Time mag looks at VISTA

Posted by: DLC

Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/27/07 07:27 PM

nice article:<br> on VISTA <br><br>I like these lines: [color:blue]<br>"1. Vista looks pretty. The edges of the windows are now transparent, like little glass microscope slides. Vista blatantly following the trend set by Apple "<br><br>"They've even, finally, come up with a decent way to make laptops sleep and wake up again, which XP was never very good at."<br><br>"One, there's a lot of functionality built into Vista look at the photo editor, which is integrated with the operating system and which works like a stripped-down version of the already-stripped-down Photoshop Elements. Isn't that the kind of anti-competitive integration that got Microsoft into anti-trust court last time around? </font color=blue><br><br>"Good job, Gatesy !!" <br>Lie, cheat, and steal !!<br><br>David (OFI)
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/27/07 08:55 PM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Basic ($199, which is about what OS X costs)<p><hr></blockquote><p><br>On some planet where 70 bucks out of 200 (35%) is not significant.<br><br>
Posted by: DLC

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/28/07 06:11 AM

agreed.... $129 &#8800; $199....<br><br>must be some New math calculated on a Windows PC <br><br>remember 10-12 years ago when there was a flaw in an intel chip and if you did this math problem it came out all FUMAR... something like 2 squared =3.... I forget the details, but I remember the news.<br><br>well now its $129 = $199 !! <br><br>in addition all I've read say go for at least Home Premium ($239) ... the Basic is missing many parts including the 3D-like Desktop they stole from Apple. <br>so it's really maybe >$100 difference unless Apple raises it's prices (and they could)<br><br>David (OFI)
Posted by: SacredBovine

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/29/07 12:42 AM

Since you're preaching to the choir, I suppose I should save my breath but ignorance and denial are two different conditions so I guess I should find out which you're offering.<br><br>A simple comparison shows that if you bought each version of OS X since its release, as most of us here have done I think, then you have paid for 10, 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, and 10.4 - all at $129 each.<br><br>5 x $129 = $645. If you buy Leopard, you'll be adding another $129 which will take you to $774.<br><br>If you bought Windows XP and you buy Vista, over a similar timeframe, then you paid ~$500. SP1 and SP2 were free in XP as they will no doubt be in Vista.<br><br>So bagging MS for its pricing policies is at best a fallacy. But it comes across mostly as a desperate attempt to denigrate an opposition OS. Why? Because we're afraid that MS actually has something half-decent which actually gives OS X a run for its money, maybe?<br><br>Whatever the truth is, it sure sounds that way.<br><br>Getting back to price for a moment, most of us would be happy to acknowledge that we're comfortable with paying a premium for our platform of choice, but it doesn't alter the fact that MS's pricing policy is nowhere close to being the rort that we as a community claim it is.<br><br>And please, those who get some fabulous discount from Apple for academic reasons or other deep discounts, the same reductions apply on the Windows side, so let's stick to retail sales for your flames.<br><br>(That last bit is not aimed at you, DLC) <br><br>
Posted by: OSXaddict

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/29/07 03:17 AM

10.1 was a free upgrade.<br><br>Here's another difference though. At $129, you got the FULL version of OSX, not an upgrade. So you could take that copy of any OS X release and install it on all of your macs, no matter what they were running (Tiger may have been different, you had to get a CD if you didn't have a DVD player and it may have required a little more in the hardware).<br><br>Plus, spread out over the years, it makes spending $516 a lot easier than all at once. <br><br>If you bought XP Home ($189) plus Vista Home Full ($226), that's $415 right there. But if you want everything in Vista that you would get for OSX out of the box, that's another $152 for a total of $567.<br><br>XP SP1 & 2 had to be free to fix all of those bugs in the XP release. That's equal to 10.x.x releases that we get.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Why? Because we're afraid that MS actually has something half-decent which actually gives OS X a run for its money, maybe?<p><hr></blockquote><p><br>Afraid? nah..not me. I just feel sorry for those who get this heaping POS from MS. They could give away Vista for free and I still wouldn't be afraid or even tempted to try it out.<br><br>
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/29/07 05:18 AM

