Windows Vista Beta 1 and Tiger

[Plymouthbreezer]

It still looks crappy. Better than XP yes - but still bad. I'll stick with Mac OS X.

If anything, it might be about equal to Panther. I'm sure Leopard will kill it.

 

[BGil]

That's all fine an dandy, but we have spotlight NOW. That it isn't currently as versatile as what vista's search is -supposed- to be is irrelevant. I guarantee that apple is still working hard on trying to improve spotlight, and by the time that leopard rolls around, microsoft will again find itself in the dust.

Please read what I said over and over. Microsoft's Indexing Service ver.2000 was in Windows 2000 and XP at their respective launches. Windows Desktop Search came out last December. Office since 1995 has included Destkop Search. Microsoft gave away Lookout for free last July and replaced that with Microsoft Desktop Search last December. So the search ability you have NOW is what savvy Widnows users had YEARS AGO.

The browsing system that Apple uses in the Finder dates back to 1988 with the earliest versions of NEXTSTEP. I doubt you'll find anything that NeXT even considered worth looking at from Windows 2.0 back then.

The browsing metaphor I'm talking about is the one that mirrors the web browsing metaphor, use, and look. Column view isn't it.

The sidebar is an implementation of the NEXTSTEP shelf within the Workspace Manager... as far as I know, Windows has never had anything like that. The use of a toolbar was first tried in NEXTSTEP 4.0 beta, but was dropped until the release of Rhapsody 5.0. The position of the sidebar comes from necessity as both the toolbar and the original shelf occupied the same place in the Workspace Manager windows. To have both, one had to be moved to a new position. As the sidebar acts basically like an icon well, having it run vertically made more since that trying to do that with the toolbar.

You're a joke. So when Apple puts something in their OS in a similar way to how Microsoft did it (first) then Apple did it as a necessity but when Microsoft does the same to Apple it's a copy, right? That's what you're trying to tell me?

I bet you think Dashboard isn't Apple ripping off Konfabulator but Desktop Accessiories reborn, huh? Assuming what you say is true (the three button in the corner answer you gave was complete BS), then Microsoft wasn't ripping off Apple when they created Windows 1.0 because the GUI, Folder Metaphor, and Mouse weren't Apple creations or innovations. Apple produces DirectX9/D93D (CoreVideo/OpenGL) video playback in their media player and you say they weren't following Microsoft's lead? That's retarded.

Some things Apple introduced with Tiger have been in Windows for years and Apple purposely made their implementation similar. Microsoft has done the same thing so trying to paint it as one way copying is BS. Apple has done most of the following since OS X came out, period. Go look at the new features from Panther and Jag and you'll see that Windows had most of them already (especially the lower level features).

Irregardless of who innovated what technologies, Microsoft has been leading the platform wars for the past 5 years and Apple has been playing catchup. They've specifically implemented a number of features to combat Windows features (the Longhorn posters at WWDC are a perfect example of them TELLING YOU THAT) and you refuse to believe it. You can go boot a copy of XP pre-SP1 and a copy of OS X 10.1 and see for yourself.

Apple is great at making GUI's and have easily been leading in that category but their technology implementations have generally come after Microsoft and Windows has already implemented things. There are some noteable exceptions (double-buffered windows and hardware accelerated compositing) but overall the trend from the early 90's has been reversed.

I still can't help but laugh at the fact that you thought that Digital Librarian was for dictionaries, thesauruses and the like.

Then go ahead and show me the digital librarian searching file content and metadata, emails, contacts, and tasks with live queries, saved searches, and a plugin system for new file formats.

The fact is that Apple's implementation of CoreVideo, sidebars in the open/save, Spotlight indexing services, and window widgets have 10x's more in common with the Windows implementation than ANY OF THE TECHNOLOGIES YOU MENTIONED.

I bet you I can tell you that Leopard will have a new Finder with a completely virtual heirarchy. Why? Because Microsoft has been implemented one in Longhorn (it's been there since the early builds). Like it or not, Apple is fighting against the Windows empire and their going to copy anything that they think is a good idea (desktop search). Microsoft specfically said Apple and Linux would do that once they started showing off Longhorn technologies and that's what happened. Nobody gave a rats ass about integrated desktop search until Microsoft showed it off at the PDC in 2003, then all of a sudden Google, Yahoo, Apple, and dozens of others started causing an uproar about their new "desktop search" products. There's a reason why Apple half-baked Spotlight and it's because they had only been working on the backend for a few months when they showed handed out developer copies.

