Sign In
Register
Help
Post your comments for 15 Ways Microsoft Can Reinvent Itself for the Post-Gates Era here
15 Ways Microsoft Can Reinvent Itself for the Post-Gates Era
MultiQuote
#2
avlis 
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 3
- Joined: 20-March 08
Posted 26 June 2008 - 03:39 AM
I agree with the idea of a windows only OS, not a bunch of bad-mixed software.
Separate thing and focus on individual products.
Although Vista has a georgeous UI when you buy a new PC you don't buy it with the idea of just staring at its interface (maybe someone does :).
With all the new advances in technology it is incomprehensible why every new OS demands more hardware for the same chore than previous versions.
What we as users want of an OS is speed, performance, reliability and not only a new face.
Separate thing and focus on individual products.
Although Vista has a georgeous UI when you buy a new PC you don't buy it with the idea of just staring at its interface (maybe someone does :).
With all the new advances in technology it is incomprehensible why every new OS demands more hardware for the same chore than previous versions.
What we as users want of an OS is speed, performance, reliability and not only a new face.
#3
phantasm74
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 26-June 08
Posted 26 June 2008 - 05:50 AM
I'm all for MS offering web based programs, but where do you expect these things to be hosted? The Microsoft/Yahoo merger was what would have made all of that possible and Yahoo blocked it. Microsoft isn't stupid, they wouldn't intentionally not innovate because that would bury them, but since they're seen as the big evil entity public opinion is against them and I'm sure that had a major impact on Yahoo's decision.
I agree totally with the mobile phone software though, WM 6 isn't any better than WM 5, and that OS is the worst mobile one I've used. It shouldn't be fancy, it should just work. It's a phone after all, it doesn't need every bell and whistle in the world.
I agree totally with the mobile phone software though, WM 6 isn't any better than WM 5, and that OS is the worst mobile one I've used. It shouldn't be fancy, it should just work. It's a phone after all, it doesn't need every bell and whistle in the world.
#4
riskyrob
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 6
- Joined: 10-February 07
Posted 26 June 2008 - 09:10 AM
I've used Google's online office suite and find it lacking; don't really see what the hype is about. I still find Office to be the most superior productivity suite out there. Firefox is kicking IE dead in the pants, it's all about the customization baby! I can't help to see paralels between Micro$ofts rep and the U.S. When you're on top and stumble a bit everybody is quick to snipe you and proclaim your demise. I wouldn't be to quick to judge on either account.
#6
caskey100
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 6
- Joined: 26-June 08
- Location:Marengo, IL
Posted 26 June 2008 - 06:34 PM
I.E will never leave the market due to its large share and also with how built into the O/S it really is.
I do think Windows should look to consolidate down to simply just mobile and PC operating systems and keep its gaming line (e.g Xbox). It has itself out in too many diffrent areas right now to focus on one thing. I have a feeling that if Microsoft where to hit the net it would get kicked in the pants worse by google than it already has.
Also Google Docs still has a long way to go before you can compare it to the Office suite. If anything Open Office is more of a threat to M$ Office.
I do think Windows should look to consolidate down to simply just mobile and PC operating systems and keep its gaming line (e.g Xbox). It has itself out in too many diffrent areas right now to focus on one thing. I have a feeling that if Microsoft where to hit the net it would get kicked in the pants worse by google than it already has.
Also Google Docs still has a long way to go before you can compare it to the Office suite. If anything Open Office is more of a threat to M$ Office.
#7
cfischer83
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 45
- Joined: 12-September 07
Posted 26 June 2008 - 08:36 PM
This whole thing is a load of garbage! Seriously, how can you post such stuff on the net and still have a job?
Upgrade continuously, not once every few years.
If you set your system to auto check for updates you'll get at least one update every month. You can also look at things like the Live Suite, Service Packs (two released this year) and all the new versions of the OS they come out with. XP Home, XP Pro, XP Tablet Edition, XP Media Center edition XP x64, Windows 2003, Vista, Server 2008, 4 service packs, and hundreds of incremental updates as well as wonderful new applications like Live Photo Gallery, Live Writer, Movie Maker among others. That's what's happened since 2001.
When Apple put a tiny "Designed in California" on the backside of every iPod, it was inevitable that the Zune would sport an equally microscopic "Hello from Seattle."
