Paul Thurrott Reviews Tiger

[rosalindavenue]

Thurott is a maddening guy. Read my sig to understand all you need to know about him.

 

[Loge]

I didn't know that Tiger will not come with AppleWorks (and yet it still comes with Sherlock...).

Is this officially the end of AppleWorks?
Will you still be able to buy it in the stores?

Well, Panther did not come with AppleWorks either, so I don't think that indicates anything.

 

[mac-er]

Well, Panther did not come with AppleWorks either, so I don't think that indicates anything.

That's right....I forgot.
Apple treats AppleWorks as premium software....

 

[stoid]

He's at about mediocre most of the way through, but once he hits the "So what's the big deal all about?" section, it's obvious that he's never used Tiger, and is just writing this review based on reading the feature list.

 

[starnox]

He's at about mediocre most of the way through, but once he hits the "So what's the big deal all about?" section, it's obvious that he's never used Tiger, and is just writing this review based on reading the feature list.

that and the fact that it isn't released yet

 

[keysersoze]

<edited for brutal profanity directed at Paul Thurrott>

 

[Maedus]

Hey if you guys (and gals) want to get really pissed off read...

XP vs OS X, where he says OS X is copying Windows

My favorite part:

Let's say you want to change the resolution of the screen. How might you accomplish this in OS X? Holding down the mouse button on the desktop does no good. Choosing View from the Finder menu offers no clue. Choosing Finder Preferences lets you change icon sizes, but not the screen resolution. And so on. How about System Preferences? In System Preferences, the Mac equivalent of the Windows Control Panel, we see a set of icons much like that used in versions of Windows circa two years ago. Let's se... hmm.... Is it Displays, General, or Screen Saver?

Displays, General, or Screen Saver? You mean it's not the icon that looks like a mouse and is labeled mouse(well now a keyboard button and mouse that is labeled Keyboard & Mouse)!?!?!?!? Next you'll tell me that the icon that looks like a monitor and is labeled Display is the correct choice!

 

[iGary]

I think Paul is an assclown just to get traffic to his site.

He IS a horrible writer, all other things said, though.

 

[GFLPraxis]

heres one

"Apple Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger" is the strongest OS X release yet and a worthy competitor to Windows XP"

what kind of mind altering substances is this guy doing? - a competitor? OS X has owned XP since its release.

I must disagree. XP owned OS X 10.0 No more than that!

 

[andiwm2003]

<edited for brutal profanity directed at Paul Thurrott>

<edited for not enough brutal profanity directed at Paul Thurrott. please try again.>

 

[GFLPraxis]

Displays, General, or Screen Saver? You mean it's not the icon that looks like a mouse and is labeled mouse(well now a keyboard button and mouse that is labeled Keyboard & Mouse)!?!?!?!? Next you'll tell me that the icon that looks like a monitor and is labeled Display is the correct choice!

Unbelievable article, eh?

"On the Mac, you get options for Displays, General, or Screensaver that could all be the one you're looking for! While on Windows XP, it's obviously Appearance and Themes1"

My...gosh.

Displays seems like the most logical choice when changing my DISPLAY RESOLUTION, don't you think?...

 

[GFLPraxis]

Absolutely wrong.
From a developers' perspective, its a HUGE HUGE upgrade.
This one really pales in comparisson to even Panther in terms of
new API and features. CoreImage, Spotlight, And definitaly CoreData,
Coredata being the biggest thing I am thankful for. Not to mention acceleration of the Quartz 2D, not just the compositor, theres a lot there
to make applications really be not only fast to develop but shine.

Yup. A minor upgrade is Windows XP SP 1. Or 10.3.1. Heck, a minor upgrade is Windows 98 to Windows 98SE (which Microsoft charged full price for, yet was nothing but a giant bug fix with internet connection sharing and a newer Windows Media Player added).

10.3 to 10.4 is NOT a minor upgrade when you have kernel updates, new API's, GUI changes, a completely different way of rendering the desktop, 3d effects in the GUI, CoreData, the ability to instantly search anywhere...etc.

Anyone who calls that a minor update needs to have his head examined. Paul Thurrot needs to have his head removed from the shoulders with a nice axe swing.

 

[GFLPraxis]

When what you change in the version number is to the right of a decimal point (e.g., 10.3 > 10.4), most people will view that as a minor upgrade (most present company excluded, apparently). If 10.4 was actually called OS XI, THEN it would be difficult to argue that it's not a major upgrade. But when the UI doesn't really change too much and you're adding just a few significant features and a LOT of bug fixes/tweaks, it's pretty much a minor upgrade.

Windows XP is still Windows XP 4 years later, but SP-2 is quite a bit better than base-level Windows XP. The same applies to OS X 10.4 compared to OS X 10.0 or 10.1. If you don't change the version number or the name too much, it's pretty much the same product.

Absolutely not. Windows XP SP-2 added new simple features that you could already download free (popup blocker, better firewall), and bug fixes.

Mac OS X Tiger has a newer kernel, new API, etc etc (see above post). Not even a good COMPARISON.


Mac OS X 10.4 vs Mac OS X 10.0 is like Windows XP vs Windows NT 1.0.

What, XP and NT are both based on the NT kernel and both have a similar GUI, the only difference are new features, bux fixes, and a bunch of under the hood enhancements, right? So technically, Windows XP is a 'minor upgrade' of Windows NT 1.0?

