Might Windows 7 be a threat to MacOS X?

[thunderweb]

I'll tell that to the many servers at work, my old PIII box which runs my server at home, our PC at work that handles the phone system voice mail and the many PCs in the shipping department. I'll remind them they should have been dead years ago.

I'm just saying the 10 PC desktops I've owned have all crapped out within 2 years of purchase. And they all were brand new computers when I purchased them. And no it was not hardware although I've had more than enough issues with that as well.

 

[SkyBell]

I'm just saying the 10 PC desktops I've owned have all crapped out within 2 years of purchase. And they all were brand new computers when I purchased them. And no it was not hardware although I've had more than enough issues with that as well.

I'm pretty sure it is the hardware. I've got PC's from the early 90's that are still cranking along running Windows 3.1/95, with no issues. I've also got a 6 year old Dell running XP flawlessly. Windows is usually not the issue when PC's die, it's the hardware.

 

[acurafan]

I'm just saying the 10 PC desktops I've owned have all crapped out within 2 years of purchase. And they all were brand new computers when I purchased them. And no it was not hardware although I've had more than enough issues with that as well.

PC quality varies from one end of the spectrum to the other b/c you have gazillions of manufacturers producing products for Windows, and M$ needs to make sure their software works for nearly all of them. I have clients still using Windows 2000 problem free!

Of course there are going to be some brands better then many others. On the other hand Apple controls their own small line up of hardware and OS, and even then they still muck up their products.

Apple will NEVER catch M$'s market share b/c it will never enter Fortune 1000 companies (no manager in their right mind would choose Mac over Windows company-wide deployments); and Apple is still trying to convince the world expensive "form-over-function" is best - but the world ain't buying it has it? [as long as Apple isn't willing diversify to go cheap (price-wise) - it's not going anywhere]

 

[GoCubsGo]

Comparing OS X and Windows 7 solely on the basis of handwriting recognition is like saying the United States is a horrible country just because New Jersey is a dump.

Isn't that the case though?

No really, I disagree with the OP, but I can say having seen a bit of Windows 7, it's fairly nice. I'm wondering how well it will run. That may be the OS that makes me try out dual OSs.

 

[MacAndy74]

According to Google the number of searches for Snow Leopard is practically non existent compared to those for windows 7.

http://gizmodo.com/5272999/windows-7-kills-snow-leopard-and-eats-it

Simple. Because most OS X users are already happy with their operating system and don't feel that they have to look to a new version to fix their computer problems and frustrations - unlike Windows.

 

[agl82]

.

 

[HLdan]

Hi,

I've reviewed the new functionalities in Windows 7 and it seemed to me, who am not an OS X developer, that it's far ahead on hand writing and drawing recognition than MacOS. One thing that I enjoyed was the capability to write an equation on a tablet and have it converted to a MS Equation object.

It seems to me that Apple is overdue to introduce a tablet-like product. As MacOS is experiencing a large market share with College students, and as I'm yet to find a good OS X replacement for MS OneNote, I think the appeal of these MS technologies for college students, specially for engineering and sciences, is huge. I think that Apple is about to loose market should MacOS X be unable to offer a similar usability.

I'm a Mac fan, but should I still be in college, I'd rather have an Windows tablet running OneNote than a mac. With the new equation recognition and basic drawing recognition, it would have made my life a lot easier than it was back on those days...

What do you guys think? For the developers in the audience, how far is Apple from Windows 7 on these topics?

Thanks,
Lac.
(PS: Sorry if my english is poor, I'm not a native speaker)

You haven't really been searching that hard, IMO Circus Ponies Notebook (http://www.circusponies.com/store/index.php?main_page=notebook&sub=organize) kicks the crap out of One Note. The only thing One Note has going for it is it is attached to Microsoft Outlook and Outlook is not on Mac anyway. Not accusing you of doing this but most people that say they can't find OS X equivalents of Windows just say stuff like that because they don't find the same brand name software on OS X, I don't think they really look as there is a lot of great Mac OS X software that's better than Windows but PC users have allowed themselves to be sucked into Microsoft software as if it's the end all and it's not.

