Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Is there anything that Windows has that OSX doesn't?
- Thread starter vniow
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
<grrrrrrrr>Mozilla just crashed as I was about to submit my first reply</grrrrrrrr>
soo....
in summary:
I liked Nipsy's summary.
I agree with some of the points about Windows File Manager/Explorer. Although I think OS X's literal representaion of mounted volumes and the file system is less confusing than Windows 'helpful' pseudo-heirachy where the Desktop is above My Computer, My Documents, My Network Places etc etc. That's what shortcuts are for aren't they?
I also agree that there is still a lack of fast and free Aqua based text editors but the field is closing. I personally like mi (which is really fast to load and has nice tidy toolset) and Apple's Project Builder looks like a pretty handy IDE even if you're just doing HTML or PHP. Although I have to admit I'd really like to have HTML-Kit (which I use every day on my work PC) on my Mac.
And lastly I'd like to say what a good discussion this has been so far. I hope (someone influential at) Apple reads this thread. It's nice to be part of a thread that is not full of whining, flaming and grandstanding for a change.
Thanks guys and gals.
i_b_joshua
soo....
in summary:
I liked Nipsy's summary.
I agree with some of the points about Windows File Manager/Explorer. Although I think OS X's literal representaion of mounted volumes and the file system is less confusing than Windows 'helpful' pseudo-heirachy where the Desktop is above My Computer, My Documents, My Network Places etc etc. That's what shortcuts are for aren't they?
I also agree that there is still a lack of fast and free Aqua based text editors but the field is closing. I personally like mi (which is really fast to load and has nice tidy toolset) and Apple's Project Builder looks like a pretty handy IDE even if you're just doing HTML or PHP. Although I have to admit I'd really like to have HTML-Kit (which I use every day on my work PC) on my Mac.
And lastly I'd like to say what a good discussion this has been so far. I hope (someone influential at) Apple reads this thread. It's nice to be part of a thread that is not full of whining, flaming and grandstanding for a change.
Thanks guys and gals.
i_b_joshua
You're right that the Finder can't show EXIF data, but iPhoto can, and also a program called "jhead" if you use the command line. I agree though that Apple needs to beef up the Finder a bit in this area. I'd like to see them get rid of list view (it's worthless) and improve column view. (Larger preview area, ability to double-click on a picture to open it, show image dimensions in the preview area, and maybe offer an "extended" preview area or something that allows you to view EXIF data and other things about the image that would otherwise only be viewable in Photoshop or with the Get Info option.)
hey i like the list view.
also i think 'beefing up' the finder is a bad idea. i thin this is one of the major faults of windows. ms trys to add everything to the finder. it creates a buggy bloated os. sure it can do a lot of things, but doesnt do any of them very well. the os should simply be the platform for applications to operate in. if you want to work with photos use iphoto. i dont want to be doing any elaborate application level tasks in my finder.
cr2sh: regarding price (i know this is a tangent), the upgrade path to jaguar was $20. I will never understand why people complain about jaguar pricing when it has been the same pricing model that apple has used for as long as i can remember and is still significantly cheaper than the windows. if you dont think it is worth the money, then dont upgrade. most computer users never upgrade (even free upgrades). os10.2 was the first os i actually purchased separate from a computer purchase. i thought it was worth it.
and back to the point of the thread, os features are important, and i am glad so many people have focused on developer tools (although not really part of the os) because what is more important than os feature is applications. offering developers a wealth of developer tools is far more important than imbedding every conceivable fetaure into the os. One of the valuable lessons from the unix/linux community that apple should be following as they join the community is that applications should perform single tasks. do not try to create one application to perform every taska user may require. this is what ms trys to do with windows. they package everything together and sell it as windows. many of the 'features' people have been mentioning here are not what i would consider useful os features, but are instead important tasks that applications should be performing.
try to keep that in mind when making suggestions.
Well, the idea behind this is that if the Finder can do more, then maybe it won't be necessary to open another app to do something that can be done more conveniently with the Finder. Sure there's a limit, a place where the line has to be drawn, but... it would be nice if I could see the dimensions of a photo, or view its EXIF data, without opening a photo viewer. (Which can be a pain when my photo viewer has 3000 pics and takes 30 seconds to load.) Yes it is a photo and therefore yes it should be iPhoto's responsibility, but it's also a file, which makes it the Finder's responsibility as well. So iPhoto should do its job as a photo organizer/viewer, and the Finder should do its job as a file organizer/viewer, which means the two should duplicate some of each other's functionality (not necessarily by creating bloat - I'm sure it would be possible to create an "EXIF viewer object" that could be called by both iPhoto and the Finder). I'm not saying we should turn the Finder into Photoshop. Actually I think the Finder is very close to where it should be at the moment.
With regards to following the Unix example of having many small utilities perform specialized tasks, I think that works well for Unix thanks to Unix's I/O redirection and scripting abilities. I'm not so sure it works well for GUIs.
Is there anything that Windows has that OSX doesn't?
Simple. OSX doesn't have nearly enough software for what I do.
