Lion vs Windows 8

[blackburn]

Windows 8 makes me touch the lcd in hopes of working with it. So it looks that it will be good for tablets or touch computers. But for regular desktop usage the metro ui is just a fancy wallpaper.

The new explorer also is confusing but manageable to use. I still haven't messed up much with it since windows update is already giving me trouble. Another thing that I noticed is that the windows folder is still a mess.

Windows is still on development so they can change things, lion well I don't even want to talk about it all the troubles plus versions and auto save made me give up on it.

 

[maflynn]

I disabled the Metro UI. While it may be ok for a tablet or phone, its absolutely horrendous on a desktop. I can't believe the folks over at redmond actually believe Metro on the PC is a good thing

 

[Hyper-X]

I'm curious why you feel this way?

The most dominant company right now for cloud services is Google's cloud. In Google's mind their vision is to move the traditional desktop experience to the cloud, where all of your needs are done pretty much in a browser. That includes stuff like email, apps like spreadsheets and such.

Apple and believe it or not Microsoft share the same idea that the best use for cloud computing isn't to move the experience to the web, rather use it to augment and enhance the current desktop experience. In other words the web augments the software (service).

I believe in the latter concept, iCloud appears at least on the surface as the way to go about things. Issues like how Google's vision requires you to be actively online to do anything bothers me as I do a lot of offline computing. The web's advantage is that I can have access to a lot of traditional data which normally resides on my computer in the cloud so I can access it without having to lug an external hard drive all the time for example.

If you looked at a Chromebook and fired up their spreadsheet app, you'll clearly see that it's not even a match for Microsoft's Excel... I'm not really an Excel power-user and even I found the web-spreadsheet app very lacking.

I haven't had any chance to try iCloud but at least the concept seems to be a lot better than Google's current implementation.

 

[BaldiMac]

Apple has never been in any position to challenge MS's dominance in the OS product race. If you use current sales figures of today which clearly shows OS X (and thus Mac sales) are at the highest in history, it's still unable to compete with MS's weakest product, Windows Vista. In other words it makes no sense for MS to deviate from their success with their OS products. Apple on the other hand has never experienced anywhere near that level of success despite breaking all Apple sales figures so it made more sense for them to diversify their attention into other areas.

Of course it makes sense for Microsoft to diversify. That's why they've been trying to diversify for more than a decade. They just haven't had much success.

So you're saying comparing a Toyota Corolla to a BMW 5 series makes for an interesting comparison? The direction and intended purpose for each product is different, what's similar is that they're both automobiles but that's pretty much where those similarities end. Both cars are very good for their respective target markets. Your viewpoint appears to value how one superior product, regardless of the circumstances is clearly the better overall product, as to pad your ego into justifying your support for the better overall car.

It all depends on what you are trying to accomplish in making the comparison.

My argument is that what makes for a better comparison is when you compare apples to apples, products that are intended to compete in the same market with the intent of competing with each other.

And we are back to the fact that Microsoft and Apple do compete in the same markets with the intent of competing with each other.

PC Market
Digital Music Market
Digital Music Player Market
Tablet Market
Smartphone Market

 

[Hyper-X]

Of course it makes sense for Microsoft to diversify. That's why they've been trying to diversify for more than a decade. They just haven't had much success.

It doesn't make sense for MS to diversify away from their OS, they need to sustain that product as it's their strong point. Apple has never had an OS in their entire history, therefore it made more sense for them to look for success elsewhere.

Like I said Apple has not had much success with networking products, MobileMe, OS X Lion (or Snow Leopard), even at Apple's current peak with Mac sales it's still no better than 10~11% overall marketshare. Their OS use accounts for less than 5% total (combined Lion + Snow Leopard). Does this mean Apple should opt out of the race for these products? No.

Apple's track record hasn't been 100% either, so again what's your point?

It all depends on what you are trying to accomplish in making the comparison.

As I stated before, anyone can make a comparison with anything, it just doesn't mean it'll be a good comparison. It seems you're the type that has no problem comparing a BMW 5-series to a Corolla and consider that "interesting". Comparing Apples to Oranges doesn't make for any worthwhile comparison just because they're both fruits.

And we are back to the fact that Microsoft and Apple do compete in the same markets with the intent of competing with each other.