 

[MikhailT]

You haven't really been searching that hard, IMO Circus Ponies Notebook (http://www.circusponies.com/store/index.php?main_page=notebook&sub=organize) kicks the crap out of One Note. The only thing One Note has going for it is it is attached to Microsoft Outlook and Outlook is not on Mac anyway. Not accusing you of doing this but most people that say they can't find OS X equivalents of Windows just say stuff like that because they don't find the same brand name software on OS X, I don't think they really look as there is a lot of great Mac OS X software that's better than Windows but PC users have allowed themselves to be sucked into Microsoft software as if it's the end all and it's not.

Unfortunately, Notebook is not better than OneNote at all. I have tried it for a couple of days but it felt too restrictive to me, it kept pushing me to keep it organized like a notebook (thus the name). OneNote doesn't restrict me to do anything. OneNote is more of a canvas+whiteboard+notebook+wiki combined.

 

[throttlemeister]

Simple. Because most OS X users are already happy with their operating system and don't feel that they have to look to a new version to fix their computer problems and frustrations - unlike Windows.

Oh, is that why Apple Stores around the world have lines queued up from here to Tokio in the middle of the night when Apple releases a new version of their OS?

 

[TheReef]

If it is a threat then great, more competition is good, generally leading to better products and features for the end user. (And hopefully the price premium gap (quite excessive atm, at least in Aus) will slightly narrow )

 

[ppc750fx]

I think open source software is going to win out in the long run. However, they've got quite a ways to go in matching the user-friendliness of Mac OS X and Windows. I've tried ten different Linux distros, including Ubuntu, OpenSUSE, and Fedora. The two unifying features were that it was a pain in the ass to install software and most of my hardware wasn't supported and required proprietary drivers installed under wrappers (through the terminal). I'll take drag-and-drop or clicking Next a million times, thanks.

Actually, most desktop distros are just as user-friendly as Windows once they're installed.

Installing/configuring any OS on commodity hardware is a painful experience. Mac OS X is easy, but it only targets a handful of specific configurations.

Deploying a new OS to a wide range of hardware is one of those tasks that can't be simplified past a certain point. Linux and Windows have, for the most part, reached that point.

 

[windywoo]

You are of course correct, but MS does not make hardware. They should NOT be allowed to dictate to hardware OEMs what they can and can't install on computers that they otherwise have NO INTEREST IN.

This is what got MS into trouble with Dept. of Justice and the European Union. Requiring OEMs to include IE when it was a piece of junk put Netscape out of business. OEMs were threatened with NOT BEING ABLE to purchase OS software from MS if they did not comply.

By requiring OEMs to install only the latest version, they are forcing its purchase. And then counting those purchases as "sales". They are hardly the same thing as a retail box sale. And, Apple has sold close to 80% of its existing OS 10.4 and earlier users a version of 10.5.X. This is a true sale.

Apple only sells computers with the latest version of OS because it is a HARDWARE vendor. MS is not, but exterts pressures on OEMs as if it were.

Why should Microsoft not be allowed to sell what they want to OEMs? Apple is worse in this regard anyway, whenever someone else tried to sell their OS on different hardware they sued them into bankruptcy.

OEMs weren't required to include IE, IE came with Windows that was what got them in trouble.

Not that I really have any great fondness for Microsoft, just realise that Apple is no better.

 

[kasakka]

Look at windows 2000. Its 9 years old and it still receives some updates and tons of new software still run on it. Look at XP. Its like 7 years old and the same goes.

Now think about a version of OSX thats 7 or 9 years old. Does anything brand new even run on it anymore? I mean think of 10.1 or 10.2. The majority of software want at least 10.4.

IMO forced obsolescence causing people to upgrade happens more with Apple.

IMO that's a good thing. We're still stuck with crap like Internet Explorer 6 etc because people don't update their machines. Likewise most Windows programs look a bit **** because they're made for XP. OSX cleaned the table a fair bit and hopefully that will happen with Windows 8 or whatever the version after 7 will be. Legacy baggage is inconvenient.

When it comes to picking the better OS, at the moment for me it's Win7. It's a bit faster than OSX, handles windows, mouse movement etc better, has a better file browser and dock etc. OSX still has the upper hand in easy program installation (although that's hardly a uniform experience since there are programs that use installers like on Windows) and keyboard shortcuts as well as Quicklook and program uniformity.

