are good because it drives competition and innovation in the industry.

Have you actually tried snow leopard yet? The system is supposed to be faster yet i think it in places it has slowed down like opening and closing applications such as iPhoto.

I do agree that the two systems have never been on such a par as they are today.

The windows UI is now more intuitive than the macs. On the Mac i keep losing all my windows that i have opened yet on windows i can navigate around lots of open windows at high speed.

Am i missing a tirck on the mac? i know i can hold the mouse button down on the applications icon to locate the open windows but this just seems er.. too slow also.

Jason Beck
Nov 8, 2009, 10:59 AM
Also let us not forget the Control Panel in Windows 7. It still looks like it got hit by a truck.
;)

mac2x
Nov 8, 2009, 11:12 AM
Also let us not forget the Control Panel in Windows 7. It still looks like it got hit by a truck.
;)

+1. I tried Win7 on some HP desktop at Costco the other day. While it looks nice at first, the Aero stuff is waaaay over the top, hit-you-in-the-face glitzy. The UI looks nice but it's too busy. I seriously don't get why people think it's all of a sudden better than OS X.

Oh, and the "ribbon interface" sucks big time. Where the heck are the File/Edit menus? I have Office 2007 on my old Dell XP machine, and I knew I hated it already...Mac of course has the traditional stationary menu bar. Getting used to that can be tiresome at first, but the old familiar menus are actually there, unlike with the ribbon business.

mac2x
Nov 8, 2009, 11:16 AM
[...]
The windows UI is now more intuitive than the macs. On the Mac i keep losing all my windows that i have opened yet on windows i can navigate around lots of open windows at high speed.

Am i missing a tirck on the mac? i know i can hold the mouse button down on the applications icon to locate the open windows but this just seems er.. too slow also.

Good stuff like Spaces and Exposé are easy to use; much easier than Win7. Particularly if you enable Hot Corners.

Jason Beck
Nov 8, 2009, 11:25 AM
Good stuff like Spaces and Exposé are easy to use; much easier than Win7. Particularly if you enable Hot Corners.

Word.

mac2x
Nov 8, 2009, 12:05 PM
Uhhh, don't quite follow you there... :confused:

elppa
Nov 8, 2009, 12:37 PM
Windows 7 does a good job of running PCs the way Microsoft wants them to and Snow Leopard does a good job of running Macs the way Apple wants them to.

From a reliability perspective there is very little between Darwin 10 and NT 6.1. A few benefits for both, but no clear winner.

The only difference is the software they empower. Windows has a broader choice and is best for Games, whereas the Mac has some really well thought out applications with great user experience that are hard to find direct equivalents for on Windows. Apps like Coda, Pixelmator, Versions, OmniGraffle, SchoolHouse, Quicksilver, Billings, DirectMail, PageHand, Delicious Library, Yep etc. These have feature equivalents on Windows of course, but the fit and finish it rarely as good. This is a highly subjective area as well. So many people will be happy with tools that just get the job done (no matter how many extra buttons or dialogs they have to click through).

At least personally that's what's keeping me on the Mac platform (that and my Photoshop CS 3 license and knowing the internal workings of UNIX and the Mac better I do NT). I use Windows 7 from time to time, I like Windows 7, but there are some apps which I can't find “good enough” equivalents.

There isn't actually that much Apple software which I would miss if I switched. Save for Mail.

The hardware isn't a huge deal for me. Sure, there are rubbish, cheap PCs out there (and probably always will be), but you can buy very good laptops and desktop which meet or exceed Apple's designs.

I think the real loser from this autumns releases (Snow Leopard, Windows 7, Karmic Koala) is canonical with Ubuntu Linux. They are still fumbling and failing to make any real impact on the Desktop. I still feel there will always be a place for commercial software development.

Edit: To qualify my comments, I'm speaking about consumer use. There's no point speaking about Win 7 vs Snow Leopard in the context of the enterprise, because that is a game Apple has chosen not to play.

muxbox
Nov 8, 2009, 01:16 PM
'There isn't actually that much Apple software which I would miss if I switched. Save for Mail.'



I like the way you think. Mail is the best imap client out there and i cannot find anything remotely as good for windows.

jb60606
Nov 8, 2009, 02:16 PM
kinda silly to ask this question on a Mac forum, isn't it? I love and hate both operating systems. Neither are perfect, and neither address all my needs. I must say that Windows 7 isn't an OS I'm ashamed to have bootcamped, unlike Vista.

boston44
Nov 8, 2009, 04:18 PM
Also let us not forget the Control Panel in Windows 7. It still looks like it got hit by a truck.
;)

It looks really simple and easy to use, but then you realize it's everything but..

Wayne s
Nov 8, 2009, 04:53 PM
Its cheap and for the masses, a bit like Mac Donald's.

Jason Beck
Nov 8, 2009, 05:57 PM
Its cheap and for the masses, a bit like Mac Donald's.

ajhahahah

elppa
Nov 8, 2009, 06:06 PM
It looks really simple and easy to use, but then you realize it's everything but..

Three or four clicks and your into a poorly organised fixed size dialog (designed for screens from the Windows 85/98) days.

[Before anyone accuses me of unjustifiable attacking Windows and show I am making a general point about software (which is ridiculous as I am on a Mac forum)]
iTunes displays this fun characteristic as well (progress bars that block any activity - ala Mac OS 9.

elppa
Nov 8, 2009, 06:08 PM
'I like the way you think. Mail is the best imap client out there and i cannot find anything remotely as good for windows.

Same! I've looked long and hard.

MythicFrost
Nov 8, 2009, 06:35 PM
I did an install on top of a 3 month old MAC that i am new to and have yet to install any meaningful software on apart from iWork and iPhone SDK.

The bottleneck i seem to be experiencing on a Mac is the HD access.

The MAC filesystem seems to be flawed and has also thrown up errors on 3 of my 5 macs that i tried to use bootcamp with.
If that's a problem then try a clean install. My upgrade went just fine, I didn't check for filesystem errors but nothing really disrupted what I was doing.

