You'd be wrong though, Windows clearly peaked at Win2Kpro. It was stable, powerful and crash resistant. I had a laptop for 4 years with Win2K on it, and not once did I ever have to reinstall the OS on it. I honestly can't say that about any other Windows OS including XP.dornoforpyros said:
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.
Now since there's VISTA, won't Leopard have to be really amazing?
- Thread starter G5Unit
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Microsoft just never had the stones to scrap this nightmare and start out from scratch. They're far too worried about backwards compatibility with horribly outdated systems and screams of terror from IT "professionals" that might actually have to earn their keep by learning something new.
As a result Vista is nothing more than SP3, putting Lipstick on a pig.
The home users loyal to anything Microsoft might fall for this new Window
dressing, but corporate customers will be very slow to adopt anything that
might break their systems.
When forced to purchase all new hardware and new software costing millions, the savvy corporate buyer is presented with rare opportunity to seriously consider other alternatives.
As long as Leopard remains as secure as Tiger has been, the first indication
that Vista has major vulnerabilities could sway buyers by the droves to drop Microsoft once and for all.
As a result Vista is nothing more than SP3, putting Lipstick on a pig.
The home users loyal to anything Microsoft might fall for this new Window
dressing, but corporate customers will be very slow to adopt anything that
might break their systems.
When forced to purchase all new hardware and new software costing millions, the savvy corporate buyer is presented with rare opportunity to seriously consider other alternatives.
As long as Leopard remains as secure as Tiger has been, the first indication
that Vista has major vulnerabilities could sway buyers by the droves to drop Microsoft once and for all.
if MS keeps scrapping new features from Vista in order to meet their deadline, Leopard won't have to be all that to top it, but I'm guessing we'll get to see the first features of 10.5 at MWSF and that should give us a good idea of what we'll see in the final release.
see guys doing a complete rewrite would be great in ways but unlike macosx theres no way in hell microsoft will use a *nix os underneath, the *nix os underneath macosx is what makes it stable and secure essentially. now if microsoft was to rewrite the whole thing new kernels and everything they would only face more security and bug issues becuase unless they tested it so well and the fact it would take years to write it up perfectly, i dont think microsft will ever do it, apple had the chance they had no enemies on the apple machines linux was there but apple was still making sales on the hardware. where as microsoft is sharing its hardware as to speak with so many OS's and if they bukle and use *nix as there base they are allowing people to see microsoft isnt great and they should look at different os
PS i just reread what i said and i dont quite get it but meh
PS i just reread what i said and i dont quite get it but meh
Besides the issue of Leopard vs. Vista, what will happen long-term? As we see, Apple's been very forward-thinking, even to the point of creating an Intel version of OS X before the Public Beta was even out. They also realize their problems early... think Copland.
Microsoft? Anything's possible because it's such a huge company. I'm sure it has plans of some sort, but I think that it's been putting all its energy into Vista and still hasn't seen what they originally envisioned. Besides, they only have to release an OS every three or four years and still have monopoly status. Think about it: XP was released next to Jaguar. It should be ancient history, yet I feel sorry for the users who will still have to deal with it for another year.
On the other hand, what will happen after Vista's released? Will Microsoft take another long break as Apple releases 10.6, 10.7, and maybe even 11?
Microsoft? Anything's possible because it's such a huge company. I'm sure it has plans of some sort, but I think that it's been putting all its energy into Vista and still hasn't seen what they originally envisioned. Besides, they only have to release an OS every three or four years and still have monopoly status. Think about it: XP was released next to Jaguar. It should be ancient history, yet I feel sorry for the users who will still have to deal with it for another year.
On the other hand, what will happen after Vista's released? Will Microsoft take another long break as Apple releases 10.6, 10.7, and maybe even 11?
So far, I haven't seen anything really amazing about Vista.
The new interface is pretty, and I think it looks much better than the Fisher Price look.
IE 7 catches up with Firefox/Safari/Opera.
The search features catch up with Google Desktop/Spotlight.
Windows Explorer gained a search box, preview pane, scalable icons, and Smart Folders.
Lots of tweaks to integrate music, video, and photos (Like iLife & FrontRow, but with TV.)
HD video, but using Windows Media instead of H.264
Much-needed security enhancements.
Calendar and Mail apps.
Each of these is a useful improvement, and I think that the sum total will be very valuable to the average user. However, I don't see anything that hasn't already shown up in Tiger, much less Leopard.
The new interface is pretty, and I think it looks much better than the Fisher Price look.
IE 7 catches up with Firefox/Safari/Opera.
The search features catch up with Google Desktop/Spotlight.
Windows Explorer gained a search box, preview pane, scalable icons, and Smart Folders.
Lots of tweaks to integrate music, video, and photos (Like iLife & FrontRow, but with TV.)
HD video, but using Windows Media instead of H.264
Much-needed security enhancements.
Calendar and Mail apps.
