[hayesk]

Picture this scenario: you sometimes work from home, and want to connect to your workplace and view files. To get the network connectivity that is only in Business and Ultimate editions, and the swishy graphics you may want at home that are only in the Home Premium and Ultimate editions you have to shell out for the Ultimate edition which is not cheap.
So tell me again why people think Macs are more expensive?

[stevedave]

From the return of Steve Jobs to the release of OS X 10.0 took 4 years. That's pretty impressive considering that they were building an entirely brand new operating system. And developing a way to run Classic applications in OS X. And developing OS 9 all at the same time.
It took MS longer then that just to update XP and come out with Vista.
Considering MS is MASSIVELY bigger than Apple, I think this is pretty telling.

[horvatic]

Lower selling price? You call $400 a lower selling price Mr. Baldy?
Try $129 for a real operating system OSX Leopard coming soon.

[jmincey]

"Seriously we've even diabled GUI functions in XP to get better performance and from what I hear it's worse in Vista."
If you have disabled GUI libraries and APIs in XP "to get better performance," you must be using grossly antiquated hardware -- either that, or your organization is involved in a highly specialized scientific application and you are using clustering.
Life is short. Get new hardware!

[leicaman]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

What a joke. A company that makes that kind of money can't put together a stellar OS in six years? What a pathetic joke. But they are all billionaires, so good for them.

---

Careful; someone might point how much time Apple spent trying to develop a next generation OS before giving up and buying NeXT - and the time they spent pounding THAT into shape.

---

The problem with your argument, though, is that it was the old guard at Apple who screwed up. Apple was in fact taken over by NeXT and became a new company under the returned Steve Jobs. And they "hammered out" OS X in a remarkably short time considering the issues at hand.
The difference being, the old guard are still at Microsoft, and there's no "savior" on the horizon to save them from themselves. Now, in 20 years, when Bill Gates comes back to save Microsoft, what will happen? /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[leicaman]

You're buying Vista for your gaming PC?
BIG MISTAKE! /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

[pairof9s]

Quote:

---

Careful; someone might point how much time Apple spent trying to develop a next generation OS before giving up and buying NeXT - and the time they spent pounding THAT into shape.

---

Point taken, but then again, Apple didn't stop development of OS 9 while it worked in parallel development on OS X. The crap that Windows users have waited 5+ years for is a much greater disappointment because it's all they've had to look forward to.
Listen, when an overt blowhard like Ballmer spins as low as he did in this forecast, you know Vista must be sucking for wind pretty bad. That monkey dancer will tell you Microsoft invented air, so this must be some serious concern in Redmond.
I guess that's why he thinks the iPhone is too expensive...he can't afford it these days!
/

[VeggieBeefcake]

As a Mac AND PC user, I would not hesitate to call Windows Vista an utter fiasco. I, for one, have been perfectly satisfied with Windows XP for years, and I've yet to find one single compelling feature in Windows Vista which warrants an update (I am hesitant to call it an upgrade). Having used Vista since the original Public Beta, it was painfully clear that Microsoft failed to address the most pressing Windows flaws, including its vulnerability to spyware and viruses. MS's solution seems to be to nag the user about very single task until the user is compelled to disable the so-called protection of the "User Access Control." Much like their anti-piracy strategy, MS's tactics rely solely on pestering the legitimate customer who is performing various (which is to say, just about each and every one) legitimate tasks. Nothing about the core structure of the OS Seems to have changed. Like the (arguably) "pretty" interface, the inroads made in the area of security are only on the surface. MS has succeeded, however, in altering code just enough that a good amount of software which runs just fine under XP will not run properly under Vista. I suppose, however, that this is to be expected, but one should hope that the changes to the code would result in some worthwhile improvements.
This is, of course, to mention nothing of awkward (what some would call "broken") file/folder navigation, the useless side bar, poor performance in gaming, and so on. Windows Vista is the exact kind of product one should expect from a company whose success has relied on automatic sales from OEM PCs. MS has not competed on a fair market for years, and so they have no sense of what it means to innovate.

[OM_user]

Quote:

---

Careful; someone might point how much time Apple spent trying to develop a next generation OS before giving up and buying NeXT - and the time they spent pounding THAT into shape.

---

While it's true it took Apple some time to come out with their next gen OS, let's keep in mind that Apple, at the time certainly, had no where NEAR the amount of cash to spend on this project that MS had for Vista. Apple had been hurting for a while when they worked on Copland and other projects, so we can forgive them if they couldn't throw every available resource at it.
And in the end, they still did it in less time than MS did with Longhorn/Vista and with arguably better results.

[tallscot]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

What a joke. A company that makes that kind of money can't put together a stellar OS in six years? What a pathetic joke. But they are all billionaires, so good for them.

---

Careful; someone might point how much time Apple spent trying to develop a next generation OS before giving up and buying NeXT - and the time they spent pounding THAT into shape.

---

Vista uses an existing Windows kernel and APIs, so your comparison is seriously flawed.
How long is it going to take before Longhorn is pounded into shape? Will you wait for SP1 or SP2? It's been six years now. OS X 10.0 shipped in 2001. Tiger shipped in 2005.
After you realize this, look at how much money each spends on R&D. Amazing.
Also, please don't imply that Apple just bought a next generation OS. OS X isn't NextStep. It's not the same kernel, not the same APIs. It's not the same display system either.

[Nobody]

Do you imagine NOBODY would buy the crappy Vista?
And M$ going out of business?
A gigant leap for humankind in general and computing in particular!
M$, please, make something really innovative or stop copying!

[Grapho]

Copland was failed attempt to keep compatible with legacy software. It promised to have all the bells and whistles of OS X but within the known realm of OS 9 Classic. They failed even thou much of their efforts did make it in to OS 9. But you will not argue today that purchasing NeXT was a brilliant move that has paid off well. Apple was not only able to transition successfully two times to a different processor architectures but also to a deferent OS. MS is still trying to keep compatibility with legacy code and this is proving to be their downfall. So what is better, to make a mistake and corrected it or simply not realize that you are still making a mistake and not correcting it.
What prove to me that Vista is a dog is reading a review by probably the biggest MS fan ever, and even him coming to the realization that it's really not all that great. Paul Thurrott wrote this: "While it includes modern OS features, such as a new hardware-based graphical user interface (GUI), Vista will also feel like familiar territory, for the most part, to anyone that's already familiar with Windows XP. And Mac advocates can claim, truthfully, that many of Vista's best features appeared first on Mac OS X, sometimes years ago.
More problematic, over the past five years, many of Windows Vista's best features have been jettisoned, and it's unclear whether they'll ever appear in future Windows versions. Other features, like Internet Explorer (IE) 7, the Avalon and WinFX programming interfaces, the RSS platform, and more have been back-ported to Windows XP and Windows Server 2003, watering down the uniqueness of the Vista platform."

[warlock7]

PIRACY?!?! This is supposed to be the "most secure OS" ever! It's not secure from pirates!?!?! /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

[warlock7]

Quote:

---

He'd have been better off trying to "balme®" it on lack of drivers from third parties.

---

Now, that's the best new pun/term I've seen/heard in quite some time. Probably a typo, but it would be very funny if it catches on... /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif