# Screenshots of longhorn



## vanguard (Oct 21, 2002)

Ok, I know this is "mac" os news and rumours but a lot of people around here still have an interest in what msft is doing.

Here are some pictures.

http://www.tech-critic.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=358&mode=&order=0&thold=0

My opinion, they seem fine.  I kind of like OSX better and I have a preference for unix.  So I'll probably stick with apple.  (Now if only their notebooks came with three mouse buttons.)

Vanguard

PS  It's important to note that the UI will probably change before anything is released.  Still, this is what it looks like now.


----------



## Rhino_G3 (Oct 21, 2002)

It does seem to be fairly interesting.  One thing that I like is the taskbar with the label "Desktop *1*"

More than one desktop?


----------



## Urbansory (Oct 21, 2002)

umm, lol, did anyone else notice the girl in the bluejeasn.jpg??? MSFT entering a new business?


----------



## Ricky (Oct 21, 2002)

> _Seen in the XP login screen_
> *Windows XP Professional
> Codename:  Longhorn*





> _Seen on the Mac OS X 10.2 box_
> *Mac OS X
> Version 10.2 Jaguar*


Apple starts another trend of including codenames in the final releases.


----------



## kendall (Oct 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Ricky _
> *Apple starts another trend of including codenames in the final releases. *



Uhm, yeah.  Silly Microsoft copying Apple again.  

That explains why Windows 95 was Chicago, 98 was Cairo, 2000 was Memphis and XP was Whistler.

All Microsoft OSs have codenames.  Blackcomb is after Longhorn.  Neither make much sense so I doubt they'll be debuting on the final product.

One thing is certain though.  Longhorn is going to give OS X a run for it's money and Blackcomb is going to crush it.

I'm not saying that based on screenshots either.  If you read about the technology going into both OSs, they are rather quite amazing.


----------



## ManicDevlin (Oct 21, 2002)

Itanium, Blackcomb has been scrapped, where have you been living these past year?

Longhorn will be out by the end of 2004. So long way to go, so these screenshots shouldn't even be considered worthy. But they are real shots.


----------



## kendall (Oct 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by ManicDevlin _
> *Itanium, Blackcomb has been scrapped, where have you been living these past year?
> 
> Longhorn will be out by the end of 2004. So long way to go, so these screenshots shouldn't even be considered worthy. But they are real shots. *



Who said Blackcomb is scrapped?  Longhorn was originally intended to be an upgrade to XP.  

Now it has taken on a life of it's own and will probably be an intermediate release between XP and Blackcomb, like  ME was to 98 and 2000.

Microsoft has pushed the release date back and focused on developing it more because of the flack it's getting from the Department of Justic.  I think they're being very careful to comply with the DoJ wishes, or at least appear is if they are.

As for the screenshots, I don't think they're real.  Similar pictures were presented months ago with that funky taskbar and were later discovered to be fake.


----------



## ManicDevlin (Oct 21, 2002)

Dood, wake up, BLACKCOMB HAS BEEN SCRAPPED.

Longhorn will be the next OS, and THERE WILL NOT BE AN XP SECOND EDITION.

And the shots are real, there are even VIDEOS of this build, just to prove newbies like you it's real.

And the people who leaked this build ARE MS employees, they will release the leak to the public, but not now, cause it's frankly too dangerous. That is why they made a mistake posting these pictures. I think they did it because there was alot of fake screenshots going around, and they wanted to shut up those sites which were promoting fake shots to get site popularity.


----------



## kendall (Oct 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by ManicDevlin _
> *Dood, wake up, BLACKCOMB HAS BEEN SCRAPPED.
> 
> *



Where does it say Blackcomb has been scrapped?  Also, why would a MS employee risk their job with screenshots that show the build #, making it easy to trace back to them?


----------



## ManicDevlin (Oct 21, 2002)

Anywhere that is a reputable windows news site. And this story might be archived by now. I guess you missed it.

It's not that easy to track, but if they release the build, they can, screenshots is not as dangerous as leaking a build. They will release this build when a new one comes out i guess.