Each of these is a useful improvement, and I think that the sum total will be very valuable to the average user. However, I don't see anything that hasn't already shown up in Tiger, much less Leopard.
wala said:
Microsoft is currently working on two OSes to succeed Vista.
Windows codenamed "Blackcomb" is currently scheduled for 2012 or so, and it will be based on Windows Vista, so essentially on the NT OS.
Then, there is a whole new, Windows side project. It is called Microsoft "Singularity," which will be like OS X was to OS 9.
http://research.microsoft.com/os/singularity/
However, obviously development on those two OSes has temporarily stopped due to Microsoft only working on Vista this year. No doubt it will resume in 2007, or Q4 2006.
When Apple dropped OS9 to Classic only and all the new applications finally
all went to OS X there was a lot of grumbling from those who were heavily
invested in OS9.
Now imagine the impact when all these Microsoft users are forced to upgrade to Vista and the hardware is supposed to be TCM protected to prevent the sharing of software.
That should go over really well.
all went to OS X there was a lot of grumbling from those who were heavily
invested in OS9.
Now imagine the impact when all these Microsoft users are forced to upgrade to Vista and the hardware is supposed to be TCM protected to prevent the sharing of software.
That should go over really well.
superbovine said:
Doesn't apple also release security updates quite often? Like the ones found on software on sporadic intervals
right now I have a desktop with Tiger and a laptop with XP pro, I def prefer tiger, BY FAR. I'm starting university in the fall and I will need to get a new laptop when it starts, prolly an intel duo core. hopfully by then we'll know enough about both OS' for me to decide if I want to go apple or intel for school. I will always prefer Apple, but Vista, from a basic users standpoint is looking good. But OS X is just so secure and runs so great (even on an old G3...) but XP sucks even on a 2GHz Celeron...
Of course Apple has to keep up with new developments and vulnerabilities
that are brought to their attention, but nothing to the scale of what Windows
has gone through.
Microsoft has had nearly 2 decades to perfect Windows and it's still not where
an OS should be.
that are brought to their attention, but nothing to the scale of what Windows
has gone through.
Microsoft has had nearly 2 decades to perfect Windows and it's still not where
an OS should be.
mkrishnan said:
Tru dat.
When a company gets so large that no other company in its class can compete, there is only one competitor that it can compete against, itself.
The one thing that could change everything would be if either by force or by choice that Apple decides to open OS X to the P/C market.
Even if only to the high end P/C market.
The installer pre-flight checker could be set to prevent most of the
lesser desktops from running it, but the workstation class Intel and AMD's
would jump all over the opportunity to use OS X.
The OSX86 project is clear evidence that the demand is there.
Even if only to the high end P/C market.
The installer pre-flight checker could be set to prevent most of the
lesser desktops from running it, but the workstation class Intel and AMD's
would jump all over the opportunity to use OS X.
The OSX86 project is clear evidence that the demand is there.
http://www.wininsider.com/news/?226dotdotdot said:
Boy these guys are sluggish. In the article from 2001, Blackcomb's release was "pushed back" to 2005... and Longhorn was scheduled for 2003!
kingcrowing said:
just dual-boot the two. Apple will not put a lock on their systems from Windows or Linux being installed, so you can technically create multiple partitions on your MacTel laptop and run multiple operating systems (this has already been done on the MacTel Dev Kits). That's one of the biggest positives coming out of the Intel Apple deal IMO.
You guys do realise that no matter how good Leopard is, no matter how crappy Vista is, the vast, overwhelming majority of PC users are NOT going to switch. They are totally accepting of viruses, crashes, instability and the way Windows works and consider Apple and the Mac expensive, different and scary.
The only way Apple is going to bring over switchers is to not only provide compelling products but to ADVERTISE heavily all aspects of the OS. Show it running Office, show it running a million and one different apps.
People won't give a flying rat's arse about the next iteration of OS X because the new Windows is what they will buy because it's what they have always bought. If they were really made aware of the Mac platform, and I mean really aware - massive advertising blitz of professional grade advertising. The iPod commercials have been wonderful but the Mac commercials to date have been woeful. Sure we laugh at them and remember a few they did nothing to stop the impression about the PC using community that the Mac is a sideshow to the Windows main event. They were kooky, oddball and short-running - exactly what the vast majority of the community thinks the Mac to be. Problem is Apple run the risk of alienating Microsoft and losing Office:mac which would be disastrous for the Mac and Apple as a company. Microsoft have no problem ignoring us if they can, sure they'd lose some money but in honesty I think Gates/Ballmer wouldn't really care - they might just take a short break from their money fight.
So yes, Leopard is going to have to be a ground-breaking version of OS X but more importantly, Joe Bloggs in the store is going to have know about it as a worthy alternative to getting a new Windows PC. Cause at the moment he knows absolutely nothing about the Mac.
The only way Apple is going to bring over switchers is to not only provide compelling products but to ADVERTISE heavily all aspects of the OS. Show it running Office, show it running a million and one different apps.