After Janurary, without the ability to boot to OS9, audio production will be impossible on the Mac with lack of support from 3rd party vendors.
I really hope Apple pulls an ace out of their sleeve at MWSF, or else I'm switching....back to PC.
Simple. OSX doesn't have nearly enough software for what I do.
After Janurary, without the ability to boot to OS9, audio production will be impossible on the Mac with lack of support from 3rd party vendors.
I really hope Apple pulls an ace out of their sleeve at MWSF, or else I'm switching....back to PC.
To add to this particular topic...
I really like what the finder does with its preview technology. While I believe the Finder should be kept simple, the preview does add a great and straightforward function to the finder.
The only problem I have with it is that it starts the Apple Finder on the slippery slope towards the Windows Explorer. I especially don't like the fact that the preview technology seems to be closed to Apple products. I think it should be opened up as an API plugin technology to third parties. This way, I can preview not only Quicktime files, but also Windows Media files, html files, etc, etc.
This should definitely be an open technology.
Taft
Hang on, they're coming (fast).
I understand your "pain" -- I've been doing sequencing and audio on the Mac since 1986. PCs have caught up and , in the consumer based apps, passed the Mac platform. But I think Apple will retain the high ground, and the majority of high-end applications are still there for Mac. Consumer based stuff exists and will become more available because of the Unix based OSX.
And unless I'm mistaken, you can still boot into OS9 on any machine that exists today, just not any that come out after the first of the year (although that might be pushed back 'til June, if I remember from another thread, because of Quark).
Switch back if you want to, but I predict that if you do, you'll eventually wish you hadn't.
But that's just my 2 cents...
Let's see,
Windows browses files via *Explorer*
OS X can't put those wonderful ads on your desktop if you want
OS X doesn't have that wild Luna interface
OS X may never reap the benefits of Palladium
I swear if Apple doesn't shape up I'm going to switch to Windows.
Windows browses files via *Explorer*
OS X can't put those wonderful ads on your desktop if you want
OS X doesn't have that wild Luna interface
OS X may never reap the benefits of Palladium
I swear if Apple doesn't shape up I'm going to switch to Windows.
Apple website. Thats what the upgrade coupons are for. Also it was announced the same time the $130 price tag was announced. This is common knowledge.
not extactly. it works the same way mac upgrades always work. if your purchase a mac or the old os 2-3 months before the new s comes out you qualify for the 'free' upgrade (apple claims the $20 is for shipping and handling only so the upgrade is technically free).
Is this a new feature in Windows XP? Because it certainly isn't in Windows 2000. In fact, when you go to log off, the option text says "Close all programs and log on as another user".
Using XP Home as the comparison point against OS X is like pitting your local tee-ball team against the New York Yankees: they both play the same game, but at completely different levels.
For a better "apples to apples" comparison of the feature sets, you need to use XP Pro and it's higher pricing:
OS X v 10.2 - $130
XP Pro upgrade - $200
XP Pro full - $300
Hmmm...
For a better "apples to apples" comparison of the feature sets, you need to use XP Pro and it's higher pricing:
OS X v 10.2 - $130
XP Pro upgrade - $200
XP Pro full - $300
Hmmm...
Not exactly. The upgrade price for Jag only applied to people who bought a Mac after Jag was announced and before 10.2 shipped. It was perfectly possible to buy a Mac after Jag shipped with 10.1x installed on the hard drive and no rights to a $20 upgrade. I should know, I bought one. Bad policy, and a first for Apple, I believe.
Anyway, one thing OSX doesn't offer and Windows does are different "Professional" and "Amateur" editions. That is such a great idea,
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Using XP Home as the comparison point against OS X is like pitting your local tee-ball team against the New York Yankees: they both play the same game, but at completely different levels.
For a better "apples to apples" comparison of the feature sets, you need to use XP Pro and it's higher pricing:
OS X v 10.2 - $130
XP Pro upgrade - $200
XP Pro full - $300
Hmmm...
This is the simplest argument EVER, and yet you guys are completelly blind to the links I posted. I don't care about quality, or home versus pro, or even about whether its 'worth it' or not... that is not the discussion.
Someone said that XP had a hefty price tag, the fact is osX costs more! Stop confusing the issue of 'value' or 'quality' with sheer price. (we all know that osX wins those arguments)
The $20upgrade thing was for a very short time and to a very small audience and quite simply: no longer applies.
It's funny, one of the mod's posts said "If you don't think its worth it, don't upgrade." He labeled me as an anti-jaguar because I stated the simple fact that it costs more to upgrade. I'm using a mac because I love it, I'm an ardent supporter of osX, I've been hounding my campus-tech services director to buy more macs, and yet because I see things the way they ACTUALLY are - I'm shunned....
Originally posted by cr2sh
This is the simplest argument EVER, and yet you guys are completelly blind to the links I posted. I don't care about quality, or home versus pro, or even about whether its 'worth it' or not... that is not the discussion.