 

[Flux Harmonic]

Please read what I said over and over. Microsoft's Indexing Service ver.2000 was in Windows 2000 and XP at their respective launches. Windows Desktop Search came out last December. Office since 1995 has included Destkop Search. Microsoft gave away Lookout for free last July and replaced that with Microsoft Desktop Search last December. So the search ability you have NOW is what savvy Widnows users had YEARS AGO.

I used both 2000 and XP for many years before switching to mac, and I have no idea what you're talking about. Same with office...I've run every major version of office and have never seen any sort of desktop search. If you could kindly explain where these can be found, I will go and verify the validity of your statements.

It seems, though, that most of the spotlight-comparable technology available from microsoft is either expensive (ie office) or some kind of download. The fact that they didn't make this technology widely and easily accessible is ludicrous. In some regards, that is of equal importance to the technology itself. Or have you not read any Marshall McLuhan?

 

[BGil]

I used both 2000 and XP for many years before switching to mac, and I have no idea what you're talking about. Same with office...I've run every major version of office and have never seen any sort of desktop search. If you could kindly explain where these can be found, I will go and verify the validity of your statements.

It seems, though, that most of the spotlight-comparable technology available from microsoft is either expensive (ie office) or some kind of download. The fact that they didn't make this technology widely and easily accessible is ludicrous. In some regards, that is of equal importance to the technology itself. Or have you not read any Marshall McLuhan?

The technology was fairly accessable but this stuff came out when computers were much slower so indexing wasn't really much of an option if you valued the performance of your machine. That's why indexing wasn't turned on in previous Mac OS's either. People complained about Find fast when it slowed down their Windows 95 computers.

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-US&ie=utf8&oe=utf8&q=find+fast+office

That's what Microsoft used up until Office 2000 when the indexing service was integrated into the OS.

By default, the Indexing Service will index HTML files, text files, Office 95 and later files, internet mail and news, and any other document that a filter is provided. For example, Adobe makes its own IFilter which once installed, helps the service index Acrobat (pdf) files.
http://www.xefteri.com/articles/show.cfm?id=2
http://www.eluent.com/indexing_service.htm
Search the net or the channel9.msdn wkik for an "ifilter explorer" and you'll see it will show you every ifilter installed on your system, in any SQL Server databases youy may have, in IIS etc.

Here's a nice overview:
http://www.pcworld.com/howto/article/0,aid,55364,pg,2,00.asp

To get fast searching in Office 2003 you have to go to the File menu and find the "find" or "search" option. I think it's actually in a submenu. After you do that you'll get a taskpane with a ton of search options including all your Outlook folders, Exchange stuff, all files on your computer and more. IIRC the first time you try to do a search it asks you if you want to turn the indexer on.

 

[MegaSignal]

So... what does everyone think of the name "Vista"?

For me, it conjurs up something with four wheels and too many Windows...

 

[AidenShaw]

more to the point

I used both 2000 and XP for many years before switching to mac, and I have no idea what you're talking about. Same with office...I've run every major version of office and have never seen any sort of desktop search.

More to the point of this discussion is the simple truth that there's been a lot of copying back and forth (and sideways, since Linux/Unix/VMS/OS360... are also found). (If you want to find an early use of meta-data in the file system, look at VMS and RSX-11 in the '70s...)

Each "copy" usually improves on the previous one - pretty obvious. Spotlight didn't appear out-of-the-blue, but is (in some ways) a better implementation of search capabilities present in Windows 2000 and many add-ons. It has some flaws, and "rushed to market" seems to be a pretty good description.

I find the Apple "Redmond - Start your photocopiers" banner to be one of the more outrageous attempts at pro-actively rewriting history that I've ever seen.

Look at early Longhorn announcements from 2002 (such as http://www.winsupersite.com/faq/longhorn.asp) and earlier "Windows Blackcomb" descriptions. Most of the features that Mac zealots are claiming that Vista copied from 10.4 were described in detail. Longhorn public builds showed many of these features as early as 2002.

Who's using photocopiers, if Microsoft was showing these features fully a year before *Panther* shipped ?!?!?

Don't you find it curious that CoreImage requires a DirectX 9 compatible video card? Cart <-> Horse ?