I love the way the Finder is structured, it's so much better than Windows explorer.

TennisandMusic
Nov 9, 2009, 02:07 AM
Same! I've looked long and hard.

I use Thunderbird 3 Beta 4. Works very similarly and has that same simple inbox structure that I really like. Apple mail was THE mail app for me until I found this. Works great and looks very very similar (and a little more attractive to me on windows) to Apple Mail.

TennisandMusic
Nov 9, 2009, 02:08 AM
Windows 7 does a good job of running PCs the way Microsoft wants them to and Snow Leopard does a good job of running Macs the way Apple wants them to.

From a reliability perspective there is very little between Darwin 10 and NT 6.1. A few benefits for both, but no clear winner.

The only difference is the software they empower. Windows has a broader choice and is best for Games, whereas the Mac has some really well thought out applications with great user experience that are hard to find direct equivalents for on Windows. Apps like Coda, Pixelmator, Versions, OmniGraffle, SchoolHouse, Quicksilver, Billings, DirectMail, PageHand, Delicious Library, Yep etc. These have feature equivalents on Windows of course, but the fit and finish it rarely as good. This is a highly subjective area as well. So many people will be happy with tools that just get the job done (no matter how many extra buttons or dialogs they have to click through).

At least personally that's what's keeping me on the Mac platform (that and my Photoshop CS 3 license and knowing the internal workings of UNIX and the Mac better I do NT). I use Windows 7 from time to time, I like Windows 7, but there are some apps which I can't find “good enough” equivalents.

There isn't actually that much Apple software which I would miss if I switched. Save for Mail.

The hardware isn't a huge deal for me. Sure, there are rubbish, cheap PCs out there (and probably always will be), but you can buy very good laptops and desktop which meet or exceed Apple's designs.

I think the real loser from this autumns releases (Snow Leopard, Windows 7, Karmic Koala) is canonical with Ubuntu Linux. They are still fumbling and failing to make any real impact on the Desktop. I still feel there will always be a place for commercial software development.

Edit: To qualify my comments, I'm speaking about consumer use. There's no point speaking about Win 7 vs Snow Leopard in the context of the enterprise, because that is a game Apple has chosen not to play.

This is a great great post, one that is rarely seen on these boards. It's nice to read something like that, obviously a well reasoned and thoughtful poster. :-P

roadbloc
Nov 9, 2009, 03:38 AM
Its cheap and for the masses, a bit like Mac Donald's.

amen to that.

SXR
Nov 9, 2009, 04:43 PM
Dont agree with all the points but seems fair enough in overall scoring.
Windows has really caught apple up in some areas of OS design but i still think OSX has the edge.

Hopefully snow leopard is a base and 10.7 is a year away and will blow W7 away!

Snow Leopard ( or Leopard for that matter ) already blows Windows away , far away. IMHO!

elgrecomac
Nov 9, 2009, 10:50 PM
Well, Apple had better step up their QC. They have been getting away with releasing buggy SW lately. Ironic, that MS is now releasing relatively bug free SW and a better overall user experience.

MS "just works".....:eek:

I totally agree. Lots of beach balls these days. I have been using Win7 via Fusion for almost a year and the release candidate is very, very STABLE. And, you are correct, Win 7 just works.

OSX is better IMHO but the gap has narrowed significantly.

roadbloc
Nov 10, 2009, 03:12 AM
They may work just as well as each other, but Windows still dies in my hands when I'm trying to record 16 channels of audio, while running reason and listening to what I am doing in reason through headphones, and playing whatever is on itunes to a stereo system in the next room. No chance. OS X however, this is not a problem.

And Windows easily wins on games.

So it hardly seems a matter of which is "best", it is just which suits you for what you do. And that would be OS X for me. Or i would be saying this to the Windows 7 forums right now.

Jason Beck
Nov 10, 2009, 02:03 PM
Same! I've looked long and hard.



I have been keeping my eyes open for another mail program.. but mail does everything I need it to and its fast. I don't think I will be switching me any time soon.:)

neteng101
Nov 10, 2009, 02:27 PM
There isn't actually that much Apple software which I would miss if I switched. Save for Mail.

Do you use Adium or Skype? There's no better multi-IM client than Adium today that I've seen, and Skype on Windows is just horribly unfriendly compared to the OSX version for text chats.

The hardware isn't a huge deal for me. Sure, there are rubbish, cheap PCs out there (and probably always will be), but you can buy very good laptops and desktop which meet or exceed Apple's designs.

I'd argue that PCs beat Apple in spec sheets rather easily (way more ports, SATA, Blu-Ray, etc) but I really don't see how any really exceed Apple's designs. Very good imitations exist but even then, they lack the simplicity and elegance that seems to be a central design theme for Apple today.

I think the real loser from this autumns releases (Snow Leopard, Windows 7, Karmic Koala) is canonical with Ubuntu Linux.

Canonical has taken the wrong approach, instead of releasing a quality product, they opt for 6 month cycles that results in - rather literally - a bleeding edge POS that's problematic and less than fully refined. In another 6 months, there will be a newer release, and the vicious cycle continues.

Can you imagine if there was a whole new version of Windows or OSX every six months - with significant changes made? It'd be a constant nightmare.

brbubba
Nov 10, 2009, 02:27 PM
I have been keeping my eyes open for another mail program.. but mail does everything I need it to and its fast. I don't think I will be switching me any time soon.:)

Gyaz Mail is my program of choice. It's super simple and does just what I need. It isn't free though. Although I only use it for my yahoo account. I have two google notifiers for both my gmail accounts with customized dropdowns so I know which account is which. Using google in gyaz mail works but it's just so much easier to use the notifier than any mail client.