----------



## kendall (Oct 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by ManicDevlin _
> *Anywhere that is a reputable windows news site. And this story might be archived by now. I guess you missed it. *



Show me a site where it says Blackcomb is scrapped.


----------



## ManicDevlin (Oct 21, 2002)

Find it yourself, I ain't here to prove you anything. Do you think I give a damn, if you are not convinced?


----------



## boi (Oct 21, 2002)

you obviously do, man, otherwise you wouldn't be preaching about it.


----------



## LordOphidian (Oct 21, 2002)

Umm.. last I heard blackcomb wasn't scrapped... just pushed back.  Blackcomb was the OS that they were going to put the DB based file system in wasn't it?  If so that OS is still in development as far as I know.

But on to more important things... namely getting a enlarged copy of that bluejeans.jpg file...


----------



## Rhino_G3 (Oct 21, 2002)

For what it's worth (from a mac user)  When I was looking for extra screen shots earlier today I saw some source that Blackcomb was scrapped... I'll look again to see if I can find it.


----------



## kendall (Oct 21, 2002)

Anyway.  I'm not too impressed with the screenshots but considering it's still in early development, a lot is sure to change.

Blackcomb lives!  If it had been scrapped, I would have felt a great disturbance in the force.

I wish Longhorn looked more professional and less like a cartoon.

I tried out Windows.NET RC2 and it was McCrappy.  I'm running OpenStep 4.2 right now since it's the closest I can get to OS X on a PC. 

Damn it Apple, release my 1GHz iBook already!

The similarities between OpenStep and OS Xare amazing.  Services actually serve a purpose in the OS and NetInfo is the devil.

The spinning wheel of death doesn't actually spin forever and when you enter the wrong information at the login prompt, it shakes just like in OS X!

I'm amused by the littlest thing obviously. 

If OmniWeb was a little more stable, things wouldn't be half bad.

I don't know why people let this platform die yet strive to keep BeOS alive.  Oh well.  Peace-out!


----------



## Sogni (Oct 22, 2002)

> _Originally posted by ManicDevlin _
> *Find it yourself, I ain't here to prove you anything. Do you think I give a damn, if you are not convinced? *



Um, YEAH - you do give a damn, so much so that you INSIST on post this universe-changing important information, even when you are banned - create another account to continue...

I don't know if you've noticed, but we - even the ones that DO use and have PCs, don't really GIVE A DAMN about information that comes from you, because those of us who do - already have this information hours/days/weeks before you hear about it!


----------



## fryke (Oct 22, 2002)

If you search The Register - http://www.theregister.co.uk - you'll find that Longhorn was planned to be an update to XP, that Blackcomb should have had the filesystem-is-a-database feature and that this feature has become its own project that might or might not make it into Longhorn. Whether Blackcomb is scrapped or not doesn't really matter: It's either pushed back or scrapped (or doesn't make sense anymore now that Longhorn is going to be a full OS upgrade and the new filesystem will be implemented at some yet unknown point).

About 'the-os-after-longhorn-will-crush-os-x': Do you really think Apple has no plans for Panther AND what should come after it?`

But as the feature set of Panther isn't known as of yet, it's clear that we just can't make statements like that.


----------



## vanguard (Oct 22, 2002)

Can anybody explain what the benefits to msft's "filesytem is a database" system will be?  It seems like most of the advantages (like being easily searchable) can be achieved through indexing without the performance hit.

Anybody want to give an explanation a try?


----------



## kendall (Oct 22, 2002)

> _Originally posted by fryke _
> *
> 
> About 'the-os-after-longhorn-will-crush-os-x': Do you really think Apple has no plans for Panther AND what should come after it?`
> ...



What did Jaguar introduce?  Nothing much.  150 fixes to a 2 year old OS.  iChat and an Address book.  Cleaned up code and QuartzExtreme.  It's where 10.0 should have been.  What will Panther introduce?  Probably a Journaling FS.  Great, OS X definitely needs one.  Shutdown improperly and you'll see why.  MS has had a Journaling FS with NTFS for quite sometime now.  Linux also has serveral different Journaling FS without a performance hit.  What's the big deal?  