People won't give a flying rat's arse about the next iteration of OS X because the new Windows is what they will buy because it's what they have always bought. If they were really made aware of the Mac platform, and I mean really aware - massive advertising blitz of professional grade advertising. The iPod commercials have been wonderful but the Mac commercials to date have been woeful. Sure we laugh at them and remember a few they did nothing to stop the impression about the PC using community that the Mac is a sideshow to the Windows main event. They were kooky, oddball and short-running - exactly what the vast majority of the community thinks the Mac to be. Problem is Apple run the risk of alienating Microsoft and losing Office:mac which would be disastrous for the Mac and Apple as a company. Microsoft have no problem ignoring us if they can, sure they'd lose some money but in honesty I think Gates/Ballmer wouldn't really care - they might just take a short break from their money fight.
So yes, Leopard is going to have to be a ground-breaking version of OS X but more importantly, Joe Bloggs in the store is going to have know about it as a worthy alternative to getting a new Windows PC. Cause at the moment he knows absolutely nothing about the Mac.
Good point.
The one thing I will despise with the release of Vista is a bunch of half-witted, uninformed, and gullible people praising it. And what they'll be praising is the same old stuff non-Windows users (especially Mac users) are used to by now. Take for instance the "brand new" IE7... I can just hear something along the lines of "OMG tabbed browsing is soooooo awesome", and it makes your blood boil because these will be the very same dummies you tried to convince to switch to Firefox over a year ago.
And if someone doesn't introduce OS X to those poor people very soon, we'll have a bunch of false prophets going around saying that Apple steals everything.
The one thing I will despise with the release of Vista is a bunch of half-witted, uninformed, and gullible people praising it. And what they'll be praising is the same old stuff non-Windows users (especially Mac users) are used to by now. Take for instance the "brand new" IE7... I can just hear something along the lines of "OMG tabbed browsing is soooooo awesome", and it makes your blood boil because these will be the very same dummies you tried to convince to switch to Firefox over a year ago.
And if someone doesn't introduce OS X to those poor people very soon, we'll have a bunch of false prophets going around saying that Apple steals everything.
wala said:
Hear Hear. I don't know how many times people have told me that apple is just some stupid rebel offspin run by people who got fired from windows (or something along that line) when macs had the first graphical interface. In fact, I remember Windows 3.1 looking a lot like mac OS. Anyways, whenever anybody bashes my mac, all I have to do is say "So, reformatted lately?"
mduser63 said:
Actually, ME --> XP is not an upgrade. It's like completely changing the operating system, because ME ran on DOS and XP is based on NT. Both share the Windows GUI, however, but GUI is not the operating system.
XP was unnecessary upgrade over W2K, but Microsoft forced people into that, because they (wisely!) wanted to get rid of DOS which was still present with the ME installations; and it was the XP that kissed DOS goodbye.
mduser63 said:
Exactly. W95, W98 and ME were all based on DOS, which shouldn't even exist in the first place. Many of the Windows' design flaws are workarounds of DOS shortcomings, and unfortunately it will take a long time to fix the DOS legacy -- and I doubt they never do it right (because it would take a very long time and their very best people).
mduser63 said:
Yes it has. There are two service packs, which are XP upgrades by definition. They try hard to introduce one new feature (security), but have so far not been able to meet expectations.
kalisphoenix said:
Low requirements of W98??? Whoa, that thing crippled machines of its day. Software that run very well on 486 hardware (and W3.11) was almost unusable under W95/W98 -- that's how low the requirements are.
But yes, compared to XP, W98 puts very little requirements on the hardware. I can't believe how inefficient XP really is, it's just amazing. It seems people need a supercomputer for just sending email...
After G said:
FWIW I liked NT4. It was W2k minus the directX stuff -- The Best Windows Ever.
Take it from a beta tester for Vista.
It isnt that amazing, nor beautiful.
Not when it doesnt support hardly any ATA controllers. >.<'
It doesnt support my Promise card, which means all my data is inaccessiable.
WTF is with that Microsoft?
It isnt that amazing, nor beautiful.
Not when it doesnt support hardly any ATA controllers. >.<'
It doesnt support my Promise card, which means all my data is inaccessiable.
WTF is with that Microsoft?
mkrishnan said:
It crashed a lot more than NT4 and was slower than NT4. It however supported more hardware, and for that reason some people might consider W2K better than NT4 -- few crashes are certainly worth being able to use the newest and greatest tech widgets
FFTT said:
Exactly what Apple is waiting for. There will be a day when Microsoft MUST break backwards compatibility, because people will not tolerate insecurity very much longer. Microsoft would have done it already, if it had faith in its own product -- but as even they themselves see that their product is flawed and hard to use, their only ace is the backwards compatibility which they do not want to lose.
wala said:
XP was released in 2001 and Jaguar in july 2002, so it was Jaguar that was released next to XP.