Jason Beck
Nov 10, 2009, 03:40 PM
Gyaz Mail is my program of choice. It's super simple and does just what I need. It isn't free though. Although I only use it for my yahoo account. I have two google notifiers for both my gmail accounts with customized dropdowns so I know which account is which. Using google in gyaz mail works but it's just so much easier to use the notifier than any mail client.

cool, thanks!

elppa
Nov 10, 2009, 06:25 PM
Do you use Adium or Skype? There's no better multi-IM client than Adium today that I've seen, and Skype on Windows is just horribly unfriendly compared to the OSX version for text chats.
Adium's a good shout. It's is not Apple's software. Sorry I was no completely clear about that, but I did in my original post list a whole heap of 3rd party Mac software I LOVE – but there is not much Mac software by Apple that I like, save for Mail.


[QUOTE=neteng101;8792323]I'd argue that PCs beat Apple in spec sheets rather easily (way more ports, SATA, Blu-Ray, etc) but I really don't see how any really exceed Apple's designs. Very good imitations exist but even then, they lack the simplicity and elegance that seems to be a central design theme for Apple today.
Lenovo have things I'd like on a MacBook. Rather than having water damage dectectors it would be nice for Apple to work on spill proof keyboard.

MikePA
Nov 11, 2009, 03:46 AM
This is a great great post, one that is rarely seen on these boards. It's nice to read something like that, obviously a well reasoned and thoughtful poster. :-P

I agree. The following quote from a recent post are the usual arrogant and condescending drivel, complete with spelling error.

"Its cheap and for the masses, a bit like Mac Donald's."

Wayne s
Nov 11, 2009, 04:27 AM
I agree. The following quote from a recent post are the usual arrogant and condescending drivel, complete with spelling error.

"Its cheap and for the masses, a bit like Mac Donald's."

It's was meant tongue in check, but some people sadly seem to lack a sense of
humour, as for spelling mistake, lo0oks OK two mee .

KALLT
Nov 11, 2009, 11:01 AM
Although I like the improvements of Windows 7 in comparison to previous versions, it's still Windows. The system is still too complex in various situations, like system preferences and setup of applications.

Mac OS X still has the better Finder: it is more simple and easier to use. Microsoft did not manage to simplify system preferences but just re-categorized them. And of course the annoying registry and file junk of uninstalled applications.

I like the interface of Mac OS X more, because it has a consistent structure and a simple and clear layout. I don't need that fancy eye-candy of Windows.

You also have to consider that Microsoft copied a lot from Mac OS X. Now they included the Dock, Disk Utility etc. Apple is the more innovative developer after all.

I hope that Apple is already working on Mac OS X 10.7 and includes more innovative features that push Mac OS X to the next decade. With Snow Leopard they had the chance to come up with a stable basis that can be expanded in the next release.

cjmillsnun
Nov 11, 2009, 11:07 AM
Edit: To qualify my comments, I'm speaking about consumer use. There's no point speaking about Win 7 vs Snow Leopard in the context of the enterprise, because that is a game Apple has chosen not to play.

I would have to disagree because of Snow's one major new feature, Exchange Support.

This alone says Apple is wanting to play the enterprise game. Otherwise the rest of your post which I snipped was spot on IMO

SwiftLives
Nov 11, 2009, 12:06 PM
I would have to disagree because of Snow's one major new feature, Exchange Support.

This alone says Apple is wanting to play the enterprise game.

I don't have SL. Haven't used it. But my understanding of the Exchange support is that it mirrors the functionality of the iPhone's Exchange support rather than say....Outlook. In other words, it's pretty basic and rudimentary. I'm not sure it's feasible as a solution for integrating into an Exchange-based corporate system just yet.

Apple has shown a reluctance to play the enterprise game in the past. But I will agree and say that at the very least, they're testing the waters.

(And Microsoft is finally releasing Outlook for Mac in 2010. Not quite feature parity, but much closer than Entourage.)

cjmillsnun
Nov 11, 2009, 02:45 PM
I don't have SL. Haven't used it. But my understanding of the Exchange support is that it mirrors the functionality of the iPhone's Exchange support rather than say....Outlook. In other words, it's pretty basic and rudimentary. I'm not sure it's feasible as a solution for integrating into an Exchange-based corporate system just yet.

Apple has shown a reluctance to play the enterprise game in the past. But I will agree and say that at the very least, they're testing the waters.

(And Microsoft is finally releasing Outlook for Mac in 2010. Not quite feature parity, but much closer than Entourage.)

It isn't too bad, having both an iPhone and Snow, and having used Outlook in Windows, there are some features it doesn't have, but they aren't essentials. If you want notes, mail.app has it, meetings can be scheduled via mail.app or iCal, and the e-mail support is top notch.

The only downer is that for it to work the exchange server must be 2007. Older versions (still very commonplace) simply won't work and you'll be forced to keep entourage

MikePA
Nov 12, 2009, 10:43 AM
It's was meant tongue in check,

It's got nothing to do with having a sense of humor. That's what emoticons are for. As a Mac user, the OP should have been smart enough to use them.

roadbloc
Nov 12, 2009, 03:01 PM
forgive me if im saying something unsayable here... but inst this a bit of a dumb thing to put on the mac forums? Windows 7 vs Snow Leopard??? It's obvious that the majority will favour Snow Leopard.

Both OS's are useful for different things, and I think Windows has shot itself in the foot by trying to invade on OS X's territory with an OS which looks good and has lots of fancy features (Vista/7) and charging obscene amounts for it, instead of providing a simple, compatible and cheap OS (XP, 98, 95... 1.0) for them who just want to play games or browse the web to use.

I feel this will be Window's ultimate downfall.

cjmillsnun
Nov 12, 2009, 06:36 PM
forgive me if im saying something unsayable here... but inst this a bit of a dumb thing to put on the mac forums? Windows 7 vs Snow Leopard??? It's obvious that the majority will favour Snow Leopard.

Both OS's are useful for different things, and I think Windows has shot itself in the foot by trying to invade on OS X's territory with an OS which looks good and has lots of fancy features (Vista/7) and charging obscene amounts for it, instead of providing a simple, compatible and cheap OS (XP, 98, 95... 1.0) for them who just want to play games or browse the web to use.