You're so right!<br><br>M$ DOES give the Faithful "More BANG for Their BUCKS"<br><br>...esp, when one considers how many more uses WinDOZE users get out of their Purchase.<br>(considering how many times they get to re-install the entire program to keep it running) <br><br>
Posted by: DLC

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/29/07 10:31 AM

{not directed at you personally}<br><br>In addition to OS X's comment about 10.1, also consider how many Windows versions have been out since OS X debuted?<br>Win2000, Win XP and now Vista...., but this has to be at least the 3rd new OS from MS since 2000... so 3 X $200+.<br><br>Furthermore, I didn;'t upgrade every time, I skipped one version and got Panther on a new machine, so IF /When I buy Leopard, it'll be my 3rd ! ...<br><br>My whole point about price is that few would opt for the Home basic, and that I think Apple's pricing is better structured.... they don't have 12 different versions.<br><br>I'll also say that at least with one service pack the Windows users despirately needed those fixes... sure Apple has updates/ fixes, but nothing has been major for me.<br><br>However, I don't care what MS comes out with, actually Office 2007 sounds more intriguing than VISTA. AND I welcome them if they do good. WHY? it keeps Apple competative and sharp... drives Apple's innovation and we all benefit. So come on M$, show us what ya got ?<br><br>David (OFI)
Posted by: SacredBovine

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/29/07 11:19 AM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>10.1 was a free upgrade.<p><hr></blockquote><p>OK. Deduct the $129 from the total, you're still admitting OS X was more expensive. But as I pointed out, perceived value is something else. My point that Windows is price competitive still stands.<br><br>Spreading the payments is somewhat moot when you're comparing it to the cost of the hardware, but I'll concede that there are some out there who can drop 3 grand on a computer but can't afford to pay $226 for an OS upgrade.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>At $129, you got the FULL version of OSX, not an upgrade.<p><hr></blockquote><p>That's very much a matter of opinion, but since you bring it up, Vista is very much a "FULL" version, as was XP compared to 98.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>XP SP1 & 2 had to be free to fix all of those bugs in the XP release.<p><hr></blockquote><p>No, they could have done what Apple does and charge people for the bug fixes while dropping in the occasional new feature or upgrade. If you think that you're getting enough new stuff each OS X point revision, then I'm happy for you.<br><br>I'm not addressing this at you personally, but the amount of anti-Microsoft rhetoric on the Mac sites is deafening. That shows that we're more concerned with Vista as a threat of some sort to OS X than we ever were about XP.<br><br>I should say that I will be buying this "heaping POS" from MS to install on the PCs that can handle it, and on my Intel iMac when I get it. Until then the PPC Macs will of course remain Windows free.<br><br>
Posted by: OSXaddict

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/29/07 11:44 AM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>That's very much a matter of opinion, but since you bring it up, Vista is very much a "FULL" version, as was XP compared to 98.<p><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>I guess you missed this part in my post: <br><br>So you could take that copy of any OS X release and install it on all of your macs, no matter what they were running (Tiger may have been different, you had to get a CD if you didn't have a DVD player and it may have required a little more in the hardware).<br><br>and this one:<br>If you bought XP Home ($189) plus Vista Home Full ($226), that's $415 right there. But if you want everything in Vista that you would get for OSX out of the box, that's another $152 for a total of $567.<br><br>The reason I posted those is because XP home version and Vista home versions are watered down versions of XP Pro and Vista Ultimate. OSX only comes in 2 flavors: OSX client and Server.<br><br><br>$567 for 2 flaky OS's is not worth $645 (that's including 10.5) for a rock solid OS. Oh, and XP Pro? that's another $60 over the cost of XP Home. So we are up to $627 for 2 Windows OS's. $17 isn't that big of a difference.<br><br>At work, we just upgraded to XP Pro because they didn't want to risk the database of what we have. So 3 years after the release of XP Pro, we finally get it. I guess we'll get Vista in 2010 or 2011.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>No, they could have done what Apple does and charge people for the bug fixes while dropping in the occasional new feature or upgrade. If you think that you're getting enough new stuff each OS X point revision, then I'm happy for you.<p><hr></blockquote><p><br>What exactly was upgraded in SP1 and 2? Was there any additional function placed in XP with those releases? (I"m serious, I don't know)<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>but the amount of anti-Microsoft rhetoric on the Mac sites is deafening. That shows that we're more concerned with Vista as a threat of some sort to OS X than we ever were about XP.<p><hr></blockquote><p><br>Hehe..no, I see it more as "can you believe people buy this zune??" <br><br>
Posted by: DLC

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/29/07 11:50 AM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p> (considering how many times they get to re-install the entire program to keep it running)<p><hr></blockquote><p>ha, ha~ I missed that earlier .... now that's damm negative gal !<br><br>I forgot how many times some people have to "Wipe and Re-Install" their OS on their HD.<br> If you consider the cost / installation- it's DIRT cheap !! <br><br><br>IF I get an Intel Mac and DO choose to put Windows on it' I'm getting a copy of Windows XP... maybe VISTA in 2 - 3 years from now after most of the bugs are worked out.<br>Does anyone have the phone number for ORKIN ? <br><br>Good Luck to you Sacred !<br><br><br>David (OFI)
Posted by: DLC

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/29/07 12:03 PM

OS Xer,<br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>At work, we just upgraded to XP Pro because they didn't want to risk the database of what we have. So 3 years after the release of XP Pro, we finally get it. I guess we'll get Vista in 2010 or 2011.<p><hr></blockquote><p>yeah at CDC we're just now getting Win XP which came out in 2001... I don't know if it's the XP Pro or not...<br>Don't you just love the Fisher-Price decor? <br><br>makes me feel so much younger...<br><br>they waited all this time becasue of all the headaches they went through with Win 2000 5 years ago. What kills me is you speak of OS X and they poo-poo it, but look what they put themselves through to support a Windows ONLY LAN. <br><br>And the other headache we have here is when you call they write a ticket (for Every little thing- every problem is a separate ticket even if they're related)... the techs are pressured to resolve issues quickly, but they focus so much on "closing the ticket", they usually do NOT fix the problem the first time or do a piss poor job doing it- it "breaks" again. The "call back:" rate must be huge.<br><br>Your govt $ at work folks. ... wasteful.<br><br>David (OFI)
Posted by: OSXaddict

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/29/07 12:41 PM

Well, actually my computer is still running Windows 2000! I think they ran out of licenses to put it on more machines.<br><br>
Posted by: Trog

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/29/07 02:00 PM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>the amount of anti-Microsoft rhetoric on the Mac sites is deafening. That shows that we're more concerned with Vista as a threat of some sort to OS X than we ever were about XP.<p><hr></blockquote><p>I certainly can't speak for all Mac users, but I suspect that statement is crap. The whole idea of Apple being a small, cuddly company is long, long gone. They are a multi-billion dollar corporation with tremendous market influence and a household name. I'm a huge fan, but I think I spend more time bitching about their few shady business practices than defending them now. I am not the least bit worried (or even interested) about what Vista might "do" to OSX. The mere idea that Apple, the corporation, would be significantly affected by MS putting out a (supposedly) solid update to their OS is just no longer a concern.<br> <br>No, I think the reason Apple fans enjoy pointing out the misgivings of Microsoft products is because they are such easy targets. Even if Vista does turn out to be great, MS has such a bad reputation for buggy, confusing bloatware. Look at this great little blurb from The Reg about just trying to figure out what to install*. And that isn't something unique to Vista, or even Windows in general, its par for the course with MS.<br><br><br>* Microsoft's Vista Update advisor software lists Microsoft Messenger as a potential third party conflict with Vista. You see? That stuff is priceless.
Posted by: DLC

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/29/07 03:52 PM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p> Microsoft's Vista Update advisor software lists Microsoft Messenger as a potential third party conflict with Vista. You see? That stuff is priceless. <p><hr></blockquote><p>THAT begs the question is the Zune compatible with VISTA ??<br><br>VISTA- Very Inadequate System To Adopt. ?? mmmm<br><br><br><br><br>David (OFI)
Posted by: SacredBovine