You're serious? They don't even say the same thing. Lots of products say a little greeting or say where it was made. Give me a break! If Apple can get away with ripping off Time Machine (Shadow Copy), Quick Look (Preview), Spotlight (Instant Desktop Search), Dashboard Widgets (MSN Dashboard turned Sidebar), Glassy Leopard interface (Aero), Stacks (Tool Bars) among SO many others (like the fact that MS has been doing the smart phone business for 12 years now) and you're going to give Microsoft crap for something as trivial as this? This is really bad "journalism" if you can even call it that.
It insists on doing away with Windows XP when there are legions of users who still want it.
The fact that you would even point to that as 'proof' that Vista is bad or somehow hated is a joke. First, someone wanting to 'save' XP isn't necessarily a vote against Vista. Secondly, MS ALWAYS puts an end to the old OS when the new one is created. You wouldn't expect Ford to still sell 2001 Mustangs would you? That's how it works. If you didn't know that I feel bad for you.... kind of like the kid finding out there's no Santa. Thirdly, the amount of people signed the petition is less than 0.1% (That's over 1,300 people who use Vista for each person that signed it, assuming that each signature is only one person, which you know there aren't).
In 2000, Apple replaced the creaky operating system known as OS 9 with OS X, an all-new, thoroughly modern OS.
1999 the server version came out and in March 2001 the desktop OS came out. 5 seconds of research would tell you that. Also, it is absolutely NOT a thoroughly modern OS. It is still based on decades old Unix code that hangs, locks up, needs to be rebooted when memory gets lost and has to be reinstalled every time user permissions get messed up. I know this first hand working on a Mac Pro with Two 2.66ghz Core 2 Duos and 6GB of ram.
so why not make both groups of people happy by offering both a legacy edition and a Windows that's new from the ground up?
sigh ok, I'll try and explain it to you. First of all, the code used in XP is archaic, keeps people in the past and takes a lot more money to support. MS isn't spending nearly as much money supporting Vista as it is XP because of the immense security improvements to the core architecture, UAC (which is not annoyed me once in the 1 1/2 years I've been using it) and Windows Defender. Back to the old version: I'm a web developer. If I see one more person using IE6 I'm going to scream! There is no excuse for someone to be using that browser When IE7, Firefox and all the rest are free! Someday when the web is free from IE6's clutches, the web will be so much better because we developers won't have to either A) spend 2 - 3 times as long programming around it as well as modern browsers or B) not use modern technologies at all because it's too much of a hassle. Believe me, when XP dies and everyone is programming in WPF, the user experience on Windows will be so much better!
Make Windows more boring
I'd like to hear you say that to Apple... my guess is you won't.
Windows Vista is too bloated to run well on cheap laptops,
Blatantly untrue. You can get a $500 laptop that will run Vista with no problems. In fact it will run Vista faster than a $500 PC would run XP in 2002/3. Believe it or not, my 2GB ram 1.9ghz (Core Duo, not even Core 2) Toshiba laptop just screams with Vista! I got it a year ago for $850. It would be about $600 today and be totally worth it.
Build Internet Explorer on top of Firefox
I think that's ridiculous. Firefox is good but it can certainly be improved upon. I don't have a problem with MS adding in some Open Source pieces to their systems (like that will ever happen) but it should not be on the Mozilla platform. They can do better.
And outside of Redmond, almost everybody seems to regard Windows Vista as a disappointment.
I am seriously getting tired of hearing the same old crap from PCWorld, Infoworld and Information Week. Vista is being embraced by the public and businesses alike. This has been shown in recent Gartner reports showing Vista is currently in line with XP and will soon outpace it in the business world. It's time for PCWorld to become the magazine it once was and report the facts, not some beat-on-Microsoft-because-we-can comments that are recycled from early 2007. You sound like mindless robots constantly stuck replaying the same, old, untrue FUD that has no real basis or substance to it.
Bring back Ed Bott!
Upgrade continuously, not once every few years.
If you set your system to auto check for updates you'll get at least one update every month. You can also look at things like the Live Suite, Service Packs (two released this year) and all the new versions of the OS they come out with. XP Home, XP Pro, XP Tablet Edition, XP Media Center edition XP x64, Windows 2003, Vista, Server 2008, 4 service packs, and hundreds of incremental updates as well as wonderful new applications like Live Photo Gallery, Live Writer, Movie Maker among others. That's what's happened since 2001.
When Apple put a tiny "Designed in California" on the backside of every iPod, it was inevitable that the Zune would sport an equally microscopic "Hello from Seattle."
