OS X and Windows Vista...some random thoughts...

[qtip919]

ok, let me start off with saying that I am a die-hard OS X fan, and because of my job I am FORCED to work with windows (which I hate)

However, there are things in the windows world which are simply superior and I cannot live without them...although I seriously wish Apple would spend 10 minutes away from iTunes to work on a Exchange/Outlook competitor...


Anyways, I have had the opportunity to work with Vista lately on a dev machine. I have to admit, I am extremely impressed. There are things in this OS which look PHENOMENAL

In fact, I shudder to say this: Vista is beautiful

Visually, there are things in the UI which make OS X look antiquated. Its funny, because I come home from Windows XP to work on OS X, and I am always so excited to get on my powerbook. Now, I kinda get excited to go to work and explore Vista.

Im also amazed at the speed. Im running it on a dual 3ghz Pentium, and for a beta, I cannot believe how fast it runs.

However, MS has done little to make this OS more simple and efficient. So, rest assured; even though it look a million times better, it's still the same old completely overloaded windows.


I mean, you still have the same old Control panel with hundreds of confunsing options. The same old completely inefficient Start menu...etc etc.

Well, anyways, I hope Apple is planning a major revamp of its UI to conincide with the Launch of Vista. I would at least really love to see a general "clean up" of the OS X UI

 

[Project]

Its definitely interesting, because I too believe some of the betas of Vista look nice in terms of the aesthetics. It *is* still Windows however, so there is little chance of me switching back as I love the Mac platform, its software etc, but in terms of switchability of other people, Apple could have a problem. Put simply, Vista looks nice enough to make OSX not look as superior as it does now. I show people OSX who have never seen it before and they make tons of comments on its beauty compared to their Windows XP machines. Everything right down to the font. And ive switched a few people solely from this.. I will have a hard time doing the same when Vista comes out, because glass looks very nice. It isnt however, very usable. But a Windows user is a Windows user... it will be fine to them. I trust that Apple will have something brewing for Leopard, but I dont think the iTunes look is enough to turn heads. Windows Media Player 11 and Windows Calendar look very nice, with the glass effects at the bottom. Thats not to say they are better than iTunes and iCal, but they do look good. One thing I do like is the way you can browse by album art in WMP11. If Apple had sense, they would buy Coverflow from its developer and integrate it into iTunes or Front Row. It looks far superior to the WMP11 way of doing things.. Vista also includes Photo Gallery, which is similar to iPhoto. Its interesting how MS is really pushing these basic apps out of the box, just like the Mac.

One thing that Vista does very well though, is metadata. I love how you can add keywords/tags in save dialogues on Word for instance. Apple needs to include this on EVERY single application come Leopard. No ifs or buts - Spotlight was here before Vista yes, but in its current form Vista will blow it away in terms of making use of all that metadata.

 

[qtip919]

Its definitely interesting, because I too believe some of the betas of Vista look nice in terms of the aesthetics. It *is* still Windows however, so there is little chance of me switching back as I love the Mac platform, its software etc, but in terms of switchability of other people, Apple could have a problem. Put simply, Vista looks nice enough to make OSX not look as superior as it does now. I show people OSX who have never seen it before and they make tons of comments on its beauty compared to their Windows XP machines. Everything right down to the font. And ive switched a few people solely from this.. I will have a hard time doing the same when Vista comes out, because glass looks very nice. It isnt however, very usable. But a Windows user is a Windows user... it will be fine to them. I trust that Apple will have something brewing for Leopard, but I dont think the iTunes look is enough to turn heads. Windows Media Player 11 and Windows Calendar look very nice, with the glass effects at the bottom. Thats not to say they are better than iTunes and iCal, but they do look good. One thing I do like is the way you can browse by album art in WMP11. If Apple had sense, they would buy Coverflow from its developer and integrate it into iTunes or Front Row. It looks far superior to the WMP11 way of doing things.. Vista also includes Photo Gallery, which is similar to iPhoto. Its interesting how MS is really pushing these basic apps out of the box, just like the Mac.

One thing that Vista does very well though, is metadata. I love how you can add keywords/tags in save dialogues on Word for instance. Apple needs to include this on EVERY single application come Leopard. No ifs or buts - Spotlight was here before Vista yes, but in its current form Vista will blow it away in terms of making use of all that metadata.

I couldnt agree more...Search metadata is something we should not loose out on to MS...

 

[SmurfBoxMasta]

yep, Vista looks pretty on top, but underneath, it's still a big, bloated, crappily coded, mish-mashed-together P>O>S> Aeroglass my a*s! Trust me, the beauty is only skin deep.....