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/29/07 08:36 PM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>I guess you missed this part in my post:<br>So you could take that copy of any OS X release and install it on all of your macs, no matter what they were running (Tiger may have been different, you had to get a CD if you didn't have a DVD player and it may have required a little more in the hardware).<p><hr></blockquote><p>Yes, I misread that. With Windows you need to buy a copy for each computer and those with more than one PC will pay more than a Mac user with multiple Macs. Of course, those with a single computer will see no difference. And again, that cost only applies to the move from XP to Vista, a single hit. But you're right, it's still a cost.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>But if you want everything in Vista that you would get for OSX out of the box, that's another $152 for a total of $567.<p><hr></blockquote><p>It would appear that MS allows the customer to decide whether or not they need the bells and whistles and if not, to pay a lower price. That seems to be a better model than Apple's forcing you to pay for it whether you need the bells and whistles or not. But I suspect you'll disagree and you're entitled to your opinion.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>OSX only comes in 2 flavors: OSX client and Server.<p><hr></blockquote><p>Which you believe is an advantage, but others may see that as inflexible.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>$567 for 2 flaky OS's is not worth $645<p><hr></blockquote><p>Up until this point, I think you presented your arguments well, but the bit I bolded is simply rhetoric. I have seen no flakiness in XP and as Vista has yet to be used by either of us, we'll have to see if it's anything but stable. So far the magazine reviews suggest it's at least as solid as Tiger. We'll have to wait before we can judge the "flakiness" issue in Vista, but XP certainly doesn't qualify in my experience.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>3 years after the release of XP Pro, we finally get it. I guess we'll get Vista in 2010 or 2011.<p><hr></blockquote><p>Probably prudent. We're only now implementing Tiger on the studio Macs at work so I'd applaud a certain caution before rolling out any new OS variant in mission critical machines. Home computers are another story though.<br><br>But getting back to my original point, Windows, as your own figures show, is price competitive with OS X.<br><br>
Posted by: Jim_

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/29/07 09:09 PM

Apple has their family pack for $199, good for 5 computers.<br><br>MS has buy one get two for $50 each. It will let buyers of Vista Ultimate ($399) get $50 copies of Home Premium for two other PCs. What a deal.<br><br>
Posted by: SacredBovine

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/29/07 09:27 PM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>I certainly can't speak for all Mac users, but I suspect that statement is crap.<p><hr></blockquote><p>And I suspect that it's not.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>No, I think the reason Apple fans enjoy pointing out the misgivings of Microsoft products is because they are such easy targets.<p><hr></blockquote><p>Which does not begin to explain why the MS bashing on the Apple boards has reached such a crescendo, since they have always been "such easy targets". That increase in noise has coincided with the nearness of Vista's release, and it's quite feasible that there's a concern that it's too darn close to Leopard for comfort in its features. You're welcome to poo-poo that conclusion but the observation is indisputable. If you doubt me, look for yourself.<br><br>Leopard will be the jewel in Apple's crown, so it had better be as fabulous as SJ claims it is.<br><br>
Posted by: Trog

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/29/07 09:59 PM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>there's a concern that it's too darn close to Leopard for comfort in its features. You're welcome to poo-poo that conclusion but the observation is indisputable.<p><hr></blockquote><p>Indisputable? What? Are you just messing with me now, bovine? <br><br>This thread is just inconceivable!<br><br>
Posted by: SacredBovine

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/29/07 10:16 PM

If you feel I've misled you, do as I suggested. Look around. Last time I looked at MacCentral's general discussion forum, for example, virtually all the threads in the last day were MS bashing. I doubt the bashing is unusual, but I'm certain that the amount is. Similar story elsewhere. <br><br>So yes. I don't believe you can dispute the elevated level of anti-MS noise. But you're welcome to try.<br><br>Hey, I wouldn't mess with you Trog. Are we not both Mac using MM denizens? <br><br>
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/29/07 10:43 PM

Why so much attention to MS at this point? For the same reason that when there's an election impending there's so much attention to political issues. The company is in the news. Their fearless leader appeared on the Daily Show tonight, for goodness sake! Assertions about the new OS, comparisons between it and other OSs, etc., etc. are everywhere, not just on the Macosphere. As for Mac users' obssession with MS--ever been to a PeeCee forum? Heck, since you mention MC, you don't even have to go to a PeeCee forum to observe their obssession with Macs. That's what Akula over at MC is all about.<br><br>
Posted by: polymerase