You're serious? They don't even say the same thing. Lots of products say a little greeting or say where it was made. Give me a break! If Apple can get away with ripping off Time Machine (Shadow Copy), Quick Look (Preview), Spotlight (Instant Desktop Search), Dashboard Widgets (MSN Dashboard turned Sidebar), Glassy Leopard interface (Aero), Stacks (Tool Bars) among SO many others (like the fact that MS has been doing the smart phone business for 12 years now) and you're going to give Microsoft crap for something as trivial as this? This is really bad "journalism" if you can even call it that.
It insists on doing away with Windows XP when there are legions of users who still want it.
The fact that you would even point to that as 'proof' that Vista is bad or somehow hated is a joke. First, someone wanting to 'save' XP isn't necessarily a vote against Vista. Secondly, MS ALWAYS puts an end to the old OS when the new one is created. You wouldn't expect Ford to still sell 2001 Mustangs would you? That's how it works. If you didn't know that I feel bad for you.... kind of like the kid finding out there's no Santa. Thirdly, the amount of people signed the petition is less than 0.1% (That's over 1,300 people who use Vista for each person that signed it, assuming that each signature is only one person, which you know there aren't).
In 2000, Apple replaced the creaky operating system known as OS 9 with OS X, an all-new, thoroughly modern OS.
1999 the server version came out and in March 2001 the desktop OS came out. 5 seconds of research would tell you that. Also, it is absolutely NOT a thoroughly modern OS. It is still based on decades old Unix code that hangs, locks up, needs to be rebooted when memory gets lost and has to be reinstalled every time user permissions get messed up. I know this first hand working on a Mac Pro with Two 2.66ghz Core 2 Duos and 6GB of ram.
so why not make both groups of people happy by offering both a legacy edition and a Windows that's new from the ground up?
sigh ok, I'll try and explain it to you. First of all, the code used in XP is archaic, keeps people in the past and takes a lot more money to support. MS isn't spending nearly as much money supporting Vista as it is XP because of the immense security improvements to the core architecture, UAC (which is not annoyed me once in the 1 1/2 years I've been using it) and Windows Defender. Back to the old version: I'm a web developer. If I see one more person using IE6 I'm going to scream! There is no excuse for someone to be using that browser When IE7, Firefox and all the rest are free! Someday when the web is free from IE6's clutches, the web will be so much better because we developers won't have to either A) spend 2 - 3 times as long programming around it as well as modern browsers or B) not use modern technologies at all because it's too much of a hassle. Believe me, when XP dies and everyone is programming in WPF, the user experience on Windows will be so much better!
Make Windows more boring
I'd like to hear you say that to Apple... my guess is you won't.
Windows Vista is too bloated to run well on cheap laptops,
Blatantly untrue. You can get a $500 laptop that will run Vista with no problems. In fact it will run Vista faster than a $500 PC would run XP in 2002/3. Believe it or not, my 2GB ram 1.9ghz (Core Duo, not even Core 2) Toshiba laptop just screams with Vista! I got it a year ago for $850. It would be about $600 today and be totally worth it.
Build Internet Explorer on top of Firefox
I think that's ridiculous. Firefox is good but it can certainly be improved upon. I don't have a problem with MS adding in some Open Source pieces to their systems (like that will ever happen) but it should not be on the Mozilla platform. They can do better.
And outside of Redmond, almost everybody seems to regard Windows Vista as a disappointment.
I am seriously getting tired of hearing the same old crap from PCWorld, Infoworld and Information Week. Vista is being embraced by the public and businesses alike. This has been shown in recent Gartner reports showing Vista is currently in line with XP and will soon outpace it in the business world. It's time for PCWorld to become the magazine it once was and report the facts, not some beat-on-Microsoft-because-we-can comments that are recycled from early 2007. You sound like mindless robots constantly stuck replaying the same, old, untrue FUD that has no real basis or substance to it.
Bring back Ed Bott!
#8
Yert
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 264
- Joined: 30-June 07
Posted 27 June 2008 - 03:29 AM
15 Ways PC World Can Reinvent Itself in for it's Post-Journalistic-Integrity Era
1. Stop trying to pander to the anti-MS crowd.
2. Fire bad journalist constantly, not just whenever sales decline.
3. Have integrity, don't just copy every [insert latest Microsoft OS name here]-sucks-and-MS-won't-last-another-year-unless-they-do-major-changes article out there.
