Leopard or Vista?

Discussion in 'macOS' started by xisforextreme, Jul 23, 2005.

  1. xisforextreme macrumors member

    xisforextreme

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2004
    Location:
    Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
    #1
    OK, this is going to make me sound like a bit of a turncoat here, but looking at the previews of vista, it actually looks pretty smooth, *gasp* :eek:, maybe even better than my beloved tiger! It's really got me wondering whether or not leopard will be able to fight it out with such an improved contender, especially now that microsoft has recognized how important a good gui is. I really hope that leopard will make more progress than tiger did from panther, and include a new more "shiny" gui as well as some vista-killing features... :D
     
  2. mad jew Moderator emeritus

    mad jew

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    #2
    Maybe give the two a chance to be released before passing judgement... ;)
     
  3. xisforextreme thread starter macrumors member

    xisforextreme

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2004
    Location:
    Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
    #3
    I guess you're right, but from the screenshots alone, vista looks to be in a whole different league to xp, and a very real tiger killer. I'm only hoping that leopard will be able to give microsoft a run for its (large amounts of) money
     
  4. rendezvouscp macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Location:
    Long Beach, California
    #4
    I'd re-read your first post in this thread if I were you. :p

    From screenshots alone? We haven't even seen screenshots of Leopard, so I definitely wouldn't even say that right now. Microsoft still has a pretty crappy GUI in the last build of Longhorn at WinHEC, but we'll see in a little more than a week if they've made improvements and what Avalon can deliver.
    -Chase
     
  5. risc macrumors 68030

    risc

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #5
    So what are you saying? All the Mac users are going to install Vista on their Macs? Can you please explain to me how you've decided that an OS that isn't even out yet is better than Tiger? Also how can you compare it to Leopard another OS that isn't out yet? I for one will be buying Leopard, Vista is a Microsoft Windows OS which isn't something I'd be considering chucking on my Mac!
     
  6. xisforextreme thread starter macrumors member

    xisforextreme

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2004
    Location:
    Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
    #6
    I don't know performance-wise if it is better, but it sure looks (at least to me) graphically, a little bit better. Of course mac will always be competition to windws, and microsoft in general. This is because it will always have its hardcore supporters, who value the complete apple experience. But for some people, like me, who switched to mac, the main reason was not its technology or any of its advandced feartures such as automator or spotlight. No, no no, it was a much shallower reason, a reason which most people who are not tech-heads switch to macs for, it looks better! :D All I'm saying is, that maybe the number of switchers from the windows side will decrease with the release of what could be the first attractive os from microsoft, maybe even a few people who have switched to macs might go back, I know that my brother is planning to, despite my attempts to get him to love osx,
     
  7. snickelfritz macrumors 65816

    snickelfritz

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2003
    Location:
    Tucson AZ
  8. xisforextreme thread starter macrumors member

    xisforextreme

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2004
    Location:
    Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
    #8
    on my local news channel, it was actually a video, but not the microsoft-made advert video. Looked like something from a convention, showcasing vista
     
  9. toneloco2881 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    #9
    Here's some screenshots of Windows "Vista" Beta 1. Im not all that impressed, just judging aesthetically of course. Granted, it's still a ways off, but they're going to have to add more than some simple window dressings and transparency effects to convince people it's worth the protracted development time. Just imho...
     
  10. iMeowbot macrumors G3

    iMeowbot

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2003
    #10
    I hope they lose that transparency thing. The semi-transparent menus in OS X are distracting enough.
     
  11. Deepdale macrumors 68000

    Deepdale

    Joined:
    May 4, 2005
    Location:
    New York
    #11
    Longhorn out, Vista in

    It appears Microsoft was affected by Apple's switcher campaign -- at least they switched names for their prospective OS. I believe the real reason behind the move was that the Redmond(V)istas finally had a long overdue epiphany. What a difference a letter makes.

    If they continued to promote a name such as Longhorn -- with its Southwestern cattle association -- it might become impossible to rid people of the notion that all the eye candy in the world will fall short of the desired goal of keeping buyers from making this leap of faith: Longhorn is to cattle, cattle is to beef, beef is to bull, their OS is essentially bull****. You see where this is going. :)
     
  12. redAPPLE macrumors 68030

    redAPPLE

    Joined:
    May 7, 2002
    Location:
    2 Much Infinite Loops
    #12
    it looks like xp with different shade of colors...
     