The big deal is basing an OS on UNIX is that UNIX is 30 years old and really hasn't changed that much since then.  Yes, Apple can slap on a pretty GUI and produce iApps until the cows come home but the UNIX core is going to hinder them in the future.  It's going to take Apple a lot longer to develop new technologies for OS X thanks to it's UNIX core.  

Just look at their Journaling FS.  10-15% performance hit, rediculous!  OS X is a great OS but they're just going to run into walls in the future because of the way they've implemented certain things today.  Running it ontop of a HFS+ file system was probably their first mistake.  A CISC-optimized Mach-O ABI probably doesn't help as well.  They can't change their UNIX core now without breaking compatibility so they "patch" the OS and take a performance hit.  This will be a continuing trend for OS X in the future.  

As for Longhorn and Blackcomb.  I guess I feel these OSs have more potential to grow.  They will be implementing new technologies that have been years in the making.  Apple on the other hand is still trying to smooth out the wrinkles.  

I think Apple is going to spend more time in the future patching their problems with OS X rather than actually innovating.

OS X is a great OS.  I just think it's 14 year shelf life was rather optimistic.  Future MS OSs just seem more promissing to introduce new technologies.

I could be wrong but I don't think I am.


----------



## tk4two1 (Oct 22, 2002)

did anyone happen to save any of these images of longhorn?  because they are all pulled now.  I was curious to see them.


----------



## cabbage (Oct 22, 2002)

So where are these screen shots?
They're all removed due to legal matters.


----------



## ~~NeYo~~ (Oct 22, 2002)

Guys!

http://www.fileconnect.net/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2517&mode=flat&order=0&thold=0



Neyo


----------



## Ricky (Oct 22, 2002)

> _Originally posted by itanium _
> *Uhm, yeah.  Silly Microsoft copying Apple again.
> 
> That explains why Windows 95 was Chicago, 98 was Cairo, 2000 was Memphis and XP was Whistler.*


Yeah, but did they ever put those codenames on the box?  Or mention them anywhere in the software?  And now that Apple has done it, they decide that it's cool, so they do it too.


----------



## kendall (Oct 22, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Ricky _
> *Yeah, but did they ever put those codenames on the box?  Or mention them anywhere in the software?  And now that Apple has done it, they decide that it's cool, so they do it too. *



Uhm, for one, there is no box.  These are leaked pictures from a lab.  Two, Yes, before XP was XP, the OS had Whistler written all over it.  I don't know about 200, 98 or 95 because I never had the pre-releases of those.  I assume they likely did as well though.

So no, they didnt do it because of Apple, they did it because typically standard.  Even Office XP has a codename.


----------



## hazmat (Oct 22, 2002)

> _Originally posted by itanium _
> *Uhm, for one, there is no box.  These are leaked pictures from a lab.  Two, Yes, before XP was XP, the OS had Whistler written all over it.  I don't know about 200, 98 or 95 because I never had the pre-releases of those.  I assume they likely did as well though.
> *



Win2k was actually called NT 5.  I have a beta copy of it from when I worked at NEC.  Funy that I said back when 98 was coming out that it should have been called 2000 so MS didn't have to worry so much about meeting the deadline of the year name.  Look what happened with 95.  They almost didn't make it.


----------



## Rhino_G3 (Oct 22, 2002)

Yes, whistler had the name all over the OS, Early versions of 95 and 98 had the codename and build number displayed on the desktop... not sure about inbetween.  

Really, who cares if it does or not?  The OS runs exactly the same either way.  it's a MS OS that doesn't look too bad (if you ignore how clunky and unorganized the  taskbar appears)  Other than the taskbar it doesn't look bad, although it's still nowhere near running on my machine of choice. 

I think MS tries to please too many people and mistakenly lets the user create a horrible looking cluster of effects.  Look at some of the pics in the previous link.  The new taskbar along with the old is just downright wrong!  Way too much screen clutter and too much screen realestate taken up to be useful.


----------



## ManicDevlin (Oct 22, 2002)

Yeah it's taking too much space, like the OSX!