4. Treat readers with truth, not FUD pandering.
5. Make PCWorld have less fear mongering.
6. Reboot PCWorld. What the crap with the Buisness Center and the rest of the site looking totally different?
7. Split PCWorld in two. Long-term, PCWorld needs a fundamentally refreshing amount of real journalism. But the FUD campaign over Microsoft shows that there are lots of folks who just want a version of the site that's familiar and FUD spewing. Oh wait, there is already a site for that. ComputerWorld.
8. Make PCWorld more boring. Headlines like "Dear Microsoft: Thanks for the Help, Linux" get readers, but amount to the same thing that's been said with every Windows release. Leave stuff like that to ComputerWorld.
9. Make incite and originality the flagship. It's obvious that tomorrow's PCWorld reader will be the descendant of today's. FUD pandering will only breed a community of hate.
10. Be consistent. Two different articles on PCWorld in the last year or so have stated different figures for Vista adoption. Which is it PCWorld?
11. Make the review part of the site actually useful by having clearer cut recommendations for each category.
12. Make the PCWorld articles indispensable on the Web. i.e. More fact and insight and less FUD pandering.
13. Hire insightful readers to blog, or allow the best of the reader blogs via the community to show up on the front page.
14. Stop imitating ComputerWorld. It sucks.
15. Rehire Ed Bott. Hire Paul Thurrott, Mary Jo Folley, and Long Zheng. They know something, unlike the author of this article.
1. Stop trying to pander to the anti-MS crowd.
2. Fire bad journalist constantly, not just whenever sales decline.
3. Have integrity, don't just copy every [insert latest Microsoft OS name here]-sucks-and-MS-won't-last-another-year-unless-they-do-major-changes article out there.
4. Treat readers with truth, not FUD pandering.
5. Make PCWorld have less fear mongering.
6. Reboot PCWorld. What the crap with the Buisness Center and the rest of the site looking totally different?
7. Split PCWorld in two. Long-term, PCWorld needs a fundamentally refreshing amount of real journalism. But the FUD campaign over Microsoft shows that there are lots of folks who just want a version of the site that's familiar and FUD spewing. Oh wait, there is already a site for that. ComputerWorld.
8. Make PCWorld more boring. Headlines like "Dear Microsoft: Thanks for the Help, Linux" get readers, but amount to the same thing that's been said with every Windows release. Leave stuff like that to ComputerWorld.
9. Make incite and originality the flagship. It's obvious that tomorrow's PCWorld reader will be the descendant of today's. FUD pandering will only breed a community of hate.
10. Be consistent. Two different articles on PCWorld in the last year or so have stated different figures for Vista adoption. Which is it PCWorld?
11. Make the review part of the site actually useful by having clearer cut recommendations for each category.
12. Make the PCWorld articles indispensable on the Web. i.e. More fact and insight and less FUD pandering.
13. Hire insightful readers to blog, or allow the best of the reader blogs via the community to show up on the front page.
14. Stop imitating ComputerWorld. It sucks.
15. Rehire Ed Bott. Hire Paul Thurrott, Mary Jo Folley, and Long Zheng. They know something, unlike the author of this article.
#9
robgries1
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 27-June 08
Posted 27 June 2008 - 06:14 AM
I completely agree with this article because clearly when they fumbled the ball with Vista they definitely need to revitalize their business or be faced with a ever decreasing marketshare. As a person who likes XP, I don't like the idea of having a crappy OS like Vista shoved down my throat! It should be clear to microsoft that people still want and use XP because of the severely downgraded performance at the hands of a little eyecandy which Linux can pull off without any repercussions with compiz fusion. I also hate how Microsoft spreads FUD about people who don't want to adopt a flawed OS like windows vista, sure vista but a computer is always secure when in a constant state of crashes and endless security cancel or allow messages! whats next in windows 7 for UAC a warning like this: YOU JUST MOVED YOUR MOUSE TO THE LEFT CANCEL OR ALLOW! Vista is terrible and microsoft should be working towards fixing it before they shove it down our throats!
#10
cfischer83
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 45
- Joined: 12-September 07
Posted 27 June 2008 - 01:46 PM
15. Rehire Ed Bott. Hire Paul Thurrott, Mary Jo Folley, and Long Zheng. They know something, unlike the author of this article.
That would certainly legitimized PCWorld over night, but if you were Walter Cronkite, would you leave CBS to try and save the National Inquirer?
Good post though!
That would certainly legitimized PCWorld over night, but if you were Walter Cronkite, would you leave CBS to try and save the National Inquirer?
Good post though!