I feel this will be Window's ultimate downfall.

I will be fair, the home premium upgrade version of 7 which will upgrade from Win2k through Vista is reasonably priced, and has a number of good features, whilst being light enough to run as well as XP on a netbook. It has to be said that this time MS have got it right. (probably the first time in 8 years ;))

Trek2100
Nov 14, 2009, 09:14 PM
I will be fair, the home premium upgrade version of 7 which will upgrade from Win2k through Vista is reasonably priced, and has a number of good features, whilst being light enough to run as well as XP on a netbook. It has to be said that this time MS have got it right. (probably the first time in 8 years ;))

Excuse me, you obviously have not checked the web or Microsoft's website. There is NO direct upgrade to Win 7 except from Vista. For any OS prior to Vista you have to save your data and perform a fresh install (wipes your drive). After the install you have to re-install all of your software and data. Check the upgrade chart on MS's website.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/get/upgrade-considerations.aspx

wrldwzrd89
Nov 14, 2009, 09:28 PM
Excuse me, you obviously have not checked the web or Microsoft's website. There is NO direct upgrade to Win 7 except from Vista. For any OS prior to Vista you have to save your data and perform a fresh install (wipes your drive). After the install you have to re-install all of your software and data. Check the upgrade chart on MS's website.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/get/upgrade-considerations.aspx
You are correct, but it looks like you didn't read the post fully. The upgrade planned is a 2-stage process: Win2k -> Vista -> 7. That WILL work.

Jason Beck
Nov 14, 2009, 09:40 PM
You are correct, but it looks like you didn't read the post fully. The upgrade planned is a 2-stage process: Win2k -> Vista -> 7. That WILL work.



= Hours of Windows fun! Drivers and discs oh my!

LOL

jimmyjoemccrow
Nov 14, 2009, 10:06 PM
In this thread the Apple fanbois have taken their petty nitpicking and deliberate ignorance to new levels. It takes true belligerent pig headedness to find so many tiny faults while the rest of the internet sings Windows 7's praises. A willingness to shut your mind so tightly that its a wonder any thoughts escape at all.

In my experience Snow Leopard feels little different from the Leopard installation on my iBook. The biggest differences I see between the two are the new menu when I right click an icon in the Dock and the fact that the Utilities menu opens as a stack now instead of a folder from with the Applications stack. Of course I know there are more changes than that but they make absolutely no difference to my day to day use.

Windows 7 on the other hand feels like its brand new. Aero Peek, the improved notification area, the nifty themes and the way it found and installed drivers for all my hardware and worked straight away without me needing to get drivers from the manufacturer's website. Oh and the ability to automatically resize two windows so they fit nicely side by side is brilliant.

But I am not going to say that Windows 7 is better than Snow Leopard because I like them both. However Apple refuse to make a machine that is good for gaming that isn't a workstation, and even if I were to buy that machine I would still need Windows to play games. So in the end my loyalties have to be with Microsoft because Apple just don't give a **** about me.

cjmillsnun
Nov 15, 2009, 01:49 AM
You are correct, but it looks like you didn't read the post fully. The upgrade planned is a 2-stage process: Win2k -> Vista -> 7. That WILL work.

Actually if you boot from DVD do an erase and install it finds your existing windows install and will activate correctly.

I have upgraded from XP directly that way. And anyway you forget that a clean install is the recommended upgrade path for ALL versions of windows

cjmillsnun
Nov 15, 2009, 01:51 AM
Excuse me, you obviously have not checked the web or Microsoft's website. There is NO direct upgrade to Win 7 except from Vista. For any OS prior to Vista you have to save your data and perform a fresh install (wipes your drive). After the install you have to re-install all of your software and data. Check the upgrade chart on MS's website.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/get/upgrade-considerations.aspx

That would be my choice for upgrading any OS.

Trek2100
Nov 15, 2009, 12:13 PM
That would be my choice for upgrading any OS.

Totally agree. I have worked with EVERY version of Windows except ME since and including the PC/MS DOS days. I have done some upgrades, HUGH mistake, but mostly clean installs. When we upgrade at work I install a new image, no upgrades allowed.

Jason Beck
Nov 15, 2009, 01:13 PM
In this thread the Apple fanbois have taken their petty nitpicking and deliberate ignorance to new levels. It takes true belligerent pig headedness to find so many tiny faults while the rest of the internet sings Windows 7's praises. A willingness to shut your mind so tightly that its a wonder any thoughts escape at all.

In my experience Snow Leopard feels little different from the Leopard installation on my iBook. The biggest differences I see between the two are the new menu when I right click an icon in the Dock and the fact that the Utilities menu opens as a stack now instead of a folder from with the Applications stack. Of course I know there are more changes than that but they make absolutely no difference to my day to day use.

Windows 7 on the other hand feels like its brand new. Aero Peek, the improved notification area, the nifty themes and the way it found and installed drivers for all my hardware and worked straight away without me needing to get drivers from the manufacturer's website. Oh and the ability to automatically resize two windows so they fit nicely side by side is brilliant.

But I am not going to say that Windows 7 is better than Snow Leopard because I like them both. However Apple refuse to make a machine that is good for gaming that isn't a workstation, and even if I were to buy that machine I would still need Windows to play games. So in the end my loyalties have to be with Microsoft because Apple just don't give a **** about me.


In my 12 years of windows experience, installation of windows is usually hit or miss. You are almost always fiddling with drivers, trialware or shareware, depending on what form of system restore you are using.
If you strictly care about gaming:
"Apple refuse to make a machine that is good for gaming that isn't a workstation, and even if I were to buy that machine I would still need Windows to play games. So in the end my loyalties have to be with Microsoft because Apple just don't give a **** about me."

Then I guess you are in the wrong camp. The Mac platform is not for hardcore gamers.. It is for people who care about stability, productivity,
and good ergonomics. We want our computers and laptops to work,
and work out of thebox. Without silly Norton reminders or various buggy
toolbars installed.

