Apple's Mac has about 12 months to prepare for Windows Vist...


Chaszmyr

macrumors 601
Aug 9, 2002
4,265
76
Apple is stronger right now than they have ever been before. For Microsoft to deliver a killing blow to Apple, I think they would need something a lot more revolutionary than what I have seen of Vista.
 

coolfactor

macrumors 601
Jul 29, 2002
4,293
3,836
Vancouver, BC
What he failes to realize is that the exact reasons that most consumers buy a Windows machine instead of a Mac are the same reasons there won't be the devastating impact to Apple that Enderle predicts... most consumers want cheap and they don't care for the best. They will be "okay" with Windows XP for many years to come, just like Win95 is still around today.
 

MacDawg

macrumors Core
Mar 20, 2004
19,708
4,274
"Between the Hedges"
What a load of mind numbing propaganda...

No matter how many times you say it, or how many different ways, it still doesn't make it true... but repeat a lie enough times and people will believe it anyway.

Woof, Woof – Dawg
 

GorillaPaws

macrumors 6502a
Oct 26, 2003
930
6
Richmond, VA
Competition is a good thing, even from Microsoft. Not that Apple's getting complacent in the OS department or anything, but you can bet that Microsoft isn't ignoring the threat of OSX on pc hardware. I know that Jobs said that they will never release it for non-Apple harware, but I'm sure that doesn't help the MS boys sleep any better at night. It is one of the largest global corporations, and despite its many faults, you can bet that they are doing their best to keep up. I'm not saying that Vistas' going to wipe the floor with Apple or anything like this dude is suggesting, but I have a feeling that they realize that they can't keep falling behind in the OS game.
 

MacDawg

macrumors Core
Mar 20, 2004
19,708
4,274
"Between the Hedges"
The MS platform has changed dramatically as well, however, and it is much greater than just the operating system these days. Apple, on the other hand, hasn't advanced nearly as much but they are predominantly consumer-based today and less vulnerable to this comparative weakness as a result. Apple will be positioning its Intel-compatible OS version against Vista and they have about 12 months to prepare for the threat.
How about 12 more months to prepare. Vista, aka Longhorn has been in development forever, while Mac users have been enjoying Panther and Tiger, and will be enjoying the next iteration before Vista even ships, much less gets some of the bugs fixed.

I don't see any Mac users being swayed to convert to Vista, so not much of a threat there.

Instant On has been promised for years and this product provides a huge advancement when loaded on appropriate hardware. While this feature remains largely in stealth mode awaiting availability of compliant hardware, this provides a massive improvement in boot times and, when coupled with PreFetch, described below, a sharp improvement in perceived performance. This, coupled with the knowledge of the security improvements that won't work on currently shipping hardware, leads to a strong suggestion that folks moving to Vista might want to do so with new hardware.

PreFetch is a new technology that will look for applications you frequently use and preload them so they pop when selected. This will be a memory hog and make you really glad memory is inexpensive.
Is he kidding? Ha! Ha!
Won't work on currently shipping hardware... memory hog... sounds about right. And as usual, MS products think they know more than I do about how I want my computer to work, so it looks for applications you frequently use and preloads them, and so becomes a memory hog and doesn't allow me to do what I need to do.

Apple will have to improve its game sharply to compete. However, given the strength at the back end, strength that Apple has never had, the exposure now goes well beyond Apple's available resources. This means Apple will have to partner to avoid what may be the most damaging competitive threat the company has ever faced.
The only place MS leads is in $ and market share. They have been behind in every other way to the Mac from the beginning and are still playing catch up.

Woof, Woof – Dawg
 

whocares

macrumors 65816
Oct 9, 2002
1,496
0
:noitаɔo˩
As for hardware, unlike 1995, the hardware OEMs not only cover a broader range with companies like Voodoo and Alienware in the mix, but historically staid companies like Gateway, HP, Acer, and even Dell are much more aggressive on design today, often surpassing Apple,
This must be the funniest thing I'll hear all week/month/year :eek: :p
 

SPUY767

macrumors 68020
Jun 22, 2003
2,018
112
GA
whocares said:
This must be the funniest thing I'll hear all week/month/year :eek: :p
'Specially that bit about dell surpassing apple in design. Pre Fetch BETTER be able to be turned off, this would eat any machine of mine alive. Prefetch would be loading about nine creative apps when all I want to do is check my effing e-mail. For whom, on modern hardware, do apps not start quickly enough anyway. Photoshop took just 6 seconds to start last time I opened it. I think this may just be a little ridiculous.
 