PC Market - Apple is only in the consumer market and they hardly have anything worthwhile to offer medium-large-enterprise-datacenter markets. MS is almost entirely in the software development area, Apple offers complete machines to include OS X. MS doesn't offer MS-branded computers so to compare Apples to Apples, Windows vs OS X, the marketshare statistics, despite Apple's highest numbers of operating system sales, still fails to add up to more than 5% of the OS's being used via marketshare. Again if you think about a Ferrari and a Kia, there's an overlap where they're both cars, operated on the roads but it doesn't change the fact that both products are not in competing markets. Win Microsoft.

Digital Music Market - See below
Digital Music Player Market - These 2 go hand in hand, you simply separated them to make it seem like there's more to your list. You can't use an iPod without iTunes so both the player and its software application (as you call the DMPM) go hand in hand. The Zune is surprisingly more successful than Sony's MiniDisc which existed much earlier but Apple has already convinced the world that the iPod offers the product to which all else are compared. This area is by far the only area where MS and Apple do directly compete as both offer products with similar features with nearly identical price ranges targeting the same audiences. Win for Apple by a large margin.

Tablet Market - MS has never put forth much effort into putting out tablets, rather they demo'd how tablets could offer a glimpse into what computing could offer today, over 10 years ago with Windows XP. Not sure why you put them down as a competitor as the chief competitor is...

Google with Android. First with Froyo (2.2.x) on the Galaxy Tab then a huge leap into Honeycomb (3.x.x), this is by far the most serious push into the tablet market than anything Microsoft has ever been involved with. Google is the primary competitor in the tablet market.

Apple struck it big with the iPad, working off the success of the iPhone and iPod Touch, Apple took great measures into changing some people's opinion of how it's merely a "big iPod Touch" by showcasing the advantages of using a larger unit. It took iOS which worked really well for the iPhone/iPod Touch and applied it to their tablet, good move on their part. Win Apple.

Smartphone Market - The iPhone was intended to be a full-feature smartphone which combined the best parts of a mobile player to support a variety of apps, through a well-supported development model with a phone. The price point of an iPhone is a premium, I don't believe any current/new model of iPhone is ever considered "cheap". Apple has about half of the lead at the moment shared with...

Google, how surprising. Android is currently the king of smartphones with enough variety to make anyone confused. The lead isn't a large one but Android currently leads Apple's iPhone. Google wins by a small margin.

Microsoft offers Windows Phone 7, it offered a completely different look from any touch-based phone. Like Windows 8 it uses a very unique tile-UI which many people who've reviewed them found using it a very good experience. The problem MS didn't anticipate was that there's not much of a market in the mid-tier. When people shop for a new phone, the attention is mostly at the ends of the price ranges. Either they want a super-phone with everything plus more, or they want something simple and cheap.

If you ask me, Apple isn't a good comparison to do with Microsoft, it did in the past but times have changed. A good comparison would be Google vs Microsoft as both are primarily software companies. Google, like Microsoft, provides mostly the operating systems for devices other manufacturers provide. When you compare professional business-level support, Apple's not even in the game, rather Microsoft would still be better compared to Novell who's pretty much synonymous with business computing for as long as I can remember.

 

[BaldiMac]

It doesn't make sense for MS to diversify away from their OS, they need to sustain that product as it's their strong point. Apple has never had an OS in their entire history, therefore it made more sense for them to look for success elsewhere.

Diversifying wouldn't necessarily involve moving away from current products, so I have no idea what point you are making here. It's clear as a bell that Microsoft has been attempting to diversify for over a decade. I'm not sure why you are arguing otherwise.

Like I said Apple has not had much success with networking products, MobileMe, OS X Lion (or Snow Leopard), even at Apple's current peak with Mac sales it's still no better than 10~11% overall marketshare. Their OS use accounts for less than 5% total (combined Lion + Snow Leopard). Does this mean Apple should opt out of the race for these products? No.

I agree. What does that have to do with anything we are discussing?

Apple's track record hasn't been 100% either, so again what's your point?

I'll repeat my point again. "My point is that it's perfectly reasonable to compare the two companies. They compete in many of the same markets."

As I stated before, anyone can make a comparison with anything, it just doesn't mean it'll be a good comparison. It seems you're the type that has no problem comparing a BMW 5-series to a Corolla and consider that "interesting". Comparing Apples to Oranges doesn't make for any worthwhile comparison just because they're both fruits.