 

[matthew24]

I work in the Windows support business, I bought a Mac as a kind of therapy to have some relief after a hard day's work, it only made things worse. After reading a lot about OSX, it''s architecture and working with it, I started to realize the inferiority of Windows and it became a real frustration to work with XP, especially when you know how good an OS could be. Still there are people promoting that crap.
My frustration with Windows is so big that I am willing to leave the IT business altogether.
One of the main reasons Vista takes so long is that after Jaguar/Panther/Tiger was introduced, MS came to realize they have done about everything wrong that could have been done wrong, and now they try to correct everything in one big effort, will it work?
As long as the registry and the DLL hell is still there, Vista only will be a cover up.

Here is a good article about the big difference between MS and Apple when it comes to administrating computers:

http://www.cio-today.com/story.xhtml?story_id=37481

Two quotes from the article: '"User friendliness and the administration capabilities are the core of their success," DiDio offered', and: 'By contrast, Microsoft's products continue to defy simplicity.'

Well at least after many years of suffering at work, at home I am enjoying an effortless computer experience again. ( many years after having owned an Atari ST )

One thing I must agree with BGil, XP does have many features, but their implementations have (almost) always been wrong.

OK, I want to say something positive about Windows, their gui (98 and 2000) was quite excellent, I liked the desktop and explorer, but with XP they really took a wrong turn.

 

[beatle888]

Well at least after many years of suffering at work, at home I am enjoying an effortless computer experience again. ( many years after having owned an Atari ST )

One thing I must agree with BGil, XP does have many features, but their implementations have (almost) always been wrong.

this is the reason why microsoft has trouble. the workload on their plate is much more than apples. i think they bit off more than they can chew gracefully but they seem to be getting it down...sort of. i would think they might be able to give the computer user an effortless experience one day. and i hope i can predict that day before it comes. but as i type this i just shake my head. i cant imagine windows being so easy.

when i install something on the mac its quick easy and effortless. and it continues to work without a problem....it just works and thats it. i dont have to know about all the incompatibilities and how to get things to work. thats not what i want to do/know about computers.

when i install something on the pc its, try this and that...oh ok it works then tomorrow rolls around and its, "what"? ok time to trouble shoot. damn what happened. ok i got it to work. so it works for maybe a couple of months then stops.

thats not fun to me and i dont care why it happened. i dont want to know why it happened. i just want to use my mac cause it just works. this to me is why apple is better for the average person.

 

[Tahko]

Yes it is. And for most people, it's good enough. And it beats OS X and Linux in one thing that people care about: Applications. I tried to move my inlaws to Linux. No-go, since their apps wouldn't work anymore. Same thing with OS X.

Who needs 300000000000 available programs if only 10 is required?

 

[dejo]

That's what Microsoft used up until Office 2000 when the indexing service was integrated into the OS.

I'm confused. You had to get Office in order to get an OS-integrated indexing service?

 

[feakbeak]

More to the point of this discussion is the simple truth that there's been a lot of copying back and forth (and sideways, since Linux/Unix/VMS/OS360... are also found). (If you want to find an early use of meta-data in the file system, look at VMS and RSX-11 in the '70s...)

Each "copy" usually improves on the previous one - pretty obvious. Spotlight didn't appear out-of-the-blue, but is (in some ways) a better implementation of search capabilities present in Windows 2000 and many add-ons. It has some flaws, and "rushed to market" seems to be a pretty good description.

I find the Apple "Redmond - Start your photocopiers" banner to be one of the more outrageous attempts at pro-actively rewriting history that I've ever seen.

Look at early Longhorn announcements from 2002 (such as http://www.winsupersite.com/faq/longhorn.asp) and earlier "Windows Blackcomb" descriptions. Most of the features that Mac zealots are claiming that Vista copied from 10.4 were described in detail. Longhorn public builds showed many of these features as early as 2002.

Who's using photocopiers, if Microsoft was showing these features fully a year before *Panther* shipped ?!?!?

Don't you find it curious that CoreImage requires a DirectX 9 compatible video card? Cart <-> Horse ?

Nice post Aiden, I get tired of the Microsoft is always copying Apple topics. Everyone is copying everyone and if they weren't, then they'd be stupid. If a company sees that a competitor has created/improved upon something that works well, then they should also include it and strive to improve upon it - we have to keep moving forward.