In other words: normal windblows

Also, try running it on ANY 5-6 year old wintel box, and "pretty" will be THE last word on your mind

Been there, done that 5x...... not enough 4 letter words in the English language to describe the experience !

In other words: normal windblows

Meez thinks when people realize that they MUST buy the newest, fastest boxes available to run it worth a crap, they may finally realize what Vista is REALLY all about:

A HUGE, bottomless money pit for the entire wintel/x86 consortium......

In other words: normal windblows

As Rosie would say: "Who knew?"

 

[Lacero]

The Vista demos do look pretty nice.

Apple has got to get rid of Brushed Metal. It is one of the ugliest UI element in existence. Apple also needs to streamline Finder so more than one Finder window can sit on the desktop on a 12" PB comfortably.

Here's to the Crazy Ones ​

 

[Project]

yep, Vista looks pretty on top, but underneath, it's still a big, bloated, crappily coded, mish-mashed-together P>O>S> Aeroglass my a*s! Trust me, the beauty is only skin deep.....

We know this, but the people Apple is so desperately trying hard to switch dont.

The facts are, Windows to them IS the computer. Its like hoover and a vacuum cleaner. They dont use Windows, they use the computer. The fact its Windows to them is on the whole invisible. Ignorance? Maybe, but thats not the point. The Windows way of doing things is the defacto standard for these people, so however bloated it is etc, they know nothing else. Thats why the beauty of Aqua and OSX has been a key selling point for Apple stores and those of us who try to show it to friends and family. It looks miles better than XP, so people would be more inclined to switch, rather than saying "Windows is bloated". Vista narrows that gap, and to some will look better than OSX. While beauty IS only skin deep, the importance of this cannot be underestimated. What do we have to go on when Windows isnt ugly? Viruses and spyware? Even Apple themselves dont promote this as a reason to switch, because that could all come crashing down when viruses do start to appear on OSX.

As I said, its definitely interesting and I often wonder exactly how Apple perceive Vista. Its more secure, it looks pleasing, it includes more apps built in that are starting to rival the Mac range and it does have very nice metadata integration. Even workflow is being improved, with stacks and some Expose-looking features. Those aspects arent as nice as Expose though.

Whatever happens, you can be sure Leopard will have to be a pretty big jump from Tiger if Apple wants to stay one step ahead. And that makes it all the more exciting about what Steve will show us over the next few months.

 

[mad jew]

The Vista demos do look pretty nice.

Although I agree with your other points, I'd hardly say Vista looks nice. The transparency is massively overdone, the Explorer window layout is awkward and the colour scheme is a Bit Iffy™ IMO.

 

[Chaszmyr]

The Vista demos do look pretty nice.

Apple has got to get rid of Brushed Metal.

Bite your tongue.

 

[After G]

I think that working on Outlook/Exchange competition is a waste of time, as MS can just change how Outlook/Exchange works, which would break functionality. Same with writing NTFS. Microsoft will just make a new file system (WinFS, as example).

As for Vista being better in some ways ... that is true, but Apple can just take those ideas that are good and implement them faster (to beat Vista) or right after Vista is released (to take attention away from Vista). And the bad ideas? Microsoft can keep them.

 

[howesey]

Apple now have till 2007 to catch up with some of the Vista features.

 

[BornAgainMac]

Competition is good. Microsoft would have sat on XP for 10 years if Mac OSX never was around. I hope the control panel mess and All Programs menu gets reworked. I would like the registry based on SQL Server technology.

 

[jhu]

yep, Vista looks pretty on top, but underneath, it's still a big, bloated, crappily coded, mish-mashed-together P>O>S> Aeroglass my a*s! Trust me, the beauty is only skin deep.....

In other words: normal windblows

Also, try running it on ANY 5-6 year old wintel box, and "pretty" will be THE last word on your mind

Been there, done that 5x...... not enough 4 letter words in the English language to describe the experience !

In other words: normal windblows

Meez thinks when people realize that they MUST buy the newest, fastest boxes available to run it worth a crap, they may finally realize what Vista is REALLY all about:

A HUGE, bottomless money pit for the entire wintel/x86 consortium......

In other words: normal windblows

As Rosie would say: "Who knew?"

couple points:
1) try running 10.4 on a 5-6 year old mac, slower than molassas in winter.
2) speaking of bloat, you mean 10.4 or the upcoming 10.5 isn't bloated?
3) we'll see when 10.5 comes out but it will probably not run well except on the newest, fastest mac boxes
4) apple has joined the x86 consortium...