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/30/07 04:58 AM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Last time I looked at MacCentral's general discussion forum, for example, virtually all the threads in the last day were MS bashing.<p><hr></blockquote><p>A bit of an exaggeration. If you remove the discussions which exist just to get a rise out of Akula's predictable gobbling up of the "Vista sucks" bait there would be barely any venting at all about Vista.<br><br>Those threads should be labeled, "For entertainment purposes only." And they are that.<br><br>As for bashing of Vista. Vista deserves to be bashed and deserves to be called on the blatant copying from OS X. When Bill Gates says, "we innovated a lot! We have parental controls on web surfing for example!" he should have it pointed out that Mac OS X has had that feature for years. Pretty much what can be said about all of Vista's features.<br><br>I had a very smart person in my office yesterday. We were discussing all sorts of stuff and then he said he was thinking of buying a Mac for home but needed to run Windows for a certain program his company sells. In a moment I showed him the software his company makes running in Parallels. Worked fine.<br><br>Then I said, "but the biggest reason to switch to a Mac is no viruses. Not a one. No computer bugs out there at all to worry about. He was shocked. He did not know that Mac OS X had zero virus problems.<br><br>If this guy didn't know that one simple fact we need to poke a lot more fun at Windows software. The first virus that poops on the translucent glass will make me laugh. It will be a sad laugh but I will be laughing.<br><br><br><br><br><br>
Posted by: DLC

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/30/07 08:30 AM

I hope that was "tongue in cheek". I didn't see a winkie.<br><br><br>For anyone else:<br>That's 3 copies for $500 ! <br>and 2 of those are pared down versions.<br><br>In contrast, Apple gives you 5 FULL copies for $300 LESS.<br><br>Lastly VISTA is M$ best and latest and may equal OS X 10.4 !<br>We'll see. <br><br>....so $500 for "older (stolen) technology"... mmmm...<br>seems M$ gets the good deal , NOT the user.<br>but... it may be better than their last deal. <br><br>David (OFI)<br><br>PS. Will someone pass those VISTA adopters a jar of vaseline?
Posted by: Jim_

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 01/30/07 09:19 PM

Yeah, "what a deal" was sarcastic. Forgot to show my winkie. <br><br>
Posted by: SacredBovine

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 02/01/07 02:12 AM

Hi Yoyo52.<br><br>Thanks for the response. I agree that Vista's release has the world's attention right now, but that doesn't explain the negative obsession with MS that the Mac forums are demonstrating. For an OS that's supposed to be so inferior to OS X, it sure gets a lot of attention from our community. Methinks we doth protest too much.<br><br>Have I ever been to a PC forum? As a PC user, most certainly. Have I ever seen "their obssession with Macs"? Frankly, no. In my experience, Macs are rarely mentioned, because they are irrelevant to the sort of topics the PC users post about.<br><br>I do see anti-Mac on 'neutral' boards such as ZDnet etc, but I also see as much, or more anti-MS from the Mac fanboys. But from dedicated PC sites? Nope. You'll have to give an example.<br><br>I saw Akula getting what seems to be an endless torrent of flame in several threads, so I must say he has a thick hide. Given the hammering he was taking, I don't know why he bothers, but it takes all kinds I guess. <br><br>But one PC zealot in a Mac forum defending MS hardly balances the anti-MS hate-fest that seems to be a significant part of their daily fare.<br><br>It makes me ponder as to whether Bill Gates sexually abused some of the posters there when they were kids, judging by the hatred that's evident. Somebody called ichimg is a standout example. Man, what a weirdo.<br><br>However, getting back to the point, what's wrong with "Assertions about the new OS, comparisons between it and other OSs"? Seems to me that it's a healthy thing to compare products in the media. It's just strange to me that on the Mac forums we're so intent on bagging MS - insecurity is my guess. <br><br>But I accept that you choose to believe differently, and I respectfully disagree with your view.<br><br>Thanks for expressing it though. <br><br>
Posted by: SacredBovine