 

[Nermal]

"Windows Vista Beta 1 and Tiger"

Simple review - It doesn't work.

It seems that the current version of Virtual PC isn't compatible with Vista, the installer doesn't even load. It bombs out with an ACPI error. I'll have to install it on a real computer now

And before you accuse me of being a pirate, I work for a software developer. We have access to this sort of stuff

Edit: Oops, I forgot my actual point! Microsoft will be forced to update Virtual PC, to add support for their new OS. Hopefully some speedups will be included too, and possibly some Intel support

 

[amin]

More to the point of this discussion is the simple truth that there's been a lot of copying back and forth (and sideways, since Linux/Unix/VMS/OS360... are also found). (If you want to find an early use of meta-data in the file system, look at VMS and RSX-11 in the '70s...)

Each "copy" usually improves on the previous one - pretty obvious. Spotlight didn't appear out-of-the-blue, but is (in some ways) a better implementation of search capabilities present in Windows 2000 and many add-ons. It has some flaws, and "rushed to market" seems to be a pretty good description.

I find the Apple "Redmond - Start your photocopiers" banner to be one of the more outrageous attempts at pro-actively rewriting history that I've ever seen.

Look at early Longhorn announcements from 2002 (such as http://www.winsupersite.com/faq/longhorn.asp) and earlier "Windows Blackcomb" descriptions. Most of the features that Mac zealots are claiming that Vista copied from 10.4 were described in detail. Longhorn public builds showed many of these features as early as 2002.

Who's using photocopiers, if Microsoft was showing these features fully a year before *Panther* shipped ?!?!?

Don't you find it curious that CoreImage requires a DirectX 9 compatible video card? Cart <-> Horse ?

I agree with your overall point, but Microsoft really opened itself up for such attacks by delaying Longhorn so many times. What good is "showing these features a year before Panther," when you don't produce the goods?

 

[.Joel]

"it's almost like Microsoft is designing [software] for geeks and Apple is designing for real people," said Joe Wilcox"

here here!

I switched to apple about 5 months ago. I don't think there is a part of OSX i haven't explored, i had the whole settings panel mastered in less then a day. This is the sort of simplicity I love. I found whilst using windows I spent more time maintaining the OS, then I did using it productively. Now on OSX, I don't need to worry about the OS, I can just get on with it and use the computer and finish what i need to do without having to tweak, or play with 15 other settings prior and hoping that a program will run this time etc etc.

 

[RacerX]

You're a joke.

Actually, seeing as you couldn't find your hind quarters with both hands, I would think that you are the closest to qualifying as a joke of the two of us.

But this thread is not about your short comings (even if it is bringing them into the full light of day as a wonderful by product ), so lets look at what misguided stuff you've decided to post today...

The browsing metaphor I'm talking about is the one that mirrors the web browsing metaphor, use, and look. Column view isn't it.

Maybe you are thinking of single window file browsing... that was there from the start of NEXTSTEP also.

Besides, we shouldn't forget that the first browsers (ever) were made on NeXT systems. And that the NEXTSTEP operating system itself was credited for much of the inspiration.

And we also shouldn't forget that Windows was a late comer to the Web. In fact, Windows limitations (that didn't exist in Unix and Mac systems) forced the changing of file names on the Web to the 8.3 convention. Before Windows, the standard extensions were 4 letters (html, jpeg, mpeg, etc.) and names weren't limited to 8 letters.

Of course, you would have had to have been using the Web back in 1993/1994 to see this change happen.

And to stick with the browser issue (as an side)... Microsoft never developed a browser. Internet Explorer was based on Mosaic licensed to Microsoft by NSCA. And the principle developer of Mosaic was the founder of Netscape (Marc Andreesen).

So when Apple puts something in their OS in a similar way to how Microsoft did it (first) then Apple did it as a necessity but when Microsoft does the same to Apple it's a copy, right? That's what you're trying to tell me?

Please show me where I had said anything about something in Windows. I've spent my time countering blatantly inaccurate information that you have put forth... I haven't had to go chasing after anything in Windows to do this.

For my part, I just want to keep the record straight... you're the one who is ignoring the history of the industry (you most likely didn't live through it, so beyond the bad attitude the only thing you can be blamed for is your inability to do a google search ).