 

[PlaceofDis]

whenever i hear Paul Thurrott name my senses go : ZzZzZzZzZzZzZzZz

 

[solvs]

I'm kind of chuckling when he mentions Konfabulator and Widgets. We're talking about MS criticizing Apple for copying, LOL. Talk about a grand ol' conversation between the kettle and the pot.

I thought that too until I read http://daringfireball.net/2004/06/dashboard_vs_konfabulator and remembered that Arlo Rose used to work for Apple. Ever wonder why he never tried to get Konfab copywrited?

<off topic rant> I do hope Apple adds more RAM in the next update though. At least in the PowerMacs. I hear Tiger is faster, but I'm sure it would be better with 512MB. I get why the mini only has 256, but I'd rather not have to pay Apple $75 to upgrade to what it should come with. I'll probably just get more RAM at Newegg.com anyway, but it would be nice if I didn't have toss what comes with it. Who needs a couple of 128MB sticks of PC3200 DDR RAM? Especially if the low-end models have only 4 RAM slots. <off topic rant>

 

[rendezvouscp]

Displays seems like the most logical choice when changing my DISPLAY RESOLUTION, don't you think?...

Hell, Paul Thurrot is so stupid he probably didn't use the search in System Preferences.

It doesn't seem like he actually had Tiger to review. However, he supposedly had actual pictures late last week, but I seriously doubt that.
-Chase

 

[stoid]

The rant on changing screen resolution is a just classic! Because it's obviously more intuitive and straight forward to double-click on the desktop and select Properties to change the screen resolution than to click the System Preferences and Display. I started using Windows when I started college (now finishing my second year) and it wasn't until just a few weeks ago that I figured that one out by accident. I had always had to go through the Start>Control Panels>Displays...etc. major P.I.T.A.!

 

[GFLPraxis]

The rant on changing screen resolution is a just classic! Because it's obviously more intuitive and straight forward to double-click on the desktop and select Properties to change the screen resolution than to click the System Preferences and Display. I started using Windows when I started college (now finishing my second year) and it wasn't until just a few weeks ago that I figured that one out by accident. I had always had to go through the Start>Control Panels>Displays...etc. major P.I.T.A.!

There's multiple ways nowadays.

Right click on desktop, properties, appearance and settings.
Or
Start, control panel, Appearance and Themes, Display (SAME NAME! or you can click "Change the Resolution" which takes you to the same box).


Vs Mac:

Control Panel, Display.

Come on, can you HONESTLY say that
Start>CP>AaT>Display

is easier than

CP>Display

with a straight face?

 

[Fukui]

It doesn't seem like he actually had Tiger to review. However, he supposedly had actual pictures late last week, but I seriously doubt that.
-Chase

You'll notice that all the pictures on his "review" were 'courtesy of apple.'
If he really had it, he would most likely take his own screen grabs I would think...
Not only that, but why does he feel the need to proclaim he's such a mac lover in the beginning? What's up with that?

 

[HiRez]

Much as I dislike Thurrott in general, I think his review was quite fair and spot-on in most areas. It appears he genuinely likes OS X, and, unlike many reviews by Mac-centric sources, he doesn't blindly gush over it, pointing out nitpicks where appropriate.

He's right on the mark when he talks about Apple trouncing all over their own (previously-sacred) UI guidelines, something that's been bothering me for as long as OS X has been around; nothing wrong with evelving, but it's terribly inconsistent, with now quite a few different interfaces to be found within their own applications (we have Brushed Metal with the slightly-different QuickTime variant, 10.3 and earlier Aqua, 10.4 Aqua, Neutral Pro (FCP etc.), oddball hybrids like Garage Band and iPhoto, and now god-knows-what with Dashboard Widgets). It won't stop me from using OS X, but overall it's quite a mess. And sorry, but the Dock still sucks.

 

[Blue Velvet]

And sorry, but the Dock still sucks.

How so? I don't have a problem with it.

 

[Lacero]

I love the Dock. If you go back to OS9, a new user would find it even harder to use, and Macs are already known for their ease of use.

 

[Maedus]

I think the Dock is fantastic. And I love having it hidden on the right side of the monitor as opposed to visible and on the bottom. That way it doesn't interfere with the desktop icons and it especially doesn't interfere with Word and Firefox which take up all the space from top to bottom but not side to side. Plus it sure beats trying to quickly access commonly used apps via the Apple menu.

 

[GFLPraxis]

Personally, I love the dock. The taskbar in XP is superior in some circumstances, but inferior in others. For just running programs, the taskbar is great, but really, the dock combines the Start Menu, Quick Launch, Taskbar, and some of the desktop into one. It really is useful if you know how to use it.

BTW, make your own start menu; stick the Applications folder in the dock and right click on it to get a list of all programs.

 

[Maedus]

BTW, make your own start menu; stick the Applications folder in the dock and right click on it to get a list of all programs.

Indiana University has different folders of applications in the Dock. I can't remember the names, but their's one for web browsers, another for Office and Office type programs. Another for graphics programs as well as a folder for all the IU networking software. And each folder has a nifty icon. I really like how its set up. If my computer wasn't so slow, I'd do it myself, but clicking the Finder icon and selecting an app from the Applications folder is actually quicker than clicking on a folder on the Dock. *Shakes angry fist at G3 Beige.* I can't wait for an iMac update that comes preinstalled with Tiger!

BTW, you can just click and hold down to get the list of all the apps or contents in the folder. For those of us that kept the standard one button Apple mouse.