Someone said that XP had a hefty price tag, the fact is osX costs more! Stop confusing the issue of 'value' or 'quality' with sheer price. (we all know that osX wins those arguments)
The $20upgrade thing was for a very short time and to a very small audience and quite simply: no longer applies.
It's funny, one of the mod's posts said "If you don't think its worth it, don't upgrade." He labeled me as an anti-jaguar because I stated the simple fact that it costs more to upgrade. I'm using a mac because I love it, I'm an ardent supporter of osX, I've been hounding my campus-tech services director to buy more macs, and yet because I see things the way they ACTUALLY are - I'm shunned....
You're trying to make a concrete, black and white statement as to which is cheaper, which is impssible to do in this situation.
In some cases XP is cheaper, and in some cases it's not. Period.
As for the $20 upgrade thing, it no longer needs to apply, since all Macs now ship with 10.2. I agree that the lack of an upgrade path was a little tough to stomach at first, but if you look back at the fact that 10.1 was a "free" upgrade from 10.0...how much do you want from Apple?
True FULL KEYBOARD ACCESS.
And universal Explorer (what-would-be-Windows'Finder) shortcuts that work from WHATEVER application you are working on. They are unstealable for those apps since Windows use the pretty intuitive way of cataloguing shortcuts: windows+something=OS shortcuts; ctrl+something=common shortcuts; option+something=interface shortcuts, such as accessing to menus, windows controls or buttons which are hinted by an underlined letter.
IMO this is wicked mad in Mac OS as there doesn't seem to be any logic when its is command alone, command+option, command+shift (they in fact swapped command+option+H to command+shift+H for Home in the upgrade from 10.1 to 10.2), and when command+option+D is going to be an OS shortcut (hide/show the Dock, which SHOULD be universal) and when it is going to be an application shortcut.
Windows+E, for example, new Explorer Window & turn it the front-most window WEREVER you are at any moment. Windows+F Find files WEREVER you are. Windows+D hide all and show desktop WEREVER you are...
This is the single most important feature that they should have sit and think about in the first alpha of Mac OS X, rapsody or whatever. This affects your whole workflow and it will affect you for all the years of future existence of Mac OS X, since it is damn difficult now to get back to a universal, intuitive and consensuated way among developers.
Oh, and ALL applications recognize the space the TaskBar is taking and do not try to invade it.
Are this interface thingies that make me wonder why Apple has not just robbed them from Windows yet.
PS: And they have Exact Audio Copy & LAME at decent speeds.
And universal Explorer (what-would-be-Windows'Finder) shortcuts that work from WHATEVER application you are working on. They are unstealable for those apps since Windows use the pretty intuitive way of cataloguing shortcuts: windows+something=OS shortcuts; ctrl+something=common shortcuts; option+something=interface shortcuts, such as accessing to menus, windows controls or buttons which are hinted by an underlined letter.
IMO this is wicked mad in Mac OS as there doesn't seem to be any logic when its is command alone, command+option, command+shift (they in fact swapped command+option+H to command+shift+H for Home in the upgrade from 10.1 to 10.2), and when command+option+D is going to be an OS shortcut (hide/show the Dock, which SHOULD be universal) and when it is going to be an application shortcut.
Windows+E, for example, new Explorer Window & turn it the front-most window WEREVER you are at any moment. Windows+F Find files WEREVER you are. Windows+D hide all and show desktop WEREVER you are...
This is the single most important feature that they should have sit and think about in the first alpha of Mac OS X, rapsody or whatever. This affects your whole workflow and it will affect you for all the years of future existence of Mac OS X, since it is damn difficult now to get back to a universal, intuitive and consensuated way among developers.
Oh, and ALL applications recognize the space the TaskBar is taking and do not try to invade it.
Are this interface thingies that make me wonder why Apple has not just robbed them from Windows yet.
PS: And they have Exact Audio Copy & LAME at decent speeds.
What's missing: A good voice chat program.
cr2sh: the Jaguar update might cost more than the XP Home edition, but remember, the Jaguar update is the FULL version. Not just an update like XP. And plus that's HOME edition, while Jaguar is on the same level as PRO edition, which is $199 for the upgrade, let alone the full version.
See a difference here?
irmongoose
cr2sh: the Jaguar update might cost more than the XP Home edition, but remember, the Jaguar update is the FULL version. Not just an update like XP. And plus that's HOME edition, while Jaguar is on the same level as PRO edition, which is $199 for the upgrade, let alone the full version.
See a difference here?
irmongoose
After using Windows for about 8 years I didn't found that out by myself... so I didn't know about these features.
Which brings me to something missing in OS X: cut/copy/paste in the finder isn't possible as it should be: just working like wherever. At least it works in Windows...
Tell me about it. Windows' way of ddiong this is good. Cut it, it goes 50% transparent. Move around a million directories (in windows dir) and then paste.
I also have to agree with those who spoke of universal shortcuts. We need those.
OR
Standardized ones. Cmd-F = Find (good
) Cmd-D = Send/Bookmark/Delete (bad )oh well cant have it all. rather a mac than a dell.