There are many reasons to compare a BMW and to a Corolla. The obvious reason to compare them would be to illustrate why the BMW is a better car. Are you trying to use the word "compare" to mean something different? Are you talking about a specific kind of comparison?

(And, despite the idiom, apples and oranges are compared all the time. The idiom is meant to refer to specific types of illogical comparisons.)

PC Market - Apple is only in the consumer market and they hardly have anything worthwhile to offer medium-large-enterprise-datacenter markets. MS is almost entirely in the software development area, Apple offers complete machines to include OS X. MS doesn't offer MS-branded computers so to compare Apples to Apples, Windows vs OS X, the marketshare statistics, despite Apple's highest numbers of operating system sales, still fails to add up to more than 5% of the OS's being used via marketshare. Again if you think about a Ferrari and a Kia, there's an overlap where they're both cars, operated on the roads but it doesn't change the fact that both products are not in competing markets. Win Microsoft.

Digital Music Market - See below
Digital Music Player Market - These 2 go hand in hand, you simply separated them to make it seem like there's more to your list. You can't use an iPod without iTunes so both the player and its software application (as you call the DMPM) go hand in hand. The Zune is surprisingly more successful than Sony's MiniDisc which existed much earlier but Apple has already convinced the world that the iPod offers the product to which all else are compared. Win for Apple by a large margin.

Tablet Market - MS has never put forth much effort to putting out tablets, rather they demo'd how tablets could offer a glimpse into what computing could offer today, over 10 years ago with Windows XP. Not sure why you put them down as a competitor as the chief competitor is...

Google with Android. First with Froyo (2.2.x) on the Galaxy Tab then a huge leap into Honeycomb (3.x.x), this is by far the most serious push into the tablet market than anything Microsoft has ever been involved with. Google is the primary competitor in the tablet market.

Apple struck it big with the iPad, working off the success of the iPhone and iPod Touch, Apple took great measures into changing some people's opinion of how it's merely a "big iPod Touch" by showcasing the advantages of using a larger unit. It took iOS which worked really well for the iPhone/iPod Touch and applied it to their tablet, good move on their part. Win Apple.

Smartphone Market - The iPhone was intended to be a full-feature smartphone which combined the best parts of a mobile player to support a variety of apps, through a well-supported development model with a phone. The price point of an iPhone is a premium, I don't believe any current/new model of iPhone is ever considered "cheap". Apple has about half of the lead at the moment shared with...

Google, how surprising. Android is currently the king of smartphones with enough variety to make anyone confused. The lead isn't a large one but Android currently leads Apple's iPhone. Google wins by a small margin.

Microsoft offers Windows Phone 7, it offered a completely different look from any touch-based phone. Like Windows 8 it uses a very unique tile-UI which many people who've reviewed them found using it a very good experience. The problem MS didn't anticipate was that there's not much of a market in the mid-tier. When people shop for a new phone, the attention as mostly at the ends of the price ranges. Either they want a super-phone with everything plus more, or they want something simple and cheap.

Are you just trying to throw out as many words as possible to confuse the point that we are discussing? Apple and Microsoft have both competed in the markets I listed. I'm not sure why you find that controversial.

As far as digital music (iTunes Store) vs digital music players (iPods), these are obviously different markets. You don't need to purchase music from the iTunes Store to use an iPod, and you don't need an iPod to play music from the iTunes Store.

With tablets, Microsoft has been trying for over a decade. In 2001, Bill Gates predicted it would be the most popular form of computing by 2006.

 

[The Phazer]

I doubt Microsoft will impose as many controversial and unnecessary rules as Apple has done on their App Store.

I can't see the rules being any different to the Windows Phone 7 store, which imposes mandatory content censorship in much the same was as Apple.

Phazer

 

[Hyper-X]

Diversifying wouldn't necessarily involve moving away from current products, so I have no idea what point you are making here. It's clear as a bell that Microsoft has been attempting to diversify for over a decade. I'm not sure why you are arguing otherwise.

Other than with the Zune and Windows Phone 7, show me other examples that they've been doing so.

I agree. What does that have to do with anything we are discussing?

This is really a continuation of the above comment, both companies have had their share of really big successes and not, it's just that you're taking a clear bias towards Apple and that's where I'm challenging your claims.

