Vista Devolves Further Still

[Tommo]

I am currently running the latest Beta of Vista and I would say it is very different to XP in many ways. Yes it is very late, but the you have to look at this from a remote perspective concerning Microsoft and Apple.

Microsoft has a vast market share and has a reputation as a stable patform for the vast majority of the worlds software packages and to continue to syuceed the most important thing, especially in the copporate market is backwards compatability with software. I have software that has given issues with XP that runs perfectly well on Vista.

Apple on the other hand has a much smaller market share and seems not to consider backwards compatability in software at all. Don't get me wrong I think 10.4 is a great system, but within the user base that I have to provide support to we have two VERY expensive software packages, specifially designed to run on Macs that now do not work. Result the software companies have now shifted their entire development to Windows.

As a stand alone home user or in avery small company this is not an issue, but for larger coropate users it is the main reason Macs are discouraged. This is made worse by Apples need to release a new version of the oiperating system every 12 to 18 months, something I can not see as anything other than a profit making exercise. Add this to the fact that new macs are forced to use the latest version of the OS by default and cannot boot to anything else this can be a real pain.

Vista maybe late and not have all the bells and whistles promised. but at least a PC user can be sure that all his recent third party software will work and he will not be lumbered with a glorified addon to his iPod/

Rant over :-)

[Rhisiart]

Originally Posted by Tommo

....this is made worse by Apples need to release a new version of the operating system every 12 to 18 months, something I can not see as anything other than a profit making exercise.

I'm not quite sure I agree with this in its entirety, but I do wonder what justifcation there was for purchasing Tiger as opposed to sticking with Panther.

Originally Posted by Mikuro

If I were a Windows user, I would be soooo annoyed. Three years ago, Longhorn (now Vista) sounded like a really good, maybe even revolutionary product. It promised to take a technological leap forward similar to Apple's leap from OS 9 to X. But over the years, it's just become more and more like XP.

Criticising Vista for not being vastly different to XP doesn't cut the mustard when you consider the few differences between Tiger and Panther.

I shall now take cover in a bunker.

[sinclair_tm]

i'm using vista beta. sure its buggy, like a beta, but it has potental. all i know is i see tons of mac guys ripping it apart, but not reconizing what has been acomplished. yes, i feel os x is a better os, but windows does something no other os does well, and that is run on almost all hardware combonations in the current market. and be useable and somewhat stable. also to the avrage joe smoe computer user, its all seamless. most of the time its not until us gamers and/or geeks start messing with things that windows has issues. windows does excalty what its desinged to do, and bill's bank account proves it true.

[Mikuro]

Originally Posted by symphonix

The Aero interface is an eyesore. All my PC-loving friends adore it for its eye-candy, but all it does is make things harder to read, more clutterred and awkward to use.

Well, people said the exact same thing about OS X. The more crotchety among us (i.e., me ) still do! (Well, okay, even I don't complain about OS X's look much anymore, but...translucent menus are still a dumb idea!)

Remember what 10.0 looked like? Panther and Tiger look sooooo much nicer than older versions. It took Aqua years to look good, and it took brushed metal even more years. So I don't think it's fair to expect Microsoft to nail it with version 1.

Originally Posted by rhisiart

Criticising Vista for not being vastly different to XP doesn't cut the mustard when you consider the few differences between Tiger and Panther.

But Tiger didn't take umpteen years of development, and it didn't fail to deliver on 90% of its promises. If MS hadn't been overselling Vista/Longhorn for so long, then nobody would be complaining. But at this point, it's a shadow of what it was supposed to be. Originally, it wasn't supposed to be a mere evolutionary advancement, like Tiger was to Panther. It was supposed to be more like what X was to 9.

I agree that Tiger probably wasn't worth the $129 to upgrade, though. It actually still seems sort of beta-ish, like a prerelease version of Leopard...that cost money. I still consider 10.3.8 the height of OS X. Tiger is now at .7, and it's still not even close to that level (mainly because Spotlight is ill-conceived and buggy as heck). But I digress.


Let me put it this way: as a lifelong Mac user, even I was interested in Longhorn once upon a time. That says a lot. But it's certainly not true anymore.

[Rhisiart]

Originally Posted by Mikuro

But Tiger didn't take umpteen years of development, and it didn't fail to deliver on 90% of its promises. If MS hadn't been overselling Vista/Longhorn for so long, then nobody would be complaining. But at this point, it's a shadow of what it was supposed to be. Originally, it wasn't supposed to be a mere evolutionary advancement, like Tiger was to Panther. It was supposed to be more like what X was to 9.I

I take your point. In fact it's very important for MS to come up with a something new and solid, as many Mac users frequently have to work with Windows in the work place (perhaps am I just getting older and more grumpier, but as every day passes I more and more detest XP).

[powermac]

[quote=Tommo]I am currently running the latest Beta of Vista and I would say it is very different to XP in many ways.

Great, how is it greatly different than XP, excluding the eye-candy features?

I am not saying Vista is not better, than XP. Nor is this a trash against MS. As a computer geek, I am curious as to how Vista is a significant, or has the potential to be a significant better OS than XP?

I don't think anyone is expecting MS to nail it down on version 1. It is clear they made a marketing mistake by saying it was going to have all these features, and now it does not. I don't even bad mouth them on that. Clearly MS has seen better days, as they appear to be having trouble releasing products as promised.

I guess what people are complaining about is the length of time it has taken MS to get a final version of Vista out. Since, they have scaled back the features they anticipated, why is it taking so long ?

[markceltic]

Microsoft presents Vista on a Mac haha http://www.uneasysilence.com/archive/2006/06/6883/

[Qion]

Originally Posted by markceltic

Microsoft presents Vista on a Mac haha http://www.uneasysilence.com/archive/2006/06/6883/

Well logically it makes sense to me. Once you stray from the irony of it, it would make sense demonstrating Windows on a piece of hardware that is stable and fast.

However, aren't they worried that increased Macintosh marketing will lose them Windows sales once people actually use OS X?