We like to browse the web and not worry about what is installing behind closed doors. Nothing like waking up to a brand new "weatherbug" icon or
"shopper pro" in the bottom left corner of your taskbar.

Windows based machines can really be killer at games. So can Macs, _if_
you spend the money. Or are you saying a Mac Pro 3,000$ computer isn't a good gaming machine? Last I saw, the thing ran _anything_ we threw at it.
High frames too.

Apple is catering to you. Good products just cost a lot of money sometimes.
IMHO the reason why Macs are dominant in our school system is because of the very reasons I gave. They work, the kids will have a harder time ******** them up, and the school software and other software works better.

Just my h.o.. I've used windows for a decade, so I am entitled to it.

mac2x
Nov 15, 2009, 03:35 PM
In this thread the Apple fanbois have taken their petty nitpicking and deliberate ignorance to new levels. It takes true belligerent pig headedness to find so many tiny faults while the rest of the internet sings Windows 7's praises. A willingness to shut your mind so tightly that its a wonder any thoughts escape at all.

Maybe because some of us actually know what we are talking about when we complain about archaic Windows junk like the Registry? Seriously, Windows would be a lot better if MS would just bite the bullet and redesign the core parts of the OS to strip out the old stuff.

Granted, there are people who buy Apple for the snob appeal (a sad affliction of most any high end product). But all the Mac users I know personally are people who know what they are doing. They chose Mac for a reason, that reason being Unix. And it's a lot less hassle than most of the flavors of Linux that you have to choose from otherwise. Not that Linux is bad, but it's a good bit more work in most cases since you have to get drivers and all that.

In my experience Snow Leopard feels little different from the Leopard installation on my iBook. The biggest differences I see between the two are the new menu when I right click an icon in the Dock and the fact that the Utilities menu opens as a stack now instead of a folder from with the Applications stack. Of course I know there are more changes than that but they make absolutely no difference to my day to day use.

Windows 7 on the other hand feels like its brand new. Aero Peek, the improved notification area, the nifty themes and the way it found and installed drivers for all my hardware and worked straight away without me needing to get drivers from the manufacturer's website. Oh and the ability to automatically resize two windows so they fit nicely side by side is brilliant.

Perhaps because there's nothing wrong with the basic principles of Leopard's UI? I'd be hard pressed to name an operating system that could boast even comparable UI to Leopard.

Windows 7 does look very nice, and I'd say it is the best looking Windows yet, and probably the most intuitive once you get used to the differences between XP and Vista/7. For me, though, Aero is way too glitzy and overdone. I especially dislike the way new windows have a sort of "smack you in the face" animation when they open. Gives me a headache. Snap is a good feature, but for me it's less important than the excellent Exposé/Spaces functionality of Leopard. After all, it's not that much trouble to put your windows side-by-side on a 24" display. :D

But I am not going to say that Windows 7 is better than Snow Leopard because I like them both. However Apple refuse to make a machine that is good for gaming that isn't a workstation, and even if I were to buy that machine I would still need Windows to play games. So in the end my loyalties have to be with Microsoft because Apple just don't give a **** about me.

Hardcore gamers will never be happy with anything but a dedicated gaming PC anyway, so what's your point? Jason Beck made some good points here, so I won't reiterate. The bottom line is that top-quality gear costs, whether it's PC or Mac.

In conclusion, different strokes for different folks. My stroke just happens to be :apple: ;) And I used Windows all the way from 95 to XP. Still have my XP box, and it runs pretty nicely even though it's approaching 5 years old now.

roadbloc
Nov 15, 2009, 04:12 PM
Still have my XP box, and it runs pretty nicely even though it's approaching 5 years old now.

The fact that the majority of Windows users are still using a 10 year old operating system, says enough about Windows in my mind.

Jason Beck
Nov 15, 2009, 04:32 PM
I agree mac2x. The registry is just archaic. It is a perfect chance for
software developers to "get at" your computer. Your computer eventually
gets cluttered, hence the slowdown of Windows that is usually unavoidable if you are a normal user who installs and deletes applications on a regular basis.

If you game, get a great Microsoft product like the Xbox. I have one, love it.
If you want to game on the go, use bootcamp on a Mac if you got one, or buy a Windows based notebook. In the end it is personal choice which you go for. Macbooks run Call of Duty just fine, and most newer games with mid to high
settings.

I love my Xbox. I just beat The Force Unleashed last night, very enjoyable
game. I didn't care for the actual cut scene graphics though. I thought the characters were clunky. But in-game... "wow" is all I can say. Good $19.95 well spent in my opinion.

Now hopefully Blizzard is going to stay Mac friendly and release a Diablo 3 Mac port at the same time as the Windows one. That is ONE game that I will play on the go.

Gaming on my macbook is constrained to the emulators I have, Warcraft 3,
Machinarium, and solitaire. I did try the demos for Bioshock, Kung Fu Panda
and had Call of Duty 4 going. They rocked.

ImperialX
Nov 15, 2009, 04:41 PM
The fact that the majority of Windows users are still using a 10 year old operating system, says enough about Windows in my mind.

This can't be any truer.

BongoBanger
Nov 15, 2009, 04:57 PM
This can't be any truer.

Sure because it's totally reasonable to upgrade about a billion PCs in four weeks. :rolleyes:

ImperialX
Nov 15, 2009, 04:58 PM
Sure because it's totally reasonable to upgrade about a billion PCs in four weeks. :rolleyes:

Are you sure it's four weeks? More like 3 years. ;)

elmancho
Nov 15, 2009, 05:07 PM
I use both quite often, and when you get used to the bells and whistles of M$ W7 you'll love SN that much more.
Ok win 7 is prettier, but I cant live without critical stuff from apple like time machine, expose all these things we take for granted.

Windows 7 is cool, but SN is still that much more ahead in the game, although i'll give you this: M$ has done a amazing job at shortening apple's lead, and they deserve a pat on the back, look where they where 2 years ago, now they have a tangible solution to rival with apple.