#11
dstechgeek
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 36
- Joined: 14-March 08
Posted 27 June 2008 - 06:40 PM
cfischer83 said:
This whole thing is a load of garbage! Seriously, how can you post such stuff on the net and still have a job?
If Apple can get away with ripping off Time Machine (Shadow Copy), Quick Look (Preview), Spotlight (Instant Desktop Search), Dashboard Widgets (MSN Dashboard turned Sidebar), Glassy Leopard interface (Aero), Stacks (Tool Bars) among SO many others (like the fact that MS has been doing the smart phone business for 12 years now) and you're going to give Microsoft crap for something as trivial as this? This is really bad "journalism" if you can even call it that.
You say Microsoft invented all that and Apple ripped them off? When was Vista released? (early 2007, in case you didn't know) When was OS X released? (2001)
Somehow, MS musta thought of all these features, never put them in XP, then Apple found out about them and ripped them off. Doesn't make sense. Clearly, you're just as biased as any Apple fanboy.
Message was edited by: AuroraDizon. No personal attacks.
#12
cfischer83
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 45
- Joined: 12-September 07
Posted 27 June 2008 - 08:49 PM
@dstechgeek
Yes, OS X was made in 2001, but the features I mentioned where not.
Time Machine was in Leopard. Released October 2007
Shadow Copy Windows 2003 and added to Vista in 2006
Quicklook: Leopard 2007
Preview: Vista 2006
Spotlight: Tiger 2005
Instant Desktop Search: XP 2004
Dashboard Widgets: Tiger 2005
MSN Dashboard: XP 2004
Glassy Interface: Leopard 2007
Glassy Interface: XP Royale Theme 2005, perfect in Vista 2006
Stacks: Leopard 2007
Tool Bars: As far back in Windows as I can remember
I could go on if you'd like? However unless you believe that Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer stole Apple's Time Machine, went back in time and told themselves to build these features before Apple did, there's really no getting around it ;)
Yes, OS X was made in 2001, but the features I mentioned where not.
Time Machine was in Leopard. Released October 2007
Shadow Copy Windows 2003 and added to Vista in 2006
Quicklook: Leopard 2007
Preview: Vista 2006
Spotlight: Tiger 2005
Instant Desktop Search: XP 2004
Dashboard Widgets: Tiger 2005
MSN Dashboard: XP 2004
Glassy Interface: Leopard 2007
Glassy Interface: XP Royale Theme 2005, perfect in Vista 2006
Stacks: Leopard 2007
Tool Bars: As far back in Windows as I can remember
I could go on if you'd like? However unless you believe that Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer stole Apple's Time Machine, went back in time and told themselves to build these features before Apple did, there's really no getting around it ;)
#13
LindaA
- Full Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 94
- Joined: 27-October 06
Posted 28 June 2008 - 07:38 AM
Most of what you suggest sounds pretty good, with the exception of #14 -- "Build Internet Explorer on top of Firefox." No!, no!, NO!!! Absolutely NOT!!! I HATE Firefox and LOVE Internet Explorer. IMHO, under NO circumstances whatsoever should the two EVER be combined in any way, shape, or form! May the two FOREVER remain SEPARATE, PLEASE!!
#14
blackcross
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 28
- Joined: 19-April 07
Posted 29 June 2008 - 06:49 AM
cfischer, you argue in facts which I like. Both companies copy from each other and it's good to see Apple copying the good ideas from MS (not just being stuck in the -made-here- mode they were in for the first 2 decades.
But do we really need an OS still stuck in the registry? Please give me several reasons why the registry should continue to exit. I ask because I can't think of one reason and until it's gone, everything else is bolt-on. Yes I understand that it would take a serious effort to get ride of it, but I think it takes even more energy to try to continue to live with it.
Oh and OS X is more modern: full memory protection, thread protection, multi-threading, multi-processor? You bet. While XP and certainly Vista are more stable than ever before, they are the current dinosaur on the field.
Oh, one more thing: counting SPs are OS upgrades? HAH. You need new content to count as a release, not bug fixing or security hole patching that should never have been there.
But do we really need an OS still stuck in the registry? Please give me several reasons why the registry should continue to exit. I ask because I can't think of one reason and until it's gone, everything else is bolt-on. Yes I understand that it would take a serious effort to get ride of it, but I think it takes even more energy to try to continue to live with it.
Oh and OS X is more modern: full memory protection, thread protection, multi-threading, multi-processor? You bet. While XP and certainly Vista are more stable than ever before, they are the current dinosaur on the field.