  13. GodBless macrumors 65816

    GodBless

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2005
    #13
    Yeah transparency is good for some things but not for most. Apple has seemed to find the perfect balance. If Microsoft doesn't find the right balance of transparency for Windows then it will sway people away from using it. (All the better for convincing people to use OS X. ;))

    Hey for those of you who are interested checkout this article that says that Microsoft has acquired spyware software which will most likely be used for Longhorn. Who would want an OS with built-in spyware? :eek:
     
  14. Applespider macrumors G4

    Applespider

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Location:
    looking through rose-tinted spectacles...
    #14
    I believe the transparency is currently only there to show they can do it and is supposedly going to be turned down in the later betas. I'm not really sure why they're putting that in to be honest since most Windows users work full screen; why do they need to be able to see the Windows behind it - it'll just end up a jumbled mess.
     
  15. Diatribe macrumors 601

    Diatribe

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2004
    Location:
    Back in the motherland
    #15
    Exactly what I was gonna say. Plus a bit too much transparency.
     
  16. Les Kern macrumors 68040

    Les Kern

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Location:
    Alabama
    #16
    EXACTLY my thought. Let's see... start menu... taskbar... minimized apps and files.... slight re-design on the main menu (XP actually looks better to me)
    But to be fair, MS has a YEAR AND A HALF to steal, uh, design some nice changes.
    Year and a half.
    In dog years that about 10 years. In MS years that's... what... about 2-3 years before they have a stable version of Vista?
    Vista was supposed to be a ground-up OS build? No? Did I hear wrong?
    I heard wrong. It looks like new code on XP code. I can't WAIT to get a copy of that monstrosity.
     
  17. steve_hill4 macrumors 68000

    steve_hill4

    Joined:
    May 15, 2005
    Location:
    NG9, England
    #17
    That's what I was thinking. By changing the colours, adding some new, nice looking graphics and a few features that are old hat already, (and most windows users won't use anyway), they call it a new OS. I know it's more of a change than that, but 5 years wait for that. I hope that it has a slow take up and that people don't get taken in by it's claims to be better.
     
  18. steve_hill4 macrumors 68000

    steve_hill4

    Joined:
    May 15, 2005
    Location:
    NG9, England
    #18
    Ground up, well perhaps Microsoft have decided that Xp is the ground and the benchmark for all OS's. :rolleyes:
     
  19. BGil macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2005
    #19
    Actually, what you see is just a theme for the Windows 2003 code base. The Aero user interface won't be shown publically until Beta 2 which is sometime between Nov. and Jan of 2006. Early reports from people who have seen Aero say there's no more taskbar.

    http://elliottback.com/wp/wp-content/lh106wh.jpg
    Notice the Window with the red trim? It's got a few interesting things in it.

    Beta 1 is the most stable beta from Microsoft ever. Cosidering Windows Server 2003 was the most stable OS I've ever used (yes, even more than Panther and Tiger) that says a lot.

    You did hear wrong but every Win32 API has been replaced. The entire networking stack has been replaced. DirectX has been replaced. The kernel is now based on the one in Windows Server 2003 as opposed to the one from XP/2000 (no they are not the same). The all video, audio, color, print, speech, natural launguage, sync, ink/tablet, and fundamentals stuff was replaced. The networking stack was replaced. The 64-bit kernel is all new and even the 32-bit kernel isn't natively compatible with the one in previous OS'es. NTFS underwent massive changes and WinFS will completely replace the user data store and data model for building apps. The commandline is being replaced with MSH and finally the entire Media Center framework has been redone. IIRC all the major API's are .NET (1.1 or 2.0) based now.

    The desktop metaphor has also been changed (you can see this in build 5048 or any of the earlier builds).

    The Vista Core features are so numerous that it would take forever to explain them all to you. The WinHec 2005 slides have the info about all of those features.

    http://bbs.xvsxp.com/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=9&t=5398&st=0
    That thread details many of the known Longhorn features. PAy attention to the first couple of pages and the last page or so.
     
  20. iDM macrumors 6502a

    iDM

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2005
    Location:
    The Commonwealth of PA/The First State-DE
    #20
    These pictures are a joke!! It looks like a mod-ed XP with some appearance package. Nothing new to see here. Of course this is based only on aesthetics I'd be lying if I commented on *any* of the new features, but appearance wise this looks like a waste of an upgrade. I also heard a dirty little rumor that it's going to require 512mb of RAM!! If this is true that is going to instantly eliminate all those people who bought those POS $299 desktops from DELL which lets face it is a majority of Grandma and Grandpa's or parents looking to get into computers. My parents questioned me when I suggested an iMac for them. They just couldn't believe dropping around a 1000 on a computer(iMac) would be worth the $700 difference of a DELL, now who is emailing me pictures through iPhoto, making iTunes playlists for their iPods and using the internet more then my siblings, and will be for the next 4+ years on the same machine

    Edit: Well don't I sound like an idiot for not reading the last post about the Beta 2 Aero new interface, ok I take responsiblity now, don't flame with for not reading earlier it was posted while I was typing.
     
