Yep as a mac lover for 20 years and 4 bad Apples in the last 6 months....Vista rocks.....sorry boys......and this from a fanboy
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.
New Mac User 1st Impressions of OS X
- Thread starter Skrilla
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yep as a mac lover for 20 years and 4 bad Apples in the last 6 months....Vista rocks.....sorry boys......and this from a fanboy
I am glad there are at least 2 of us on this board with some common sense!
i suppose it is probably a little crazy for us to expect people to even fathom that both OS's are just as useful on a forum like this. without their perceived superiority alot of the users would proably have reality set in and they would realize that being a mac user doesn't make you special.
not to say that i think windows is perfect either. far from it. windows is built on a foundation of workarounds and they keep piling more ontop, doesnt make for a very solid one at all. that said it is still very functional, fast, and user friendly, not to mention having the best library of software in computing bar none.
For the record, I've never said that OS X was more efficient. I've always maintained, and still do, that someone's perception of an OS is always colored from your past experience. Windows users coming to OS X will be a little taken aback on the way OS X does things and vice versa. Sit someone that's used to OS X in front of XP or Vista and they'll have quibbles here and there too.
I've always hated the attitude of superiority some lover of an OS has. I mean, come on, it's a fricken OS. Get a grip. The only problems I have are people spouting off about things that are complete false-hoods...regardless of what OS you're talking about. And those that spit in your face as you're trying to help also grate on my nerves too. Meh, no good deed goes unpunished.
I DID try to reign it in with a post I did yesterday to this thread:
The only thing is, I didn't follow my own advice when I attacked Skrilla outright. For that, I apologize.
Ok, now you just invalidated any half valid arguments you may have had. Thanks for giving me the good feeling to ignore this thread from now on.
Let me introduce you to a good feature called "repairing permissions" using the disk utility. You can also use a script cleaning tool like MacJanitor, search for something like that on www.versiontracker.com
There honestly is no need to reinstall the system twice on a mac. I did one clean install when I got my powerbook 2 years ago. I repair permissions and run Macjanitor once every 2 months approximately. I have never had any problems with the OS and haven't experienced your slow down. And my computer is running 10+ hours a day, running Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign and Cinema 4D.
What do you do with your system that requires so much power?
I have been a Windows user for the longest time. Last year my boss wanted me to get to know OS X and I got a MBP. So now I have been a Mac user for a couple of month. And for me, too, there are things that I like and I disklike
I really hate this rounded corners from the windows and the menu bar. I bought ShapeShifter before I even got the machine. In Windows I at least have the option to go to Classic. I even do this with Vista set as Group Policy.
I don't see any advantage of having the application menu in the menu bar. What if you have multiple displays? I recently purchased for the lab a MacPro with the four 7300GT. So now I have 7 screens. I can only maximize/zoom an application (I tried Maya) to one screen. It can be a long way to the menu bar. I'm hoping that with multiple displays becoming more common that there will be a solution.
I would like to hide the dock till I press a key. If there is an input from an application at the bottom of the screen the dock often comes up because I get too low with the mouse.
Expose does not seem to work well with multiple screens, too. Right now I'm working on the MBP with a Cinema display attached as primary screen. Expose shows just the windows of the primary screen and hides the applications on the secondary screen.
In the Finder I would like to organize the files/folders according to the type instead of the name. There is an "Arrange by" under the view menu, but it always seems to be grayed out.
Why can I only an application (like Maya, RDC) once?
What I love with this Mac is the way the displays are handled. If I plug in my Cinema Display it becomes automatically the primary screen, unplug it and the notebook screen is the primary again. Try this in Windows - even Vista - and it fails miserably. I guess this is what is meant by Plug-And-Play.
If you have any solutions to my complaints, please let me know.
Steffen
I really hate this rounded corners from the windows and the menu bar. I bought ShapeShifter before I even got the machine. In Windows I at least have the option to go to Classic. I even do this with Vista set as Group Policy.
I don't see any advantage of having the application menu in the menu bar. What if you have multiple displays? I recently purchased for the lab a MacPro with the four 7300GT. So now I have 7 screens. I can only maximize/zoom an application (I tried Maya) to one screen. It can be a long way to the menu bar. I'm hoping that with multiple displays becoming more common that there will be a solution.
I would like to hide the dock till I press a key. If there is an input from an application at the bottom of the screen the dock often comes up because I get too low with the mouse.
Expose does not seem to work well with multiple screens, too. Right now I'm working on the MBP with a Cinema display attached as primary screen. Expose shows just the windows of the primary screen and hides the applications on the secondary screen.
In the Finder I would like to organize the files/folders according to the type instead of the name. There is an "Arrange by" under the view menu, but it always seems to be grayed out.
Why can I only an application (like Maya, RDC) once?