I'll repeat my point again. "My point is that it's perfectly reasonable to compare the two companies. They compete in many of the same markets."

There are many reasons to compare a BMW and to a Corolla. The obvious reason to compare them would be to illustrate why the BMW is a better car. Are you trying to use the word "compare" to mean something different? Are you talking about a specific kind of comparison?

The term "better" is subjective. You don't see any magazine, tv show or online e-article pitting a Kia Sedona, Toyota Corolla, to a BMW 5-series because it makes no sense to do so. There's absolutely no reason for anyone to do such a comparison, a driver only needs to sit in a BMW 5 series to really know what's different. Each person's unique needs and wants in combination of their budget determines what is better.

And, despite the idiom, apples and oranges are compared all the time. The idiom is meant to refer to specific types of illogical comparisons.)

Just because it happens, it doesn't make the comparisons meaningful.

Are you just trying to throw out as many words as possible to confuse the point that we are discussing? Apple and Microsoft have both competed in the markets I listed. I'm not sure why you find that controversial.

Nope, being very specific with regards to the invalidity of your comments on how each on that list has to do with how MS and Apple directly compete with each other.

As far as digital music (iTunes Store) vs digital music players (iPods), these are obviously different markets. You don't need to purchase music from the iTunes Store to use an iPod, and you don't need an iPod to play music from the iTunes Store.

I fail to see your point. It's not like you have to acquire iTunes separately from any iPod product. I've already stated that this is by far the best example of how MS and Apple does compete directly.

With tablets, Microsoft has been trying for over a decade. In 2001, Bill Gates predicted it would be the most popular form of computing by 2006.

What do you mean trying for over a decade? I saw no news that they were actively involved with tablet development past the period when Microsoft offered the public the notion that tablets are very much in the future of computing, thus it was a "tablet concept". MS's first real push into the tablet scene is with Windows 8 which isn't out yet. I think you're confusing Microsoft with HP which did come up with a very early tablet device with rich features that didn't sell.

 

[BaldiMac]

Other than with the Zune and Windows Phone 7, show me other examples that they've been doing so.

Not sure why those don't count, but okay.

Windows media
Plays for Sure
Surface
Xbox
Web services
MSNBC
Ford Sync

That's off the top of my head.

This is really a continuation of the above comment, both companies have had their share of really big successes and not, it's just that you're taking a clear bias towards Apple and that's where I'm challenging your claims.

I haven't said anything biased towards Apple. I simply said that it is perfectly reasonable to compare Microsoft and Apple.

The term "better" is subjective. You don't see any magazine, tv show or online e-article pitting a Kia Sedona, Toyota Corolla, to a BMW 5-series because it makes no sense to do so. There's absolutely no reason for anyone to do such a comparison, a driver only needs to sit in a BMW 5 series to really know what's different. Each person's unique needs and wants in combination of their budget determines what is better.

And here he get to the root of the problem. You don't seem to have an understanding of what it means to compare two things. To "really know what's different" is a comparison.

Just because it happens, it doesn't make the comparisons meaningful.

It's not meaningful to compare the price of an Apple and an Orange? It's not meaningful to compare their flavors? Are you willfully ignoring these things?

Nope, being very specific with regards to the invalidity of your comments on how each on that list has to do with how MS and Apple directly compete with each other.

I said they "compete in many of the same markets." How does anything you said contradict that?

I fail to see your point. It's not like you have to acquire iTunes separately from any iPod product. I've already stated that this is by far the best example of how MS and Apple does compete directly.

You misunderstood the two separate markets that I referenced. Digital music (selling songs in digital formats) and digital music players (iPods and Zunes). I tried to clarify. You still don't understand.

What do you mean trying for over a decade? I saw no news that they were actively involved with tablet development past the period when Microsoft offered the public the notion that tablets are very much in the future of computing, thus it was a "tablet concept". MS's first real push into the tablet scene is with Windows 8 which isn't out yet. I think you're confusing Microsoft with HP which did come up with a very early tablet device with rich features that didn't sell.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Tablet_PC

 

[LIVEFRMNYC]

Wonder how this is going to turn out?