  21. iindigo macrumors 6502a

    iindigo

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #21
    Meh... In the screenshots it's still no real competition for Tiger, and the final is nothing Leopard or 10.6 can't beat :) I'm expecting a lot from 10.5 since Apple knows it will be competing with Vista... lol, I wouldn't surprised if MS pushed this thing off AGAIN :p
     
  22. BGil macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2005
    #22
    IIRC that's going to be the recommended amount of ram not the requirement. I think the requirement is going to be 128 or so. With 128mb's you'll probably only be able to run the "Classic" or "To Go" interfaces though.

    You'd be hard pressed to walk into a Best Buy, Circuit City, or CompUSA and find any computer with less than 512 ram though (unless it's a Mac). 512 ram because "standard" on retail PC's in early 2002.

    Even the $499 e-Machine comes with a 16X dual layer DVD burner, Direct X 9 PCIe based graphics, PCI Express, 512mb's of ram, 160GB HD, Dolby 5.1 output and decoding, and an Athlon 64 3200+ (2.2ghz).
    http://www.emachines.com/products/products.html?prod=eMachines_T6410

    Microsoft is right to push the requirements of the higher level tiers. If you have older hardware it will run another UI but anyone who bought hardware within the last few years and has a decent video card will get something much better.
     
  23. snickelfritz macrumors 65816

    snickelfritz

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2003
    Location:
    Tucson AZ
    #23
    Thanks for screens!
    Looks nice, but it also looks kinda like a Tiger rip-off using XP interface conventions and black instead of white.
    The example of Explorer looks suspiciously like Safari.
    The whole thing looks like a Windowshade skin on XP to me.
    (especially the System Properties panel)

    For the life of me, I will never understand the penchant for window and menu transparency; it does not improve navigation, and ends up just using resources and IMO it looks cluttered.
    BTW, I like the way safari handles multiple Windows as tabs; the Finder should work the same way.
    Also, little desktop information balloons are irritating; Microsoft needs to quit doing this.

    Microsoft should get out of the business of copying Apple, and start working on some innovations of their own.
    Personally, I think OSX looks better than Vista, but Vista certainly looks better than XP.
     
  24. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #24
    This may be true in desktops, but what about notebooks? A quick look at the US Home & Home Office site for Dell revealed the following Inspirons: XPS-2, 9300, 700m, 600m, 6000, 2200, 1200. Of those, only the first (XPS-2) has 512MB of memory in its default configuration -- all the others are at 256. And of the six others, four share that memory with the video card (the other two have dedicated video memory).

    Don't get me wrong, please...I agree that it's a practical requirement to have 512MB of RAM now for many users. I personally refuse to have less than 1GB in my next computer....
     
  25. BGil macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2005
    #25
    Dell does that so they can offer $600 notebooks. The two low end Dell laptops get 512 ram at about $800 and the higher-end models get 512 around $1000.

    HP, on the other hand, has 512 ram standand on all their "recommended" and "ready-to-ship" models, 1GB is standard at about $1100. Keep in mind that Best Buy and CC rebates on these machines usually lower the price $100-$250.

    http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7267799&type=product&id=1117177721941
    That's a Gateway with 512 ram at BBY.

    http://bestbuy.dailyshopper.com/ind...&deptid=10154&title=Computers+and+Peripherals
    That's an HP with 512 ram (and DX9 graphics with 128mb's of dedicated memory) for under $1000 after rebates.
    http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?id=1115365776587&skuId=7247712&type=product
    That one cost $700 after rebates and it's got 512 and DX9 graphics (shared memory).

    Ram is super cheap these days. You can pick up 2 sticks of 512 for less than $100. ATI and Intel both offer integrated graphics with full DX9 support (some have dedicated memory some don't).

    Dell is really the only manufacturer selling a ton of machines that don't meet those basics specs but those are only machines under about $800. Anything above that price range is going to be very well equipped (unless it's an IBM/Lenevo, Mac, or Sony).
     

Share This Page