What I love with this Mac is the way the displays are handled. If I plug in my Cinema Display it becomes automatically the primary screen, unplug it and the notebook screen is the primary again. Try this in Windows - even Vista - and it fails miserably. I guess this is what is meant by Plug-And-Play.
If you have any solutions to my complaints, please let me know.
Steffen
Ok, now you just invalidated any half valid arguments you may have had. Thanks for giving me the good feeling to ignore this thread from now on.
wow! what a great point! i liked how you backed it up with supporting evidence and not opinions!
part of one of my jobs for abbott laboratories was to write reports on the aesthetics and functionality of both internally and externally developed programs. i would rate windows pretty highly. i guess if you are a total dolt it could be a little unfriendly, but in that case its the user that is the problem, not the OS. the only real issues with windows are security and the fact that it is piled ontop of old workarounds.
response to 3D-Troll
These are real questions -- here's a beginning. I'm on a Windows machine now, so I can't check to see how things really work .....
About the dock: I think you can hide the dock in the options, and bring it back with command-option-d. This is one of the features described in "Mac OS X: Additional features of the Dock" somewhere on the Apple web site.
Multiple screens haven't been well thought out by anybody, as far as I can tell. The Expose behavior you describe is probably a feature -- it shows you all the windows on one screen, to see others you need to switch screens. I can see someone wanting it to behave that way. As for the menubar being attached to the top of one of the screens, that relates to the different way Mac treats windows: each application can have many windows open at once, unlike Windows. Which window should get the menubar? This works quite sensibly when there's only one screen -- with more than one, the application needs to act differently. One way would be to have a "control" window, and a "display" window, with the display window on another screen. Another approach would be to allow tear-off menus which could be moved around, and some applications do this. But I think it will evolve as having multiple screens becomes normal.
This is also the reason behind not having multiple copies of the application running at the same time -- it's supposed to let you do multiple tasks within a single running copy. Some applications allow running a separate copy in background -- the ones I'm aware of all come from Unix, and require starting up from a terminal window for this to happen.
Organizing finder windows by type may depend on which view you're using? Yes, it should be possible.
These are real questions -- here's a beginning. I'm on a Windows machine now, so I can't check to see how things really work .....
About the dock: I think you can hide the dock in the options, and bring it back with command-option-d. This is one of the features described in "Mac OS X: Additional features of the Dock" somewhere on the Apple web site.
Multiple screens haven't been well thought out by anybody, as far as I can tell. The Expose behavior you describe is probably a feature -- it shows you all the windows on one screen, to see others you need to switch screens. I can see someone wanting it to behave that way. As for the menubar being attached to the top of one of the screens, that relates to the different way Mac treats windows: each application can have many windows open at once, unlike Windows. Which window should get the menubar? This works quite sensibly when there's only one screen -- with more than one, the application needs to act differently. One way would be to have a "control" window, and a "display" window, with the display window on another screen. Another approach would be to allow tear-off menus which could be moved around, and some applications do this. But I think it will evolve as having multiple screens becomes normal.
This is also the reason behind not having multiple copies of the application running at the same time -- it's supposed to let you do multiple tasks within a single running copy. Some applications allow running a separate copy in background -- the ones I'm aware of all come from Unix, and require starting up from a terminal window for this to happen.
Organizing finder windows by type may depend on which view you're using? Yes, it should be possible.
Yep as a mac lover for 20 years and 4 bad Apples in the last 6 months....Vista rocks.....sorry boys......and this from a fanboy
As a former old school OS 7/8 mac user, windows user since 1997, and now an OS X and Windows XP dual user, and you can throw in a smattering of almost every Linux distribution, I can say without a doubt that Vista is one of the WORST OSes I have used. I feel like they took a good OS, added eye candy out the wazoo, made it stupid proof to the point where you have to click ten boxes to run an app, and made it load ten times slower due to all the new bloat. My Desktop is running XP pro perfectly and it is going to stay that way for a very long time.
I'm glad that I checked back in with this thread because I just picked up a great tip on how to increase the speed of OS X. No it's not something logical like adding more ram; the best way to return OS X to it's blazing speed of day 1 is to REINSTALL!!!! How come I didn't think of that?!?!1!1 I'm gonna go do that right now!
My first impression of Vista was positive. Then I tried the three Windows aps that require me to own Parallels -- Dragon Naturally Speaking, Diamond Mind Baseball and Action PC Football. DNS in Vista just barely worked. Diamond Mind and Action Football loaded and played fine, but the online gaming component didn't work. So I tried all three aps on XP and they ran smoothly. And actually, everything's about 20 percent faster in XP than Vista. So there's absolutely no reason to ever run Vista in Parallels. Six years later, Vista still seems like it's in beta. For all but hardcore gamers, a Leopard-Parallels-XP-(plus Linux, if you like) combination is an ideal setup. (BTW, tried VMWare Fusion too ... it's just too slow right now. Once they take off the debugging mode, it will be easier to make a fair comparison with Parallels.)