Metro-style Internet Explorer 10 ditches Flash, plugins

 

[applefan289]

From the previews, Windows 8 is looking very promising.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4771/microsoft-build-windows-8-pre-beta-preview

http://www.engadget.com/2011/09/13/windows-8-for-tablets-hands-on-preview/

Given how much of a radical departure Windows 8 appears to be from Windows 7, does anyone here wish Apple was more aggressive with Lion? I was skeptical of the single OS for both tablets and PCs, but the early previews seem to indicate that Microsoft could pull it off. We'll see when the betas come out, but it looks promising for now.

(Mods: I wasn't sure if this was more appropriate here, in Windows on Mac, or elsewhere).

I think Lion is a nice update from Snow Leopard. I would rather be stuck on Snow Leopard than Windows 8.

I do like the idea though of a single OS for both devices. I can see Apple going in this direction pretty soon.

 

[Hyper-X]

Not sure why those don't count, but okay.

Windows media - vs what, Quicktime? Both support mostly proprietary formats (.AVI, .MOV, WMV, etc.)
Plays for Sure - not a competing product rather a certification
Surface - Fair enough
Xbox - Apple has no current gaming console product as it flopped badly back in the 90's.
Web services - This comment is very broad, MS offers way more products and services in relation to this area. For example Apple has no knowledge base that compares to Microsoft's, Apple does not have anything along the lines of Intune, no direct channel with other developers and live engineers (like Technet) exist for Apple. If you're hinting that both have web pages...
MSNBC - Is a broadcast network. Apple's is...
Ford Sync - Open to support non-MS products to include Android. Apple's venture into this area is still completely proprietary to its iPod/dock interface. Support for non-Apple devices have not been developed to compete directly with SYNC. A better comparison would be to compare Bose to SYNC.

I haven't said anything biased towards Apple. I simply said that it is perfectly reasonable to compare Microsoft and Apple.

So, basically, you don't want to compare them in markets where Apple is ahead.

And here he get to the root of the problem. You don't seem to have an understanding of what it means to compare two things. To "really know what's different" is a comparison.

I could say the same thing about your thinking. You could compare anything, like I said many times, it doesn't mean it'll make for a good comparison. How many times do I need to say this?

It's not meaningful to compare the price of an Apple and an Orange? It's not meaningful to compare their flavors? Are you willfully ignoring these things?

Ignoring what? Are you saying that I should look for meaningful information by reading about a Veyron in a mini-truck magazine? Again you seem to pick and choose what you want to read instead of reading everything I posted. I said earlier...

Again if you think about a Ferrari and a Kia, there's an overlap where they're both cars, operated on the roads but it doesn't change the fact that both products are not in competing markets.

What this means is there's nothing wrong with looking and comparing flavors but that doesn't mean they're in competing markets. Fuji Apples are not competing against Florida oranges for their share in the apple market. Dole pineapple isn't competing against Sunkist oranges over pineapple dominance. Fuji Apples would be much better compared against Gala Apples, Dole pineapples against Del Monte and Minute Maid orange juice with Tropicana juice, etc. I don't need to know how a Fuji Apple tastes to know how good a Flordia orange is. It makes better sense for me to try another orange from a different vendor to see what makes the Florida orange different.

I said they "compete in many of the same markets." How does anything you said contradict that?

Oh brother, have you been reading anything? I've conceded that there are only a few, but most of the major topics (in this thread specifically to Windows 8 and Lion), I've proven you wrong. The comment you had an issue with was my response to maflynn where I was responding to how MS and Apple differ in their directions for their OS products.

You misunderstood the two separate markets that I referenced. Digital music (selling songs in digital formats) and digital music players (iPods and Zunes). I tried to clarify. You still don't understand.

Read up, I already gave you the portable music player area which includes all associate software that comes with it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Tablet_PC

I knew you were going to use this, read that page carefully and you'll see that you're mistaken. Microsoft has not released any tablet device on their own. The tablet PC was the natural progression to the Palm PDAs and a necessary step towards the tablets we see today.

However if you insist that the Microsoft Tablet PC specification is a valid example to support your claim, then you can't deny it when I mention the Newton. If you can't see by now how stupid you're making things, I don't know what else I can say because obviously you don't understand.