I bet you think Dashboard isn't Apple ripping off Konfabulator but Desktop Accessiories reborn, huh? Assuming what you say is true (the three button in the corner answer you gave was complete BS), then Microsoft wasn't ripping off Apple when they created Windows 1.0 because the GUI, Folder Metaphor, and Mouse weren't Apple creations or innovations. Apple produces DirectX9/D93D (CoreVideo/OpenGL) video playback in their media player and you say they weren't following Microsoft's lead?

Where did I say anything about Dashboard/Konfabulator?

And if you put money on that bet... you lost!

I absolutely thing that the implementation of Dashboard is based on Konfabulator. I've never said anything different.

Further, I think that Sherlock 3 was a blatant copy of Watson (though implemented very badly).

Unlike you, I know where Apple has copied others... I don't need to make up this stuff like you, I know where the ideas originated from.

As for Windows 1.0... how in the world could Microsoft have ripped off Apple? Firstly, Windows 1.0 was a GUI shell for running applications. And second, the technology was licensed from Apple (they had no need to rip off Apple when they had a license to do what they were doing).

The deal with Microsoft was for Excel to be released on the Mac and Apple to license the GUI technology so that it could then be released for DOS.

As for CoreVideo and CoreImage, I know people who are on those teams at Apple and have known them for years (even before they were at Apple). Much of these technologies were acquired by Apple when they bought companies (just like Microsoft does).

As for OpenGL, I was using it for hardware accelerated 3D modeling back when it was still called IrisGL in 1993. As I recall, that predates DirectX. Also, Apple was dealing with the same problem their own way back then... QuickDraw (1994). I think that also predates DirectX.

Of course, QuickDraw is one of the legacy technologies that keeps Mozilla based browsers so far behind on the Mac (they are still using a rendering engine based on QuickDraw in the Mac versions of their browsers).

And we are currently using Quartz which is based on OpenGL, Quicktime and DisplayPDF. This was Apple's answer to having to pay Adobe a hefty license fee for every copy of Mac OS X if they had continued using Display Postscript (which was used in NEXTSTEP 0.8 up to Mac OS X Server 1.2 v3).

That's retarded.

What is retarded is not checking your facts before you post.

Some things Apple introduced with Tiger have been in Windows for years and Apple purposely made their implementation similar. Microsoft has done the same thing so trying to paint it as one way copying is BS. Apple has done most of the following since OS X came out, period. Go look at the new features from Panther and Jag and you'll see that Windows had most of them already (especially the lower level features).

I'm still waiting for you to come up with a reasonable example.

Irregardless of who innovated what technologies, Microsoft has been leading the platform wars for the past 5 years and Apple has been playing catchup.

The last 5 years at Microsoft have been damage control, and pretty much nothing else. The only thing Microsoft is leading is their users to insecure computing.

They've specifically implemented a number of features to combat Windows features (the Longhorn posters at WWDC are a perfect example of them TELLING YOU THAT) and you refuse to believe it. You can go boot a copy of XP pre-SP1 and a copy of OS X 10.1 and see for yourself.

Well, I've been using NEXTSTEP since 1991, Rhapsody since 1999 and I started using Mac OS X at Developer Preview 4. I shouldn't need to boot up a copy of 10.1 if you actually know what you are talking about.

Tell me what Windows features I'll see (that weren't there in 10.0, in any of the Developer Previews, Rhapsody, OPENSTEP or NEXTSTEP... or even previous versions of the Mac OS).

... but overall the trend from the early 90's has been reversed.

But you can't be sure... you don't even have a handle on the basics of the technology or what had been happening out side of your Windows-only mind. Given your complete and utter lack of knowledge on the subject (that you have displayed so far), you are in no position to be discussing trends of any type.

Then go ahead and show me the digital librarian searching file content and metadata, emails, contacts, and tasks with live queries, saved searches, and a plugin system for new file formats.

Well, you were the one that told me to boot up a copy and see for myself... wouldn't the same advice hold true for you?

Should I really be asked to take the time to hold your hand and show you something that you should have research before posting?

I'm really not posting to educate you (that would require me caring about you in some manner... which I don't ), but I'll post a screenshot anyways.

Digital Librarian in action
​

The fact is that Apple's implementation of CoreVideo, sidebars in the open/save, Spotlight indexing services, and window widgets have 10x's more in common with the Windows implementation than ANY OF THE TECHNOLOGIES YOU MENTIONED.