Skrilla™;3449517 said:Did you read my reasons for doing a fresh install? Go and have a look, because I didn't do a fresh install to clean out apps, this was just an added benefit.
This is the last post of yours that I respond to, I will not continue to feed the trolls!
I'm not interested in arguing over which system is better etc. I couldn't care less. However, you seem to be missing the point everyone is making, and they are making this point because reinstalling OSX twice to make the system run faster is a leaf out of a windows user's book. Saying that you reinstalled the system twice sets a mac users alarm bells ringing because it simply is not necessary to do (though it is necessary in windows - once every 6 months according to many administrators).
I would recommend doing a complete reinstall with a new computer, before using it. I always recommend this, but didn't do it with my two recent macs - now I regret it.. anyway... It's true that if you delete a program, it's possible that the preference file will live on, perhaps even some other files. But they won't slow down your computer (in OS X). For this kind of use, you should repair permissions and, better, I would recommend using a program like Onyx to run scripts (especially if you don't leave your computer running over night) and optimize the system. You can also do other maintenance tasks in Onyx.
Now, you are correct also that slimming down your OS is going to help it run faster, but there is no reason to reinstall it just to remove some fonts, languages etc. For this, have a look at Mac | Life April 2007. There's a whole article about removing garage band files and fonts. Personally, I use a lot of languages so I haven't tried to remove any, but I'm sure their suggestions will work.
Best of luck learning osx!
YT
Yes, while this is true, I think the other poster was talking about the fact that it still comes up if you accidently mouse down near the bottom no matter if you use the key commands you describe or not- I have this happen quite often too.
I'd be curious to hear if anyone has disabled the dock completely, or even if its possible. Quicksilver has made my dock considerably smaller, but I don't think I could live without it. It does take up way too much room at the bottom and I hate hiding docks/toolbars/etc, so I just live with it.
As for the earlier complaints about the look of OSX, I'd like to thank those folks for introducing me to Shapeshifter. I was quite happy with the look of OSX and would have never thought to switch it up, but now that I have Shapeshifter installed its pretty nice.
1. the softwares u discussed will update for Vista, 100%, I assure you
2. leopard-Parallels-XP need extra $200, u do realize that?
Im really curious about this, the so called repair-permission, what exactly does it do?
Im glad to let you know my windows machine has been running for 4 years w/o re-install of windows XP, and its running fast and healthy now (well, I do consider myself a power windows user.
) Windows, as an OS doesn't need to be re-installed every 6 month, but users do need to know how to maintain it, such as running msconfig, cleaning application data, cleaning registration data, running free AV softwares, etc,Thats not saying that OSX need no care, trash files and residues of deleted apps (drag and drop to trash can? lol, not clean) are always there, and sometimes weird disappearance of disk spaces, etc,
For re-install of OSX, only at the beginning when u get the new machine, you can choose to do so to save alot of disk space. otherwise, unless u don't have important data, I don't suggest re-install the OS.
As to point 1 ... Diamond Mind Baseball and Action PC Football are developed by very small companies. They can't afford to spend development $ updating their software for Vista online components run in routers with Parallels. Why couldn't Microsoft let its developers know that the open ports would be different for their online software? They simply don't care about the little guys.
As for 2 ... Extra $200 compared to what ... Leopard, Parallels, Vista? Not true. Vista is in fact more expensive because you have to run the business or ultimate version while any flavor of XP will do ... I was able to use my XP Pro VirtualPC disk image, Parallels migrated it over without a hitch (and by the way, MS accepted the authorization too ... so to all those who say that MS won't allow a VirtualPC to Parallels XP transfer, you are wrong.)
Last time I read one of your posts you were a fan girlYep as a mac lover for 20 years and 4 bad Apples in the last 6 months....Vista rocks.....sorry boys......and this from a fanboy
https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=3449200#post3449200
Service Pack 2 almost never crashed on me unless the system was being taxed to the max. I mean if you ran xp on a reasonable system, there's no reason why is would crash.
Last time I read one of your posts you were a fan girl
https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=3449200#post3449200
pwned
Im glad to let you know my windows machine has been running for 4 years w/o re-install of windows XP, and its running fast and healthy now (well, I do consider myself a power windows user.
Thats not saying that OSX need no care, trash files and residues of deleted apps (drag and drop to trash can? lol, not clean) are always there, and sometimes weird disappearance of disk spaces, etc,
For re-install of OSX, only at the beginning when u get the new machine, you can choose to do so to save alot of disk space. otherwise, unless u don't have important data, I don't suggest re-install the OS.
That paragraph made no sense. I'm a Tiger power user on a powerbook 1.2 ghz g4 with 1 gig of ram, 120gb hd + FW800 1TB external. I use the entire adobe cs2 suite plus dreamweaver and flash as well as final cut pro HD. I've yet found a reason to upgrade as my machine runs plenty fast. So I really don't know what you're talking about.