 

[mountains]

I disabled the Metro UI. While it may be ok for a tablet or phone, its absolutely horrendous on a desktop. I can't believe the folks over at redmond actually believe Metro on the PC is a good thing

Consider it another option. One that could potentially redefine the tablet/mobile computing market if tech catches up with Microsoft's ambitions.

Anyhow, it's not a big issue as you can use the legacy desktop for everything. The legacy desktop is actually considerably improved, in my opinion; support for virtual desktops, virtual machines, and the like is long overdue. And it's nice to see a shift away from the old Start menu.

 

[BaldiMac]

Windows media - vs what, Quicktime? Both support mostly proprietary formats (.AVI, .MOV, WMV, etc.)
Plays for Sure - not a competing product rather a certification
Surface - Fair enough
Xbox - Apple has no current gaming console product as it flopped badly back in the 90's.
Web services - This comment is very broad, MS offers way more products and services in relation to this area. For example Apple has no knowledge base that compares to Microsoft's, Apple does not have anything along the lines of Intune, no direct channel with other developers and live engineers (like Technet) exist for Apple. If you're hinting that both have web pages...
MSNBC - Is a broadcast network. Apple's is...
Ford Sync - Open to support non-MS products to include Android. Apple's venture into this area is still completely proprietary to its iPod/dock interface. Support for non-Apple devices have not been developed to compete directly with SYNC. A better comparison would be to compare Bose to SYNC..

You have no idea what we are discussing. You asked for examples of Microsoft attempting to diversify. I gave you examples. This had nothing to do with Apple.

Oh brother, have you been reading anything? I've conceded that there are only a few, but most of the major topics (in this thread specifically to Windows 8 and Lion), I've proven you wrong. The comment you had an issue with was my response to maflynn where I was responding to how MS and Apple differ in their directions for their OS products.

No, that was not the comment that I had an issue with. You are just making stuff up.

Read up, I already gave you the portable music player area which includes all associate software that comes with it.

Seriously? Music is not "associate software". It is a completely different market than iPods and other media players.

I knew you were going to use this, read that page carefully and you'll see that you're mistaken. Microsoft has not released any tablet device on their own. The tablet PC was the natural progression to the Palm PDAs and a necessary step towards the tablets we see today.

However if you insist that the Microsoft Tablet PC specification is a valid example to support your claim, then you can't deny it when I mention the Newton. If you can't see by now how stupid you're making things, I don't know what else I can say because obviously you don't understand

You are just making up my argument on your own. What do you think I am trying to show?

 

[scottsjack]

I have one Mac set aside for self torture and frustration. My mini is dual booting Lion and Windows 8. It will be interesting to see if Apple (or developers) can restore some of SL's missed smooth desktop experience.

Equally interesting will be to see how Windows 8 develops. So far it's messy but promising. It's a developers preview and acts like one. Unfortunately Lion has shipped when it should be going though beta tests, not that Apple really cares if others don't share their vision of the future.

 

[regwiztr]

Enlightenment of a Pc Slave

Hi,

As a "Microsoft Office beta tester", "Power User" and newbie to Mac Os X, I wish to tell my opinion about Microsoft and its major products despite my poorest English. Windows 8 media previews encouraged me to write this post.

So, I have spent more than a decade while playing with Windows, Microsoft Office plus tons of software and hardware tools. By the way, I am not in IT business. Just I am using the computer to do more in less time for my job. My occupation is about keeping business records, reporting, communication, productivity and data re-use with pc in our small office.

Here goes;

1-) Microsoft doesn't give enough:

I remember that earliest "Multitouch Device" prototype was a microsoft one. Surface, right? But they didn't implement that multitouch tech to their mobile os earlier (Windows Phone). Because they thought that multitouch was a "sooo big feature" to give easily to customers. Customers could wait for a while and beg for new minor updates from Gods of Redmond.

Microsoft was always eager to follow that "give it less and slow" way. But something happened. Iphone is released and been sold nearly half billion pieces worldwide. Probably Iphone 5 will be sold more than 200 million pieces. I think Iphone was a big revolution and the best answer to Microsoft's business mentality. However Microsoft have learnt great lessons from Iphone.

Another example: Did you ever use "Windows Live Mail 2011" as supplied in "Live Essentials" package?
It is a cute organizer software nearly keeping all basic daily communications data. Mail, Contacts, Calendar, Rss and News Groups. An Outlook competitor? No sir, it's like a bird without wings. You cannot follow your daily tasks in this organizer software. Events and appointments are ok but no tasks. Otherwise you might not purchase big Brother Outlook. If there is no tasks, there is no any reason include a calendar feature in such software. Total confusion.