Just for info I have the 64bit professional windows 7 installed.

Conclusion:

Time for Mac OS XI.

DMann
Nov 15, 2009, 08:02 PM
Are you sure it's four weeks? More like 3 years. ;)

Not to mention that over 71% of Window's market share who continue to use XP, who have clearly chosen

to pass on Vista, are now expressing little interest in migrating to W7. According to a ScriptLogic survey,

most companies and corporations will not be moving to W7 anytime soon. (http://www.infoworld.com/d/windows/survey-says-most-companies-wont-deploy-windows-7-098)

All and all, it seems that the majority has spoken - too little, too costly, too late.

Eidorian
Nov 15, 2009, 08:13 PM
Not to mention that over 71% of Window's market share who continue to use XP, who have clearly chosen

to pass on Vista, are now expressing little interest in migrating to W7. According to a ScriptLogic survey,

most companies and corporations will not be moving to W7 anytime soon. (http://www.infoworld.com/d/windows/survey-says-most-companies-wont-deploy-windows-7-098)

All and all, it seems that the majority has spoken - too little, too costly, too late.Is there something newer than that? I remember reading that article the first time around.

DMann
Nov 15, 2009, 08:44 PM
Is there something newer than that? I remember reading that article the first time around.

Why the need? Have things changed significantly since then?

Eidorian
Nov 15, 2009, 08:46 PM
Why the need? Have things changed significantly since then?I'd like to know if they have. Infoworld has always been a pain to navigate though.

deltadog03
Nov 15, 2009, 09:40 PM
I don't have any real expierance with snow leopard, but I can tell you that windows 7 is by far the best OS made from gates land. I have a hardcore mac fanatic buddy who has windows 7 on his macbook and looooves win7. With that said, I am gonna try to get leopard on my desktop pc. I heard its not that hard of a process to dual boot them.

thecheda
Nov 15, 2009, 11:08 PM
No Visual Studio 2008 for Snow Leopard. Decided to run Win 7 on Parallels. Was smooth, and was surprised.

djrobsd
Nov 16, 2009, 12:50 AM
Excuse me, you obviously have not checked the web or Microsoft's website. There is NO direct upgrade to Win 7 except from Vista. For any OS prior to Vista you have to save your data and perform a fresh install (wipes your drive). After the install you have to re-install all of your software and data. Check the upgrade chart on MS's website.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/get/upgrade-considerations.aspx

That is totally untrue. As long as you are running ntfs you do not have to reformat your drive. I just installed 7 over xp last night and it moved my xp to windows.old. I can actually still boot into my previous windows install.

ImperialX
Nov 16, 2009, 12:52 AM
That is totally untrue. As long as you are running ntfs you do not have to reformat your drive. I just installed 7 over xp last night and it moved my xp to windows.old. I can actually still boot into my previous windows install.

It's sorta like Snow Leopard. It says you can only update from Leopard, but you can easily update from Tiger. :rolleyes:

roadbloc
Nov 16, 2009, 03:53 AM
Sure because it's totally reasonable to upgrade about a billion PCs in four weeks. :rolleyes:

seems so.... me, college, highfields studio's, all my mates with mac's and satellite arts all upgraded to snow leopard within the first week of it's release.

DMann
Nov 16, 2009, 04:55 AM
seems so.... me, college, highfields studio's, all my mates with mac's and satellite arts all upgraded to snow leopard within the first week of it's release.

This seems to be in line with Snow Leopard's fairly impressive 23% adoption rate, to date.

Not a bad start, out of the gate.

Trek2100
Nov 16, 2009, 05:52 AM
That is totally untrue. As long as you are running ntfs you do not have to reformat your drive. I just installed 7 over xp last night and it moved my xp to windows.old. I can actually still boot into my previous windows install.

Question, did you have to re-install your software under Win 7? If not, perhaps you should tell Microsoft they are misleading the public.

BongoBanger
Nov 16, 2009, 06:56 AM
seems so.... me, college, highfields studio's, all my mates with mac's and satellite arts all upgraded to snow leopard within the first week of it's release.

Sure. Different market though.

90% of Windows 7 sales will be driven by OEM purchases so I wouldn't expect Windows 7 to be anywhere near to, say, 50% for a coupe of years yet. After all, it took XP three to four years to get there so not seeing this as any different.

On the other hand, you could say that it's disappointing for Apple that about a quarter of their customers feel Leopard is so awful that they have to upgrade to Snow Leopard straight away. Of course, that's probably nonsense in much the same way as expecting everyone who owns a Windows PC to upgrade straight way too.

djrobsd
Nov 17, 2009, 07:07 PM
Question, did you have to re-install your software under Win 7? If not, perhaps you should tell Microsoft they are misleading the public.

If you can provide links to web sites and ads from Microsoft claiming contrary please do so, I've never seen them say that you wouldn't have to reinstall your programs or that the upgrade would be "smooth". Yes, I did reinstall everything, and my computer runs about 50% faster now without all those unwanted programs I had on there before! :)

jimmyjoemccrow
Nov 18, 2009, 12:41 AM
In my 12 years of windows experience, installation of windows is usually hit or miss. You are almost always fiddling with drivers, trialware or shareware, depending on what form of system restore you are using.
Thats not my experience in 15 years of installing Windows. Most of the time the drivers are on a CD with the hardware, or failing that on the manufacturer's website. Problems can occur if the hardware is really old and support discontinued, but in cases like that its usually worth upgrading anyway. I usually just do a fresh install of Windows over all that OEM crap and install a free antivirus.


If you strictly care about gaming:
"Apple refuse to make a machine that is good for gaming that isn't a workstation, and even if I were to buy that machine I would still need Windows to play games. So in the end my loyalties have to be with Microsoft because Apple just don't give a **** about me."