Oh, one more thing: counting SPs are OS upgrades? HAH. You need new content to count as a release, not bug fixing or security hole patching that should never have been there.
#15
sadnan
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 11-February 08
Posted 29 June 2008 - 04:45 PM
@cfischer83 I complete agree with u. The PC World Guys are going mad bashing Vista. They have gone crazy and when they have nothing good to write and they pick up Vista and start hitting it. Jobless creative less people. Microsoft should sue PC world for all this bad journalisim against it. All the Vista haters i met till today says that they never used Vista or hates it just because PC World and all those other Vista Bashing Magazines says so.
Come on Guys and Girls out there VISTA is the PRESENT WINDOWS , XP is the PAST.
P.S In Arabia Vista laptops are available for 600 dollars.
To the PC WORLD,
Please upgrade your versions of Windows to Vista. You will love it when you will start using it. Don't remain outdated for next 2-3 years until Windows 7 releases may be you will hate that also and start praising Vista.
Come on Guys and Girls out there VISTA is the PRESENT WINDOWS , XP is the PAST.
P.S In Arabia Vista laptops are available for 600 dollars.
To the PC WORLD,
Please upgrade your versions of Windows to Vista. You will love it when you will start using it. Don't remain outdated for next 2-3 years until Windows 7 releases may be you will hate that also and start praising Vista.
#16
cfischer83
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 45
- Joined: 12-September 07
Posted 29 June 2008 - 05:18 PM
But do we really need an OS still stuck in the registry?
I'll be happy when/if Windows ever gets rid of the registry, but it's just one small component that honestly, rarely ever needs to be dealt with. Windows would be better without it, true, but it's certainly no deal breaker.
full memory protection, thread protection, multi-threading, multi-processor?
Many so-called "tech journalists" will try and tell you that Windows does not support these features, when in fact they do. I own a quad core PC and could prove it to anyone. Also, multi-threading has been supported for quite some time. Memory protection on OS X is a joke. More information can be lost through a kernel panic than can through and type of Windows-based crash (non-hard drive of course).
Oh, one more thing: counting SPs are OS upgrades? HAH. You need new content to count as a release, not bug fixing or security hole patching that should never have been there.
That's exactly what Puma, Jaguar, Panther, Tiger and Leopard were. Service Packs. Upgrades like XP SP2, XP Tablet, XP Media Center and things such as the Live Suite were certainly in line with those releases. They just weren't marketed that way.
Now if you want to get into a fact-based argument about security....
I'll be happy when/if Windows ever gets rid of the registry, but it's just one small component that honestly, rarely ever needs to be dealt with. Windows would be better without it, true, but it's certainly no deal breaker.
full memory protection, thread protection, multi-threading, multi-processor?
Many so-called "tech journalists" will try and tell you that Windows does not support these features, when in fact they do. I own a quad core PC and could prove it to anyone. Also, multi-threading has been supported for quite some time. Memory protection on OS X is a joke. More information can be lost through a kernel panic than can through and type of Windows-based crash (non-hard drive of course).
Oh, one more thing: counting SPs are OS upgrades? HAH. You need new content to count as a release, not bug fixing or security hole patching that should never have been there.
That's exactly what Puma, Jaguar, Panther, Tiger and Leopard were. Service Packs. Upgrades like XP SP2, XP Tablet, XP Media Center and things such as the Live Suite were certainly in line with those releases. They just weren't marketed that way.
Now if you want to get into a fact-based argument about security....
#17
dstechgeek
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 36
- Joined: 14-March 08
Posted 29 June 2008 - 11:24 PM
@cfisher83
Maybe it looks like Leopard is copying Vista, but, again, you're still not giving the other product the benefit of the doubt (showing you're biased)
You mention some of the features that were in Vista in 2006 (one year before its actual release; in its beta stage stil), yet you give that leeway for Leopard. You just compared the features that were present in Vista Beta but not in Leopard's Beta. How do you know when Leopard had those features planned? They could've had them planned back when Tiger was released. I'm not against Vista, just against your argument.
As far as I'm concerned, Vista's great. But the extra improvements over XP aren't. If it had WinFS incorporated (not dropped coz of their late schedule), a smaller kernel (think MinWin), & PC-to-PC synchronization not dropped, then it's a justifiable upgrade. Okay it has DirectX 10, Aero, Readyboost, & gadgets but, really - would you pay an odd $AU455+ to have all these basic upgrades plus the hardware upgrades required? In fact, my brand new laptop doesn't have full Aero capability (I had to do a registry hack), and can't even play any graphics-intensive games, let alone DX10 ones. The sidebar's annoying and a memory hog. The Vista Desktop Window Manager (DWM.exe) is a huge process and is the biggest constant process in Vista. You can get so many addons to duplicate the new Vista features - even ReadyBoost.