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 02/01/07 03:58 AM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>A bit of an exaggeration. If you remove the discussions which exist just to get a rise out of Akula's predictable gobbling up of the "Vista sucks" bait there would be barely any venting at all about Vista.<p><hr></blockquote><p>A bit of an exaggeration you say? On the day I mentioned, there were practically no new posts that weren't slagging off Microsoft in some way. I had the new threads set to "active in the last day" and it was a slag-fest aimed squarely at MS.<br>So if it was an exaggeration, it was a very slight exaggeration.<br><br>But without going through the tedium of revisiting the MacCentral forums and looking through each post by date, you'll never have proof either way. So I copied the MS-related threads that have been active in the last week and compare them to the total.*<br><br>That's 34 of a total of 68 threads in the last week. That comparison doesn't begin to take into account that those 34 threads were made up of significantly more posts than those that didn't negatively focus on Microsoft, so although half of MacCentral's threads were obsessing about MS, the actual percentage of posts was even higher.<br><br>Let me summarize:<br>The majority of traffic on MacCentral's general discussion forum over the past week has been about Microsoft in some way or other. You apparently believe that because they involve the poster Akula a good deal of the time, then in some way that proves that Mac users are not obsessed with MS at all. If you truly believe that, then I can only shrug and shake my head at the magnitude of your self deception.<br><br>But you know what? I think you're grasping at that explanation because you want it to be true, not because you really do believe it.<br><br>Here's a funny thing; I don't need to sip from the chalice of the Cult of Apple (which has succeeded the Cult of Mac for obvious reasons) in order to enjoy the platform and to appreciate its advantages. And there are many.<br><br>But the rhetoric that's hurled about as fact in our community is as misguided as anything I've heard quoted from the MS camp. Apple is just as guilty of hype as MS and I note with some sense of irony that we give SJ a major leave pass and a nudge and wink when he's doing it but we muster up a righteous outrage when the competition play the same game. <br><br>Can you spell "hypocrisy"? <br><br>But I've argued this point as far as I feel comfortable. My impression is that not toeing the platform line is damaging what little standing that I have here so I'll call it quits at this point. If any other comments are forthcoming, I'll naturally be interested in reading them, but I think I've made my argument as eloquently as I'm able. Anything further will be repetition.<br><br>Cheers.<br><br><br><br>*The following is a list of MS related threads at the MacCentral general discussion forums over the last week.<br><br>*cha-ching [wow inside] ichi.cMg 65 2 (2) 01/31/07 07:48 PM<br>*captain she cant take much more! ichi.cMg 119 7 (7) 01/31/07 09:29 PM<br>*Gates grilled by NPR. kagharaht 71 3 (3) 01/31/07 08:10 PM<br>*I love this quote Akula 451 54 (54) 02/01/07 03:04 AM<br>*SF Vista madness... ichi.cMg 151 6 (6) 01/31/07 07:18 PM<br>*Was this in the XP EULA? MikeS 157 10 (10) 01/31/07 05:45 PM<br>*German TV gets Vista Blue Screen!! eckhard 181 11 (11) 01/31/07 12:50 PM<br>*Three compelling reasons to switch kagharaht 111 7 (7) 01/31/07 03:37 PM<br>*So were there long lines for Vista? iBookmaster 126 8 (8) 01/31/07 07:38 PM<br>*The new 'Switcher' Campaign? Mike 79 3 (3) 01/30/07 08:55 PM<br>*CNN's Miles O'Brien on Vista this morning iBookmaster 153 6 (6) 01/30/07 01:22 PM<br>*Windows annoyances ... help? eckhard 58 2 (2) 01/30/07 04:29 PM<br>*So many "Wows" It's overwhelming kagharaht 137 5 (5) 01/30/07 02:46 PM<br>*Vista's pretty but... SteveS 256 16 (9) 01/31/07 02:52 PM<br>.apple larger then mS by 2010 ichi.cMg 28 0 01/29/07 09:44 PM<br>.Gates has Apple on his mind kagharaht 206 13 01/29/07 11:29 PM<br>.Microsoft patents SteveS 117 4 01/29/07 04:12 PM<br>*Tom's Vista review/benchmarks SgtBaxter 187 8 (1) 01/30/07 09:24 AM<br>.They think this is sleek? kagharaht 146 6 01/30/07 12:20 AM<br>.Go to another site after looking at this iBookmaster 107 4 01/29/07 12:23 PM<br>.Speaking of Vista... iBookmaster 342 27 01/29/07 05:27 PM<br>.I'm just not that excited about Leopard Alucard 567 56 01/29/07 11:44 AM<br>.Like I said, how many Vistas iBookmaster 182 14 01/28/07 02:57 PM<br>.akula the MS astroturfer answers the call! *DELETED* ichi.cMg 326 21 01/29/07 08:57 PM<br>.Time looks ta VISTA DLC 284 21 01/29/07 12:01 PM<br>..Nyet dev buying ADC membership... ichi.cMg 81 1 01/27/07 05:23 PM<br>.Akula ...now is your chance!!!! zweigand 176 3 01/26/07 01:58 PM<br>.Lawsuit embarassment SteveS 174 5 01/27/07 09:03 PM<br>.How many Vista choices can you count? iBookmaster 102 2 01/26/07 08:28 PM<br>.MS Photo Info Tool NucleusG4 92 2 01/26/07 02:04 PM<br>.Bad news for MS. baobaog3 134 4 01/26/07 10:44 AM<br>.I am BAD news for PCs... DLC 272 10 01/26/07 08:32 PM<br>.I'm back! Need more help than ever docholiday 366 19 01/25/07 12:48 PM<br>.Lol... more "Mac Tablet" news! droogie 200 11 01/25/07 01:52 PM<br><br><br>
Posted by: polymerase