 

[contoursvt]

Ya but you have to remember that 90% of people use their computer as a tool. They dont care if one is a little prettier than the other or whatever. As long as it works, gets the job done and doesnt cost them additional money, then its good. I dont go buying a new wrench just because the one I have is ugly and has scuffs on it. I dont go get a new one because a new wrench is a little lighter to hold. As long as my existing one does the job, then its all good.

So while I myself am a computer geek and I love buying new things from time to time, most people I know use the computer just as I use a wrench. Also people can run Safari on Win2k if they dont like 'crap like IE6'...and its free of course

IMO that's a good thing. We're still stuck with crap like Internet Explorer 6 etc because people don't update their machines. Likewise most Windows programs look a bit **** because they're made for XP. OSX cleaned the table a fair bit and hopefully that will happen with Windows 8 or whatever the version after 7 will be. Legacy baggage is inconvenient.

When it comes to picking the better OS, at the moment for me it's Win7. It's a bit faster than OSX, handles windows, mouse movement etc better, has a better file browser and dock etc. OSX still has the upper hand in easy program installation (although that's hardly a uniform experience since there are programs that use installers like on Windows) and keyboard shortcuts as well as Quicklook and program uniformity.

 

[Enigmafan420]

Oh, is that why Apple Stores around the world have lines queued up from here to Tokio in the middle of the night when Apple releases a new version of their OS?

Yeah but thats for another version of an already good OS.

I will buy Snow Leopard principally for the Open CL and its ability to leverage GPU processing power.

Otherwise, I LOVE 10.5.X. I can't think of a single thing that does any more to me than slightly annoy me. And that will be true for all OSes.

 

[Matek]

I will buy Snow Leopard principally for the Open CL and its ability to leverage GPU processing power.

If you have a nVidia card and an updated Leopard installation, you can already leverage GPU processing power through C for Cuda for quite a while.

 

[Macmel]

You are of course correct, but MS does not make hardware. They should NOT be allowed to dictate to hardware OEMs what they can and can't install on computers that they otherwise have NO INTEREST IN.

This is what got MS into trouble with Dept. of Justice and the European Union. Requiring OEMs to include IE when it was a piece of junk put Netscape out of business. OEMs were threatened with NOT BEING ABLE to purchase OS software from MS if they did not comply.

By requiring OEMs to install only the latest version, they are forcing its purchase. And then counting those purchases as "sales". They are hardly the same thing as a retail box sale. And, Apple has sold close to 80% of its existing OS 10.4 and earlier users a version of 10.5.X. This is a true sale.

Apple only sells computers with the latest version of OS because it is a HARDWARE vendor. MS is not, but exterts pressures on OEMs as if it were.

First, when Vista was released, many manufacturers offered Vista as well as XP preinstalled versions of their computers. In the end, Vista was put on every new computer because it was newer and a lot of people wanted the new thing. Not everybody is reading the internet forums all day to know if the new OS is good or not.
Second, MS went to trial for integrating Explorer into the OS, not for forcing OEMs to do it. It was the OS which was installing Explorer in the computer and you could not uninstall it. I bought a computer without an OS preinstalled and after installing XP, you could not unistall Explorer. That was considered monopolistic. In the end, it doesn't matter: people will use explorer even if it's not integrated, just because is the default application. Many people I know don't even bother to download other browsers.
And to be honest, Explorer 8 is quite fast.

 

[Dojan5]

I really didnt like win 7, yes its a little better then vista and with less crashes but it still is not better then os x. not at all.

Spot on. Being a BETA tester of many products Microsoft's released ever since Office 2007 early Alphas, I have to say, no, Windows 7 is not a threat to Mac OS X. Not even to Mac OS X Tiger. I've used Windows 7 on my PC since a very early build, I can't even recall which one, and I've been using the latest version aswell, I have to say that it is still just Windows. It's like Vista, only a bit more stable, and a tad less buggy. I'm sure that most users are better off with Vista SP2 than Windows 7.

 

[bpetruzzo]

I hope it's a threat.

As much as I love Apple, they only became excellent out of competition in the first place. If they have to lose some market share in order to make 10.7 a mind blowing system, then I'm all for it. Part of me even wonders if 10.6 isn't as innovative as previous releases because they've been on easy street for the last couple years.

Competition is good. In fact, in the end if Microsoft really makes an excellent product that puts Macintosh out of business (however unlikely that may be), we can't really fret because it most likely means the competition produced a better product for us.