Also, OS X, Linux, Unix, or Windows are useless if they don't accomplish the OS golden rule: it must enable enable the user to achieve whatever he wants, as simply as possible. If the user has to fight the interface/OS to get it to work, work around its design, or figure it out, then it's counter-productive.
You mention lockups with OS X because of its "archaic" Unix architecture. How come when I use my mum's iMac, I've never had lock-ups or anything of such. How come Apple's Mac purchases are rising and in fact, recent research shows that the change-hesitant businesses are using Macs now - 8/10 businesses, to be exact. Don't tell me, people - especially biz people, would use an OS that locks up and crashes as you say...
Maybe it looks like Leopard is copying Vista, but, again, you're still not giving the other product the benefit of the doubt (showing you're biased)
You mention some of the features that were in Vista in 2006 (one year before its actual release; in its beta stage stil), yet you give that leeway for Leopard. You just compared the features that were present in Vista Beta but not in Leopard's Beta. How do you know when Leopard had those features planned? They could've had them planned back when Tiger was released. I'm not against Vista, just against your argument.
As far as I'm concerned, Vista's great. But the extra improvements over XP aren't. If it had WinFS incorporated (not dropped coz of their late schedule), a smaller kernel (think MinWin), & PC-to-PC synchronization not dropped, then it's a justifiable upgrade. Okay it has DirectX 10, Aero, Readyboost, & gadgets but, really - would you pay an odd $AU455+ to have all these basic upgrades plus the hardware upgrades required? In fact, my brand new laptop doesn't have full Aero capability (I had to do a registry hack), and can't even play any graphics-intensive games, let alone DX10 ones. The sidebar's annoying and a memory hog. The Vista Desktop Window Manager (DWM.exe) is a huge process and is the biggest constant process in Vista. You can get so many addons to duplicate the new Vista features - even ReadyBoost.
Also, OS X, Linux, Unix, or Windows are useless if they don't accomplish the OS golden rule: it must enable enable the user to achieve whatever he wants, as simply as possible. If the user has to fight the interface/OS to get it to work, work around its design, or figure it out, then it's counter-productive.
You mention lockups with OS X because of its "archaic" Unix architecture. How come when I use my mum's iMac, I've never had lock-ups or anything of such. How come Apple's Mac purchases are rising and in fact, recent research shows that the change-hesitant businesses are using Macs now - 8/10 businesses, to be exact. Don't tell me, people - especially biz people, would use an OS that locks up and crashes as you say...
#18
Chris32
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 22
- Joined: 09-January 08
Posted 30 June 2008 - 04:29 PM
Hello, I am system admin for a school and use 70% macs and 30% PC's and honestly have to say that both: osx and windows have there strengths and weaknesses but neither is really superior. I Have to agree that vista has gotten the bad rap from the media (PCWORLD)."dstechgeek" You Say: Vista's great. But the extra improvements over XP aren't ... The Greatest improvment's are the security aspects of the OS which people don't really see. If Apple had 90% of the market share; trust me you would see a lot more viruses for the MAC OSX, and the mac will never gain the majority of the market share because of there pricing and customizations, Lets face it There's no way you can walk into an Apple Store, Best Buy and buy a Imac for 4-600 dollars... isn't going happen. Why? because you pay for the propriety looks/size of an Imac, and then there's the service/repair options. To my knowledge you cant have an apple tech come to your business and replace a motherboard if need be . you have to take your machine to an apple store or send it in to have it repaired or take it to an authorized repair facility (which are scarce) that then turns to a loss of money and productivity for a company........ And everybody copy's everybody ... The "Precious Apple dock" was originally seen on an Amiga Computer known as the "workbench" but has the same concept.
#19
RogerKnights
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 4
- Joined: 01-September 08
Posted 01 September 2008 - 05:21 PM
Here’s a Big Move Microsoft should consider making: Software metering built into Windows. Users would then have the option of a pay-as-you-go model (for those vendors that chose to offer their software in this model as well as, or instead of, the standard model). Users would receive these benefits:
A. Low-cost access to thousands of software titles, including expensive software they rarely use but that would be valuable on those occasions.