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 02/01/07 04:38 AM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Can you spell "hypocrisy"? <p><hr></blockquote><p> I am a hypocrite? A hypocrite says one thing and does another. I think slagging Vista at a Macintosh web site is wholesome fun. It's what you are supposed to do when Microsoft comes out with a new operating system a few years late and a dollar short.<br><br>Complaining about the slagging isn't hypocrisy either. It's just weird.<br><br><br><br><br><br><br>
Posted by: SacredBovine

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 02/01/07 04:50 AM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>I am a hypocrite? <p><hr></blockquote><p>I don't know. Are you?<br><br>I was referring to the Mac community, as is evident in my post, not specifically aiming that at you. I think that accepting a certain standard of behavior from one entity while decrying that same behavior from another is indeed hypocrisy. <br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Complaining about the slagging isn't hypocrisy either. It's just weird.<p><hr></blockquote><p>But not as weird as self-delusion, I think. But if expressing a view that runs counter to the vox populi is "weird", then mea culpa. <br><br>
Posted by: OSXaddict

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 02/01/07 05:25 AM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>I think that accepting a certain standard of behavior from one entity while decrying that same behavior from another is indeed hypocrisy. <p><hr></blockquote><p><br>Oh please....MS claims that this new OS is the most secure. Didn't they say that about XP? <br><br>At least what Apple comes out with is definately more secure and easier to use than anything out by MS so far. <br><br>I can't recall the last time Apple presented an update to OSX that it was something windows already had. (I'm not saying it didn't...but I don't know. I am sure someone will point out that MS had something before Apple did.) Look at what Vista is coming out with and tell me that OSX doesn't already have it, or is coming out with in 10.5<br><br>The reason you see all this MS bashing is because it's laughable that people actually pay for something from MS. Look at the Zune. What a crock of zune that thing is. MS can't seem to come up with anything on their own. Examples: XBox, Zune, and the majority of what Vista has.<br><br>You want to see head to head OS vs OS forum? Try The Battlefront at ARS and their mac achaia is pretty on topic too. <br><br>And as far as Akula, man that guy can't hold up his own it seems.<br><br>
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 02/01/07 07:28 AM

Well, the same problem obtains in any situation where there is a dominant thing, whether that be an OS or a racial group. The first time I went to NY City I went with a black friend from HS, and we stayed with his uncle in Harlem. I did the whole Harlem thing, and the second afternoon we went to the Apollo theater, which at the time was one of those wonderful full-day entertainment venues, beginning with a cartoon, followed by a B movie and then an A movie, going on to a series of comics, and ending with a musical show (that night it was Peaches and Herb, if you remember them). Anyway, the comedy routines were to me a revelation: almost all the jokes were "white jokes" (which at first made me very self-conscious). So why were the comedians obssessing, to use your term, with whites? Isn't the answer self-evident? And isn't the same answer self-evident in connection to an OS that asserts it dominates 95% of computers?<br><br>
Posted by: Trog

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 02/01/07 08:29 AM

You know, if this thread gets old you could always go visit some of the major league baseball teams' forums and talk about how unfair the Yankee bashing is. I hear the Red Sox fans are especially unfair to the poor pinstripes. Just like MS, the Yanks are really in need of some of your TLC too! <br><br>
Posted by: lanovami

Re: Time mag looks at VISTA - 02/01/07 01:40 PM

As much as I enjoy bashing MS, whose software I use everyday at work, and as much as I enjoy extolling Apple products, I would never want Apple to do "too" well, anyway. If Apple ever got above a 10 percent user base, what fun would that be? It's always fun finding another Mac user out there when you weren't expecting one, and talking about them. (Except for the about the first year of it's production, how much fun is it running across another iPod user?) For me, it's like finding another left-hander. I like being left-handed, but I wouldn't want our numbers too increase too much. I want Microsoft to continue putting out stuff that I will characterize negatively (not that it is so hard) and I want to continue to wonder why more people don't jump over to my side. And I suspect a lot of Mac users feel the same.<br><br>We are what we repeatedly do. -Aristotle
Posted by: drjohn

A Mac user switches to Vista - 02/01/07 01:58 PM

A Mac user switches to Vista<br><br>Be sure to see the end of the article. <br><br>Old farts, the hidden caulk of civilization. Jim Atkinson<br>
Posted by: OSXaddict

Re: A Mac user switches to Vista - 02/01/07 03:36 PM

Ha! I like the ending! Good article.<br><br>
Posted by: Trog

Re: A Mac user switches to Vista - 02/01/07 05:04 PM

Very good! <br><br>I thought the ending was going to say that the author was really a MS employee, but they've already played that trick a few times.<br><br>
Posted by: Leslie

Re: A Mac user switches to Vista - 02/02/07 08:33 AM

Great article. I like winning!<br><br>
Posted by: DLC

Re: A Mac user switches to Vista - 02/02/07 08:48 AM

Good article DrJohn...<br><br>I was really disappointed though....<br><br>I was really hoping that the author would develop hives when he touched a PC and as he used VISTA he'd develop a severe acute immune reaction like anaphalaxis and DIE !<br> <br><br><br>oh well ! <br><br>David (OFI)
Posted by: lanovami

Re: A Mac user switches to Vista - 02/04/07 01:55 PM

He should have NOT told readers to read to the end first, and then wrote the same article to see how many pieces of hate mail he would get, and then he could gently berate them for their short attention spans and knee jerk reactions.<br><br>We are what we repeatedly do. -Aristotle
Posted by: Mike

Uh...Slight Correction! - 02/05/07 03:35 AM

OS X versions 10.1 - 10.3 were freely distributed by Apple to educators and academic institutions a few months after they were introduced to the general public.<br>All ya had to do is ask for it!<br><br><br>[color:blue][/b]Been there. Done that.</font color=blue>[/b]
Posted by: Mike

The 'Millenium' Edition? - 02/05/07 03:37 AM

You forgot 'Windows ME'...the most crash-prone of them all! <br><br>[color:blue][/b]Been there. Done that.</font color=blue>[/b]
Posted by: DLC

Re: The 'Millenium' Edition? - 02/05/07 03:44 AM

Well I find it MOST interesting that a CNET article said Both Home editions should have been FREE upgrades... ie they're really watered down in areas like security etc.<br><br>Sounds like M$ is charging $200 for a pretty new face.<br>(mainly fluff and little meat)<br><br>That can't be good.<br><br>David (OFI)