 

[ppc750fx]

Spot on. Being a BETA tester of many products Microsoft's released ever since Office 2007 early Alphas, I have to say, no, Windows 7 is not a threat to Mac OS X. Not even to Mac OS X Tiger. I've used Windows 7 on my PC since a very early build, I can't even recall which one, and I've been using the latest version aswell, I have to say that it is still just Windows. It's like Vista, only a bit more stable, and a tad less buggy. I'm sure that most users are better off with Vista SP2 than Windows 7.

With a very few minor exceptions, Microsoft doesn't do public testing of alphas.

Windows 7 is a threat to Mac OS X primarily because it (potentially) will stem the flood of bad press surrounding Vista. Mac OS X marketshare has grown in no small part due to Microsoft's horrid handling of the Vista launch -- as soon as people regain their confidence in Windows I suspect that Apple will see a reduction in the number of "switchers."

 

[Infrared]

So is Windows XP, really. It's not that bad, apart from security.

Windows 7 isn't a threat to OS X, it's basically a polished, refined Vista. It might stop some Windows users coming over to OS X, but it won't make Mac users go back to Windows.

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/710356/

 

[plarusa]

Windows 7 a threat to OS-X?

Don't think so, at least not the way I see it. I have been using Windows 7 since the early beta, and here what I think,

- The UI has changed yet again from Vista. Now there is a Mac like toolbar at the bottom of the desktop. MSFT does not seem to know what to do with this UI.
- I find the built-in security features annoying to no end. Got to do this and that to share a file. Got to do this and the other thing for a machine to be pinged. A far cry from the simple to understand but effective Unix implementation.
- Even the Windows 7 RC is buggy compared to OS-X. Just yesterday, I plugged a USB stick, and it would not enumerate until I rebooted.
- Want access to Unix and its utilities? Forget it. Windows 7 come with a Unix like emulation environment which is a joke. And no descent X server either unless you want to shell more money.
- I have 4G of memory, but the OS will only give me access to 3G. To use it all, I have to run Windows 7/64. But I can't run that for long before running into a lack of driver problem. Some apps are not supported and likely never will be. Cisco VPN client is a good example.
- Want to boot from a USB stick, or a 1394 drive so you can play with other configurations? Can't do it, at least not easily.
- Want virtual desktop? It is not there.
- Want to program for the platform? Yesterday it was COM and ActiveX. Now it is bloated .NET. If you don't know bloated, check out the latest runtime size. They say the .NET religion is needed. I ask why can Apple do it better with a programming language designed in the 80s?

And the list goes on. I program Windows for a living cause Windows is what the masses want. Windows is all the masses knows, thanks to the MSFT marketing mill. In that respect, they have no equal.

 

[Quillz]

Will Windows 7 be a threat? No.

Why? Because Apple will always have a small market share compared to Windows. People who prefer Windows will migrate to 7 and people who prefer Apple will migrate to Snow Leopard.

Some will switch from Mac to PC, others will switch from PC to Mac.

This is how it's always been, and how it will likely always be.

Windows 7 won't affect Snow Leopard, and vice versa.

 

[Quillz]

It's like Vista, only a bit more stable, and a tad less buggy.

Snow Leopard is just like Leopard, only a bit more stable, and a tad less buggy.

 

[throttlemeister]

- I find the built-in security features annoying to no end. Got to do this and that to share a file. Got to do this and the other thing for a machine to be pinged. A far cry from the simple to understand but effective Unix implementation.
- Even the Windows 7 RC is buggy compared to OS-X. Just yesterday, I plugged a USB stick, and it would not enumerate until I rebooted.
- I have 4G of memory, but the OS will only give me access to 3G. To use it all, I have to run Windows 7/64. But I can't run that for long before running into a lack of driver problem. Some apps are not supported and likely never will be. Cisco VPN client is a good example.

- ICMP should be disabled by default. That means no ping. It is called security.
- Buggy? It is BETA, if you are a software developer, you know what that means.
- If you are a software developer, you know about address space. If you know about address space, you know that in a 32b system you CANNOT address more than 4GB physical memory. Period. You would also know that this means things like graphics memory and PCI address space is included in that maximum of 4GB. In other words, no 32b system will allow you to use full 4GB of memory if you put it in, because 4GB ram would take it over the 4GB limit of a 32b system.

You're not a developer, you're a fanboy without a clue.