Then I guess you are in the wrong camp. The Mac platform is not for hardcore gamers.. It is for people who care about stability, productivity,
and good ergonomics. We want our computers and laptops to work,
and work out of thebox. Without silly Norton reminders or various buggy
toolbars installed.

That is my point. Macs are niche, and yet continually Mac owners will rubbish PCs, even when Apple do not provide an alternative. PCs cover more than Apple's niche.


We like to browse the web and not worry about what is installing behind closed doors. Nothing like waking up to a brand new "weatherbug" icon or
"shopper pro" in the bottom left corner of your taskbar
Get back to 2009. That sort of thing hasn't happened on Windows since XP service Pack 2.


Windows based machines can really be killer at games. So can Macs, _if_
you spend the money. Or are you saying a Mac Pro 3,000$ computer isn't a good gaming machine? Last I saw, the thing ran _anything_ we threw at it.
High frames too.

Apple is catering to you. Good products just cost a lot of money sometimes.
IMHO the reason why Macs are dominant in our school system is because of the very reasons I gave. They work, the kids will have a harder time ******** them up, and the school software and other software works better.

Just my h.o.. I've used windows for a decade, so I am entitled to it.
A Mac machine for gaming will cost me 3 times as much as a PC for gaming and I will still need to use Windows on it, so why bother with a Mac? Again the point is that Apple are niche, so Apple fanbois should stop bashing PCs for filling the gaps in Apple's range.

Maybe because some of us actually know what we are talking about when we complain about archaic Windows junk like the Registry? Seriously, Windows would be a lot better if MS would just bite the bullet and redesign the core parts of the OS to strip out the old stuff.
Actually when Mac users talk about the Registry I can usually tell that its just stuff they have read on forums like these. It takes an inordinate amount of installing/uninstalling software to truly make any difference to the size of the registry. And what if Microsoft did bite the bullet and completely redesign their OS? Would all the businesses who wrote their software for Windows updgrade and rewrite or just stick with what they have? Look what happened when Vista was released with a new driver model. Third parties were incredibly slow to produce drivers, contributing to the bad rep Vista got. After the first service pack and drivers were sorted, Vista was a reliable OS, and ran better than XP on modern hardware. Yet companies stuck with XP because it had been around for so long they had got everything working and didn't feel the need to change.


Granted, there are people who buy Apple for the snob appeal (a sad affliction of most any high end product). But all the Mac users I know personally are people who know what they are doing. They chose Mac for a reason, that reason being Unix. And it's a lot less hassle than most of the flavors of Linux that you have to choose from otherwise. Not that Linux is bad, but it's a good bit more work in most cases since you have to get drivers and all that.

Great, but Apple refuse to license their OS and they only provide a limited range of hardware, outside the price range of many people. They are not catering to as wide a range of needs as PCs do.


Perhaps because there's nothing wrong with the basic principles of Leopard's UI? I'd be hard pressed to name an operating system that could boast even comparable UI to Leopard.

Windows 7 does look very nice, and I'd say it is the best looking Windows yet, and probably the most intuitive once you get used to the differences between XP and Vista/7. For me, though, Aero is way too glitzy and overdone. I especially dislike the way new windows have a sort of "smack you in the face" animation when they open. Gives me a headache. Snap is a good feature, but for me it's less important than the excellent Exposé/Spaces functionality of Leopard. After all, it's not that much trouble to put your windows side-by-side on a 24" display. :D

There wasn't really much wrong with Vista's UI either, but I presume that to clear as much of the stigma of Vista as possible they gave it an overhaul. I could do without the extra thick outline Aero gives its windows but overall I like it, especially the themes. You can define a set of wallpapers to rotate, a different colour for the taskbar and wimdows, set the amount of translucency and even choose a range of sound schemes. Contrast this with OSX choice of grey or grey with blue sliders. And what happened to Mac sounds? I used to love that little Eep! sound. I think OSX has grown a little too serious.

Its not hard to put windows side by side, but nor is it particularly hard to use Control Panel, its just a little more complicated than System Preferences. We are only debating the difference between a few clicks usually when it comes to anything in Windows or OSX. This is why the fanbois adoration of OSX is a mystery to me. OSX is a very nice operating system but at the end of the day both Windows and OSX are still pointing and clicking. They don't require memorising console commands and their relevant switches.


Hardcore gamers will never be happy with anything but a dedicated gaming PC anyway, so what's your point? Jason Beck made some good points here, so I won't reiterate. The bottom line is that top-quality gear costs, whether it's PC or Mac.

In conclusion, different strokes for different folks. My stroke just happens to be :apple: ;) And I used Windows all the way from 95 to XP. Still have my XP box, and it runs pretty nicely even though it's approaching 5 years old now.

Of course we won't be happy with anything unless we build it ourselves which Apple don't allow us to do. Apple don't provide anything at all for this need so the fanbois should stop crying about PCs and Windows because they meet the needs of more users than Apple can.

However both your posts were well above the usual fanboi drivel on these forums I doff my cap to you.

Luis Ortega
Nov 18, 2009, 03:39 AM
Apple is catering to you. Good products just cost a lot of money sometimes.
IMHO the reason why Macs are dominant in our school system is because of the very reasons I gave. They work, the kids will have a harder time ******** them up, and the school software and other software works better.
Just my h.o.. I've used windows for a decade, so I am entitled to it.

I must disagree.
I work in schools and the main reason that macs are popular is that apple gives them a very low price. Unfortunately, the low cost comes at a price because the machine specs they offer for those prices are less current than their retail models.
And the mac labs we have do not work any better or break any less than the windows labs we have.

mac2x
Nov 21, 2009, 02:04 PM
[...]
Of course we won't be happy with anything unless we build it ourselves which Apple don't allow us to do. Apple don't provide anything at all for this need so the fanbois should stop crying about PCs and Windows because they meet the needs of more users than Apple can.

However both your posts were well above the usual fanboi drivel on these forums I doff my cap to you.