But you have admitted that you are completely unaware of any of the technologies that I mentioned... so you, again, are in no position to pass judgment. Until you take some time to do research (which obviously isn't your forte), you really should stop displaying your ignorance in public. If for no other reason than to keep from embarrassing yourself further.


Honestly, before we could even get started going into some of this stuff you really need to learn how to search the internet for information. Most of the misinformation you post could have been discovered and discarded by you before posting by spending a little time on Google.

Don't get me wrong, I do enjoy making you look bad... but at the same time, the argument is totally one sided. I can't help but feel like I'm picking on you. I would really appreciate it if you, well... worked a little harder to hold up your end of the argument.

As it stands right now (based on your performance to date), there is very little sport in this for me.

Why not try something new... like backing up your statements.

 

[bousozoku]

Sorry, I must have missed something. Have the forums changed to a free-for-all?

I would suggest waiting to post before you say something you shouldn't.

 

[beatle888]

beatle gives change to BGil for some Asspercream.

..........never say im not a humanitarian.

 

[Nermal]

I'll have to install it on a real computer now

Progress report for one of the systems at work:

You can now install SATA drivers from CD, and don't need a floppy drive (finally!)

However, the install crashed a short way in, so I can't say how good the actual OS is.

 

[iMeowbot]

You can now install SATA drivers from CD, and don't need a floppy drive (finally!)

...but you still need to bring your own SATA drivers? In 2005?

 

[Evangelion]

Who needs 300000000000 available programs if only 10 is required?

Because none of those 10 are what the user needs/wants? Or because the apps he currently owns would not run on OS X, forcing the user to re-purchase the apps? Or what about games? Sure, OS X has games. Quite a few in fact. But what if those games are not what the user wants to play? Hell, one of the reason why my in-laws refused to move to Linux or OS X, was that none of the little games (that their kid liked to play) they got from cereal-boxes wouldn't work anymore.

Yes, OS X has Doom 3 (for example). But I don't care one bit about Doom 3. The games I like to play are NOT AVAILABLE on OS X. Nor are they available on the consoles. I find it 100% irrelevant how many games there are for OS X, if I'm not interested in those games!

It seems to me that some of you guys are not living on the same planet as rest of us are. One recurring suggestions seems to be to get a PC for fun & games, and Mac for serious work. So according to you, the user should have two computers (at twice the price)? If he wants to play games, he loads up the Windows-machine. If the then wants to type a letter (for example), he shuts down the Windows-machine, and boots up the Mac. Do you have any idea how tedious that would be? Instead of going through that extra hassle, why not simply type the letter in the Windows-machine? Fact remains that there's something Windows can do, that the Mac can't do: play games. And Windows can do the things the Mac can do (word-processing, email, net-surfing, etc. etc.). Os it's only logical that people stick with Windows.

Reality called, he wants you guys back.

 

[JFreak]

IMHO, it is very clumsy to actually label said icon with a word in English if one wants international appeal of this OS. (BTW - I haven't seen any iterations of Windows in other languages - is it still called "Start"? If so, my case in point.)

the "start" text is localised, and that makes it even worse. in case of finnish language, the words used for starting applications and initiating other activities are different, and "starting a shutdown process" is just not understood at all. it is a BIG joke in here that if you want to turn off your computer you need to press the turn-on-button.

really, that sucks. i believe that is the reason why vista seems to only have the windows logo as a start button, which on the other hand is a direct copy of the apple-menu, only that microsoft has taken apple's top-of-the-screen-bar to the bottom of the screen. how innovative of them

 

[Nermal]

...but you still need to bring your own SATA drivers? In 2005?

Yep!
This was on a Via 8237. Some other chipsets might be included on the Vista DVD.

 

[BGil]

Maybe you are thinking of single window file browsing... that was there from the start of NEXTSTEP also.

Besides, we shouldn't forget that the first browsers (ever) were made on NeXT systems. And that the NEXTSTEP operating system itself was credited for much of the inspiration.

And we also shouldn't forget that Windows was a late comer to the Web. In fact, Windows limitations (that didn't exist in Unix and Mac systems) forced the changing of file names on the Web to the 8.3 convention. Before Windows, the standard extensions were 4 letters (html, jpeg, mpeg, etc.) and names weren't limited to 8 letters.

Of course, you would have had to have been using the Web back in 1993/1994 to see this change happen.