 

[poohat1000]

 

[poohat1000]

http://media.spikedhumor.com/2772/windows_vista.wmv


check out this video with gates doing his best steve impression, "now what if you have loads of windows open at once, and you need to see which to use... well llook what we did - we copied apple!!!"


(it does look vvvvvvv pretty tho )

 

[IJ Reilly]

Vista is to XP what XP was to 98 -- the same old confusing Windows UI with a new color scheme. For ten years now, Microsoft has refused to rethink the Windows UI in any significant way. Every few years, they just paint nicer lipstick on the same old pig. This is not the way it should be done, obviously, and not the path Apple should take. I don't care about brushed metal or any of these superficial "look" characteristics. I care about how the user experience is thought out. The Mac has always beaten Windows in this area, and based on what I see of Vista, will continue to do so.

Also, keep in mind that Vista will be an automatic success at least in terms of sales numbers, whether it's great or it totally sucks. Even if Microsoft doesn't sell a single upgrade, they'll get millions and millions of OEM sales. It'll be forced into the pipeline just like every version of Windows before it.

 

[topgunn]

Vista is to XP what XP was to 98

XP was a vast improvement over 98. With XP, you only have to reformat every year or two as opposed to every 3 to 6 months with 98.

 

[Dane D.]

List what winblows does better

there are things in the windows world which are simply superior and I cannot live without them

Will you list what winblows does better. I never seem to get a straight answer. A lot of people say that but fail to back it up with examples.

 

[IJ Reilly]

XP was a vast improvement over 98. With XP, you only have to reformat every year or two as opposed to every 3 to 6 months with 98.

I'm aware of the technical improvements. I was speaking of the UI, which hasn't changed significantly since Windows 95. Microsoft corrects their interface mistakes by making them look prettier instead of actually fixing them.

 

[Randall]

Vista is to XP what XP was to 98

What?!? XP is based on a completely different kernel then the "hybrid DOS" kernel that 95/98 were based on. I am so sick of people bashing XP just because it's Microsoft. It's a good operating system, and it's rock solid.

C:\>systeminfo | find "System Up Time"
System Up Time:            34 Days, 22 Hours, 12 Minutes, 52 Seconds

yeah you're right, I guess it's an unstable piece of junk.

 

[aristobrat]

yep, Vista looks pretty on top, but underneath, it's still a big, bloated, crappily coded, mish-mashed-together P>O>S> Aeroglass my a*s!

I thought the reason Vista is so late getting to market is because Microsoft decided to recode it from scratch with an emphasis on eliminating most of the bloated, crappily coded, mis-mashed togetherness?

 

[Randall]

The Vista demos do look pretty nice.

Apple has got to get rid of Brushed Metal. It is one of the ugliest UI element in existence. Apple also needs to streamline Finder so more than one Finder window can sit on the desktop on a 12" PB comfortably.

I agree. They are switching over to "Solid Metal" which is what iTunes6 and QuickTime7 use, and IMO it looks much better.

 

[jhu]

What?!? XP is based on a completely different kernel then the "hybrid DOS" kernel that 95/98 were based on. I am so sick of people bashing XP just because it's Microsoft. It's a good operating system, and it's rock solid.

C:\>systeminfo | find "System Up Time"
System Up Time:            34 Days, 22 Hours, 12 Minutes, 52 Seconds

yeah you're right, I guess it's an unstable piece of junk.

although i agree with your statement, your uptimes don't mean anything without a load-average during that time. i had linux running on a 486 as my router several years ago. it had uptimes in the hundreds of days, however its load average was only 0.1 during that period.

 

[jhu]

I'm aware of the technical improvements. I was speaking of the UI, which hasn't changed significantly since Windows 95. Microsoft corrects their interface mistakes by making them look prettier instead of actually fixing them.

you could argue the same with the mac interface.

 

[Randall]

you could argue the same with the mac interface.

I was just about to say that. OS X is great, but a lot of the interface is the same as the old Mac OS, just more eye candy. Hmmm kinda like XP's user interface is to 98.

Mind you that these OSes are total overhauls under the hood, but the UI is much unchanged.

 

[jhu]

I was just about to say that. OS X is great, but a lot of the interface is the same as the old Mac OS, just more eye candy. Hmmm kinda like XP's user interface is to 98.

Mind you that these OSes are total overhauls under the hood, but the UI is much unchanged.

and you would expect that because an abrupt change in the user interface would upset too many of the base users. imagine if microsoft or apple used sun's project looking glass as their user interface. people would be leaving in droves.