Gasu E.

macrumors 601
Mar 20, 2004
4,421
2,222
Not far from Boston, MA.
Be Very, Very Scared

No, really, this article itself should make Mac people worry. It sounds as though it was written by someone with an IQ of 85. Previous Enderle scribbles have sounded as though they were written by someone with an IQ of 45. Clearly, the Windows world is rapidly closing the gap!
 

angelwatt

Moderator emeritus
Aug 16, 2005
7,842
7
USA
From the way the article makes it sound windows users will have to upgrade their hardware, especially since he was talking about having 2GB of memory to make things run smooth. Very view home pcs of windows users have this which means they'll need to upgrade, which most will not do until their current machine dies because it cost too much. Sure the companies will throw out millions for new computers so they can run vista, whenever microsoft speaks these blindly obedient companies seem to jump.

I'm with SPUY767 about prefetch being able to be turned off. Nothing worse than letting a windows os decide how to run the show. Wonder how many hours it'll take me to get vista to run correctly the way i like it? Maybe I'll just turn my rear to this OS. :D
 

cwtnospam

macrumors regular
Sep 4, 2004
148
0
This guy can't be so stupid that he doesn't know what he's saying isn't true. He must be getting paid to do it.
 

SiliconAddict

macrumors 603
Jun 19, 2003
5,889
0
Chicago, IL
Chaszmyr said:
Apple is stronger right now than they have ever been before. For Microsoft to deliver a killing blow to Apple, I think they would need something a lot more revolutionary than what I have seen of Vista.
This is something that many Mac users don’t get and something that Apple back in the 90’s didn’t get either. You don’t need a revolutionary product to win a market. You simply need “Good enough” That is it. Windows 2000 is good enough. Windows XP is good enough from stability standpoint. Security? Not so much. That is why some people are checking out OS X. If MS can bring stability, security, and relative ease of use to existing Windows users Apple is going to have a hell of an uphill battle. Not an insurmountable one but its going to be very hard. This is what the author of the article was trying to state.
People need to understand that no time in the last 5 years has Microsoft’s and Apple’s OSs been as close in features as they will be next fall. To the point that many will say why Apple. A valid question when you consider software compatibility a major selling point for many. I cannot tell you how many people I’ve tempted by sending them to the Apple store only to say sorry but no simply because they have several hundred dollars worth of software invested in Windows. And don’t say use virtual PC. With the migration to x86 this may be a viable option but on the PPC its slow enough that to many its really a crappy option.
 

Neuro

macrumors regular
Jun 15, 2003
209
2
London
I think it's funny that with each release of OS X, my old Powerbook 667 has got faster and more responsive, but by installing Vista, your PC will get slower to the point that you need to buy new hardware.

However, all MS needs to do is make the default Vista desktop look nice and Windows users will love it (and perceive it as better than OS X).

Personally, I don't think OS X looks that great until you tweak it.
 

cwtnospam

macrumors regular
Sep 4, 2004
148
0
SiliconAddict said:
This is something that many Mac users don’t get and something that Apple back in the 90’s didn’t get either. You don’t need a revolutionary product to win a market. You simply need “Good enough” That is it. Windows 2000 is good enough. Windows XP is good enough from stability standpoint. Security? Not so much. That is why some people are checking out OS X. If MS can bring stability, security, and relative ease of use to existing Windows users Apple is going to have a hell of an uphill battle. Not an insurmountable one but its going to be very hard. This is what the author of the article was trying to state.
This assumes that Microsoft can dramatically improve security while maintaining compatibility. They can't do both because improving security requires a complete rewrite of the basic Windows code. What they seem to have chosen is compatibility, which explains why the first Vista virus came out 8 days after the Beta.
 

dashiel

macrumors 6502a
Nov 12, 2003
876
0
look i know it's fun to bash enderle because 99 times out 100 he's absurdly wrong, and it's fun to bash longhorn because it's so late, but vista and some of the vista tools - especially their creative studio are really, really nice. now before you jump all over me for being a microsoft-y let me just say my first apple, was a ][+ back in 1983 and it's been apple ever since.

if their expression studio works as advertised i could see a portion of designers moving to microsoft, especially with an intel mac. the ability to create some truly interactive experiences for online delivery is amazing.

i certainly hope apple with adobe and moz come up with something as exciting, but they're behind the 8ball on this one.
 

SiliconAddict

macrumors 603
Jun 19, 2003
5,889
0
Chicago, IL
cwtnospam said:
This assumes that Microsoft can dramatically improve security while maintaining compatibility. They can't do both because improving security requires a complete rewrite of the basic Windows code. What they seem to have chosen is compatibility, which explains why the first Vista virus came out 8 days after the Beta.

What a load of horse ****. A virus for a product that is a year out. Oh no. Good heavens. Its the end of the world. Get real. Did you even know that at this point the default user has full admin rights? This aspect of Windows isn't even enabled yet. We will even overlook that half of the security features that MS is touting in Vista are still off right now. And the fact that you think Windows needs a ground up rewrite to get compatibility and security sounds as if you have done less reading about the OS itself and more listening to rumormongers. :rolleyes: We will completely ignore the fact that most security holes that have shown up in XP and 2K don't apply to Windows 2003 which is what the code base for Vista is based on and doubtless that MS has worked on that code further since its introduction as Vista's base.