And to stick with the browser issue (as an side)... Microsoft never developed a browser. Internet Explorer was based on Mosaic licensed to Microsoft by NSCA. And the principle developer of Mosaic was the founder of Netscape (Marc Andreesen).

This is another attempt at you bringing up things as if they're related but they aren't. I'm talking about the web browsing metaphor in the Finder and Windows Explorer. Who had the first web browser doesn't relate to the first web-browsing metaphor in a file manager. Nor does single window browsing(I told you before this is nothing like column view).

You did the same thing with the SGI stuff. 3D modeling has nothing to do with Apple and Microsoft's implementation of CoreVideo and Direct3D video playback. CoreVideo isn't similar to SGI or NeXT's technology at all but it's almost exactly the same (I actually haven't see any differences except for OpenGL versus DX).

Unlike you, I know where Apple has copied others... I don't need to make up this stuff like you, I know where the ideas originated from.

Again, you keep making stuff up but while trying to make it sound relevant. The whole thing about Apple's three buttons in the corner of the window being a neccessity rather than copying is BS. The majority of the paragraph you wrote proceeded to talk about the pill on the other side of the window-- which has no bearing on the three buttons I'm talking about.

As for OpenGL, I was using it for hardware accelerated 3D modeling back when it was still called IrisGL in 1993.

What does that have to do with CoreVideo and D3D playing videos? Nothing. The fact that OpenGL existed before DX is another red-herring.

As for CoreVideo and CoreImage, I know people who are on those teams at Apple and have known them for years (even before they were at Apple). Much of these technologies were acquired by Apple when they bought companies (just like Microsoft does).

Fallacy. Show me where Apple aquired CoreVideo or CoreImage technology. The specific implementation that Apple uses.

Well, you were the one that told me to boot up a copy and see for myself... wouldn't the same advice hold true for you?

Windows and Office run on over 400 million computers, Windows runs on over 700 million... How many does the digital librarian run on? Where can you download a copy of the OS to try out? (Microsoft.com has free 180-day and 360 trials of Windows BTW).

Tell me what Windows features I'll see (that weren't there in 10.0, in any of the Developer Previews, Rhapsody, OPENSTEP or NEXTSTEP... or even previous versions of the Mac OS).

Do you mean what features Windows had first or what features Apple copied?
Journaling, AES file system encryption, Fast User Switching, ACL's, Integrated compression, task-based interface (wizards, context sensitive icons, etc.), the new system preferences categories, file system/kernel events, true multitasking, arbitrarily extensible metadata streams, DVD burning (on many levels), firewire networking (IP over 1394), desktop search, video hardware acceleration (decoding, de-interlacing etc.), hardware accelerated image processing, file grouping, ... Microsoft beat OS X to all of these things among others.

really, that sucks. i believe that is the reason why vista seems to only have the windows logo as a start button, which on the other hand is a direct copy of the apple-menu, only that microsoft has taken apple's top-of-the-screen-bar to the bottom of the screen. how innovative of them

The words "start" are still there in Vista Beta 1. I'm posting from it now.

 

[BGil]

I'm really not posting to educate you (that would require me caring about you in some manner... which I don't ), but I'll post a screenshot anyways.

Again, this is not about "file search" but specifically emails, appointments, contacts, tasks, saved searches, live queries, the plugin system for new formats, and file metadata. That's "desktop search". Think Windows Desktop Search, Find Fast, Google Desktop Search, X1, and Lookout not "file search" as imployed in Jaguar, Win9x, or Linux (not Beagle).

And why do you keep bringing up the Digital Librarian and NeXT stuff anyway? What NeXT did before Apple purchased them has no bearing on the current Mac OS and it's specific implementation of CoreVideo, window widgets, or the new searchkit additions in Tiger. You claiming NeXT as if it was Apple building that OS is like claiming Palm built (or had anything to do with) the BeOS or Bill Gates/Microsoft and Lookout or the original OS he gave to IBM. It have nothing to do with what I'm talking aobut.

But you have admitted that you are completely unaware of any of the technologies that I mentioned.

I though you said you didn't make stuff up?

 

[JFreak]

The words "start" are still there in Vista Beta 1. I'm posting from it now.

oh, great. now the ONLY good thing i had to say about vista is gone. was it like that (without the start word) at some point or did i just imagine that the button would have been more stylish? anyway, my bad. i was mistakenly thinking that the new windows would somehow look better than the old.