B. The ability to try out software for as long as they like without incurring a large cost. In particular, competing products could be compared head-to-head.
C. No more “buyer’s remorse,” because users could migrate to a better new product without talking a financial “hit.”
D. Less need to research products before acquiring them, because there’d be no financial penalty as a result of making a poor initial choice.
E. Lower software costs, since vendors’ marketing expenses would be reduced because buyers wouldn’t have to be “sold” on the product before they started using it.
F. Increased competition from new software offerings, because new entrants would find it easier to get users to switch over. (There’d be nothing new to buy—the rental fee would just flow to a new vendor in the future.)
Of course, MS would benefit too, because:
A. It would collect the revenues on behalf of vendors, distribute it among them, and take a 20% (say) “postage-and-handling fee.” (Many a mickle makes a muckle.)
B. It would also counter the appeal of free or rental “cloud” software from Google, etc. Low-income consumers could make use of the Office suite without having to pony up a lot of cash up front.
In order to make software metering secure, it might be necessary for PCs to incorporate a special chip to discourage hacking this feature. (Or maybe that could be an optional feature for extra security.)
A. Low-cost access to thousands of software titles, including expensive software they rarely use but that would be valuable on those occasions.
B. The ability to try out software for as long as they like without incurring a large cost. In particular, competing products could be compared head-to-head.
C. No more “buyer’s remorse,” because users could migrate to a better new product without talking a financial “hit.”
D. Less need to research products before acquiring them, because there’d be no financial penalty as a result of making a poor initial choice.
E. Lower software costs, since vendors’ marketing expenses would be reduced because buyers wouldn’t have to be “sold” on the product before they started using it.
F. Increased competition from new software offerings, because new entrants would find it easier to get users to switch over. (There’d be nothing new to buy—the rental fee would just flow to a new vendor in the future.)
Of course, MS would benefit too, because:
A. It would collect the revenues on behalf of vendors, distribute it among them, and take a 20% (say) “postage-and-handling fee.” (Many a mickle makes a muckle.)
B. It would also counter the appeal of free or rental “cloud” software from Google, etc. Low-income consumers could make use of the Office suite without having to pony up a lot of cash up front.
In order to make software metering secure, it might be necessary for PCs to incorporate a special chip to discourage hacking this feature. (Or maybe that could be an optional feature for extra security.)
#20
RogerKnights
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 4
- Joined: 01-September 08
Posted 01 September 2008 - 10:26 PM
Allow Outlook & Entourage to “attach” heading-level document-portions, because Users sometimes like to send only a portion of a document, especially:
• A long document (to ease the burden on the recipient and his disk);
• A document of which only a portion is germane, or one with private portions;
• An “omnibus” document that is really a database whose headings contain individual documents. (This arrangement is useful for giving ready access to a multitude of documents on the same topic, while simultaneously reducing file clutter. The need for such a database is fairly widespread, because many people make hundreds or thousands of posts to a special-topic forum. It would help them if they could save them to a database that could be divided and subdivided into a hundred categories.)
This facility would also encourage a greater use of headings. This is a Good Thing because headings enable users to quickly navigate around a document and to automatically create a table of contents, among other things.
The benefits to MS would be:
A. Users of Word would be encouraged to employ its heading feature, which would make migration to competing word processors (which lack it) less likely.
B. Users of Word would be encouraged to use Outlook as their Mail client, or, on the Mac, to acquire the whole Office suite to use Entourage instead of Apple’s free Mail application.
C. User satisfaction would increase.
• A long document (to ease the burden on the recipient and his disk);
• A document of which only a portion is germane, or one with private portions;
• An “omnibus” document that is really a database whose headings contain individual documents. (This arrangement is useful for giving ready access to a multitude of documents on the same topic, while simultaneously reducing file clutter. The need for such a database is fairly widespread, because many people make hundreds or thousands of posts to a special-topic forum. It would help them if they could save them to a database that could be divided and subdivided into a hundred categories.)
This facility would also encourage a greater use of headings. This is a Good Thing because headings enable users to quickly navigate around a document and to automatically create a table of contents, among other things.
The benefits to MS would be:
A. Users of Word would be encouraged to employ its heading feature, which would make migration to competing word processors (which lack it) less likely.
B. Users of Word would be encouraged to use Outlook as their Mail client, or, on the Mac, to acquire the whole Office suite to use Entourage instead of Apple’s free Mail application.
C. User satisfaction would increase.