2-) Microsoft is not good even on basics:

Everbody is social today. Individuals, small businesses even enterprises effort to be social more. Facebook, Google+, Twitter and others battle to have some big share from market.

So, what is the center of Social Live? My answer is the "Address Book". Yes, your computer, your mobile phone, your web mail system, facebook, skype, messenger have Address Books.

Wait, Microsoft offers you some crappy Address Books. I assume you have Win 7.

a-) Windows Contacts: Comes from ages without any evolution. Totally scrap. Pardon me, contact portraits added yet.
- No categories.
- Just one mobile number.
- Only two postal adresses.
- No fields for social communication tools and profile pages.
- No usable for businesses and inviduals. Only basic demands.

?! Interestingly Mozilla Thunderbird Team originated this "Windows Address Book" probably to be compatible, but felt in to same gap. Huh!

b-) Windows Live Mail Contacts:
- No categories.
- Limited phone number fields
- Two messenger fields.
- Two emails.
- There are no any fields for Skype, FB, twitter or so on.
- Not sufficient for personal or business use.

c-) Hotmail Contacts:
- Very similar to above.
- Not efficient for people or businesses.

d-) Microsoft Outlook Contacts: Most closer to business use. But it has unacceptable major lacks for a paid software in my opinion.
- Just one IM field.
- Only three email fields.(This can be enough for someone)
- One mobile phone number doesn't fit me. Here in my country most people has two mobile phones. One for business, second for personal use.
- No fields for skype, aol, yahoo, facebook, twitter etc. messenger and social services.
- Thus no sync those social information with other devices.
+ Outlook Social Connector Add-on shows status messages from subscribtions. It is just ok for viewing or writing status updates.
? There are some add-ons like Xobni but no one can repair Outlook. Add-ons have their limitations too.

All sofware listed above don't do any decent job for me. How can I call Microsoft as innovative company from this view?

3-) Why Windows is not a productive Platform for (smart) business use?

When you compare with Mac Os X, Windows doesn't offer any sytem-wide scripting for "programs" to interact each others like AppleScript does. Windows PowerShell has some limited application and system command support.
Also you can nearly automate everthing in Mac Os even with Automator GUI. It offers easy automation without any line of script. Mac Os' unix kernel makes it unbeatable in all the way.

Still there is no any Windows equivalent available Blacktree's Quicksilver for Mac Os X. Quicksilver is a great tool allows users to do more in very less time with a few keystrokes. There are something for Windows, mimic like Quicksilver but none of them capable like Quicksilver because of Unix architecture.

Windows Search is far behind of Mac Os' Spotligt too. Spotlight indexes and searches everyhing within system. Windows Search needs you to buy some Ifilters to search some specific file types.


4-) Some Microsoft Apps are Really Dull:

Have you ever used that One Note? You can save Web Page contents, excel tables, Pictures, Videos etc. into One Note. I don't like save web bookmarks (or whole messy html pages) then visit again to read the webpage. Just you select web page part and click to send to One Note. This also makes "clipped" web content available for offline reading. Imagine, the website may be down when you visit again. So One Note helps.

But, One Note GUI is worst in the universe. Dullest GUI I have ever seen. Multiple database files, obscure file sections make it unuseful. What a loss? Someone may say how great is but it isn't. Some product managers and lead developers in Redmond, may live in their own box. But they cannot pack all of us in the same box.

Have you ever heard Evernote? A OneNote equivalent. But with very sleek and tidy interface, simply database, continual development. They say, they have built very big market share, happy customers and strategic partnerships in a short time. Evernote shines like a success story of little smart team gained against some software giants. www.evernote.com


5-) If Apple opens Mac Os to Oem Partners?:

Yes, if Apple opens Mac Os to system developers no one goes to Windows. Mac-borns may not understand what I am saying. Even they don't know what the hell we are dealing with.

So, I can tell a lot about Microsoft and its approach. Just here I summarized my opinions with some example cases. Finally I don't believe that Windows 8 will bring some solutions to users because of it's defective legacy kernel.

Thank you for reading,
RegWizTr