Apple isn't about "building it yourself". If you want to do that, hardware is freely available for anyone to buy from many vendors. What's so hard to understand here? Apple is all about providing systems that are basically one package, with a few upgrades that cover most people's needs. If Apple doesn't have what you need, NO ONE is putting a gun to your head and telling you to buy from them.

In the meantime, If anyone here is a "fanboi" [sic], it's you. :rolleyes: I'm more of a Unix fanboi than an Apple fanboi. :D

Goona
Nov 21, 2009, 05:14 PM
Snow Leopard > Windows 7

SXR
Nov 23, 2009, 03:35 PM
Snow Leopard > Windows 7

You definately got my vote.

muxbox
Nov 23, 2009, 07:42 PM
Software such as mail, iPhoto, iMovie on Snow Leopard > Windows 7

Windows 7 > Snow Leopard on Speed and Stability and also the way you organise your open windows.

mac2x
Nov 23, 2009, 08:30 PM
Software such as mail, iPhoto, iMovie on Snow Leopard > Windows 7

Windows 7 > Snow Leopard on Speed and Stability and also the way you organise your open windows.

Agreed on point one. :)

As to point two, I'd say "Leopard > Windows of any kind for stability". I have zero intention of upgrading my MBP to SL. Leopard works so perfectly at the 10.5.8 build I don't want to damage a good thing.

safhsdas
Nov 23, 2009, 08:49 PM
Windows 7 uses the same core foundation as Vista while fixing issues and prettying up the outside, while Snow Leopard keeps most of the same spots while re-arranging how things work internally. But the mission is the same—to evolve their current OS—not change the whole game. And launching this fall, we can't avoid a comparison study. The stars of Redmond and Cupertino have never been so closely aligned before.

muxbox
Nov 23, 2009, 09:06 PM
Give me a mixture of the two please. None of the operating systems are good enough on their own.

Jason Beck
Nov 23, 2009, 09:37 PM
You definately got my vote.

I agree.

crazyxzer0
Nov 23, 2009, 10:13 PM
Give me a mixture of the two please. None of the operating systems are good enough on their own.

agreed. I believe both have pros n cons to the way i work. why limit yourself to one specific tool?

felt.
Nov 23, 2009, 10:21 PM
I actually get less spinning beachballs in windows 7..so its obviously better, because I can get work done instead of waiting

MythicFrost
Nov 24, 2009, 12:23 AM
Snow Leopard:

Features) Expose, Spaces, Time Machine, Quick Look, Stacks, Dashboard, Spotlight, System Preferences, Software Updates, Finder
Although they aren't exactly "features" I consider Software Update, System Preferences and Finder to be excellent applications and far better than their Windows 7 equivalents.

The SL interface is very clean and tidy (inc. the SL apps, and I'm sure most or some third party apps go along with this)
it's a sight for sore eyes, Windows 7 looks very nice, it does have some eye candy, but the Start Menu and particularly Windows Explorer are messy (I really hate Explorer), and a lot of the applications are messy.

Little Features) SL has lots of little things it can do, like zooming in on the screen, adding dates to iCal from mail with a click, inactive scrolling etc.. they are very little, and are only a few examples but it's easier than doing it the alternative way.
Not to mention the other applications that all come bundled on your computer, plus you've got iLife and iWork which are very nice.

SL works really well together, Windows 7 doesn't. I won't say SL is perfect because it's not, but its better.

Windows 7:

Features) Flip 3D, Shake, Windows Aero Graphics Theme, Peek, Thumbnail Previews, Jump Lists, DirectX
Windows is very good for gaming, that's what I use it for.

Flip3D is cool, I wouldn't want to use it with a lot of documents open though.
Shake is not so good, I can't always get it to work exactly when/as I want, but maybe it's my mouse.

Windows Aero is cool, Peek & Thumbnail Previews look very nice, I don't really use Jump Lists but I imagine they are useful.

End)

The full edition of Windows 7 Ultimate costs $450 and the full edition of SL (Mac Box Set) costs only $220 but includes iLife & iWork 09.
The upgrade edition of Windows 7 Ultimate costs $320 and the upgrade edition of SL costs $39.

You can upgrade up to 5 Macs for $69 or buy the Mac Box Set for up to 5 Macs for $320 (includes license to install iLife/iWork 09 on up to 5 Macs as well).
I don't think Windows does anything like that, I think there is a Student version of Windows 7 but I don't know the AU prices (I'd guess $39 :p).
(Prices are in AU dollars and are rough and therefore may be a little off)

Just thought I'd add one line for the sake of not adding imo on nearly every line :p, this post is purely my opinion lol.

Oh and for all those guys that complain SL is slower and apps crash more than Windows 7, it is not a fair comparison between an upgraded SL and a fresh install of Windows 7.
I'd like to see how you go upgrading a 1-2 year old Vista to Windows 7 :)

The Core i7 iMac is very comparable to a PC in pricing.

Pe:apple:ce

mac2x
Nov 24, 2009, 12:32 AM
I actually get less spinning beachballs in windows 7..so its obviously better, because I can get work done instead of waiting

True...since there isn't a spinning beachball animation in Windows. :p

cjmillsnun
Nov 24, 2009, 12:42 AM
Agreed on point one. :)

As to point two, I'd say "Leopard > Windows of any kind for stability". I have zero intention of upgrading my MBP to SL. Leopard works so perfectly at the 10.5.8 build I don't want to damage a good thing.

Disagree,

Windows 7 is extremely stable in my experience. As is Snow.

Leopard < Snow to me in pretty much every aspect including stability

Snow > Windows 7 for UI but surpisingly Snow = 7 for stability. 7 really isn't bad. I'm no Windows fanboi, but this time I feel Microsoft have achieved the impossible. Kudos to them. 7 is actually good!

mac2x
Nov 24, 2009, 01:24 AM
[...]

Leopard < Snow to me in pretty much every aspect including stability

[...]

No contest to the other stuff you say...haven't used Win7 all that much.

Curious as to why you say that, though. Obviously, more 64-bit is better, but Leopard is pretty solid. I like it just fine.