Btw, the sidebar and taskbar in longhorn is totally customizable, you can auto-hide it, you can make the taskbar integrate in the sidebar, whatever you want.

So MS pleasing everyone is a good thing, everyone can be happy with their own customized desktop.

Unlike some other OS'es


----------



## mrfluffy (Oct 22, 2002)

meh, doesnt look any better than XP, and unless it has a lot of useful features it wont be any better (ie any feature apple comes up with in the next 12 months that M$ copy).

and the bluejeans.jpg pic is from FHM a few months back, the woman is a page 3 model called ebony, and remebering this makes me feel rather sad.


----------



## ~~NeYo~~ (Oct 22, 2002)

Hmmm... i look forward to the OS, its always nice to try something new! 

I REALLY hope M$ Clear up their icons though! Moving onto the Longhorn enhancements, the icons look Out of place, i'd prefer a less cartoony like feel, more like X. 

The Multi Desktop thing looks pretty cool, similar to the Powertoys i guess, but it can be handy, nice to see it actually implemented, and usable 'out of the box'.

At The moment though, its SOOO early to judge any of this, its probable many features will Drop/alter and such as you're all aware. The Shots Remind me of Builds like 2250, where 2000 and Whistler Transitions made it seem like 'alternations' didn't fit, because it wasn't systemwide. I guess what i mean, is that underlyingly, it looks like Something Funky, Mixed with some crappier parts of XP! lol 

nice to see the 'Green Eye' isn't around this time !

<< man i talk Crap!!!   >>

Neyo


----------



## Rhino_G3 (Oct 22, 2002)

> _Originally posted by ManicDevlin _
> *Yeah it's taking too much space, like the OSX!
> 
> 
> ...




OS X taking too much space?  you mean the menu bar?

BTW... the dock is customizable and auto hiding as well.

MS pleasing everyone is a good thing if you know how to change it.  Many of these cutomization options are hidden where many people don't know where to look for them. Most MS users don't even know anything about customizing the interface.  I do Tech support for a large ISP and work in IT for a bank supporting PC's.  Most users freak out when the task bar moves to one side of the screen.  Obviously they don't know where to find customizable options.  The default display will have to be simplified greatly to become a workable interface for less intutative users.


----------



## ManicDevlin (Oct 22, 2002)

You can argue the same point with OSX, but that does not discredit MS for attempting to make Desktop customizable. If people can't do even the simplest things on computers, then this is not MS fault, but the user which hasn't read any documentary or is new to a computer.

Also, you can't say these features are hidden, because we really don't know how these features will work and what new features will be added. MS tried to make XP as easy to use as possible, and in that war against OSX, MS won. So I can assume easily that Longhorn will be even easier to use.

Did you see MSN 8 or Media Center(Freestyle)? A monkey can use them with no problem.


----------



## stephanec (Oct 22, 2002)

> Just when you thought they couldn't make Windows any more ugly, we present to you Longhorn! Its like Windows XP, only more ugly!



This was posted by shaurz on the tech-critic discussion concerning the longhorn images. I couldn't agree more!


----------



## Rhino_G3 (Oct 22, 2002)

> _Originally posted by ManicDevlin _
> *You can argue the same point with OSX, but that does not discredit MS for attempting to make Desktop customizable. If people can't do even the simplest things on computers, then this is not MS fault, but the user which hasn't read any documentary or is new to a computer.
> 
> Also, you can't say these features are hidden, because we really don't know how these features will work and what new features will be added. MS tried to make XP as easy to use as possible, and in that war against OSX, MS won. So I can assume easily that Longhorn will be even easier to use.
> ...



Having used both XP and OS X I can say without a doubt that everything is easier to find in OS X.  I've never used Media Center.  I prefer Quicktime, the standard of media players.
For usability I've been judging off of previous versions of MacOS to previous versions of windows.  

I'm sorry, there never was a "war" between XP and OS X that anybody could win.  If so, it's still waging on.  I find XP an abomination to use.  To each his own, you like your Windows, I like my OS X.  I have no desire whatsoever to use XP on a daily basis.  You've publicly stated that you do like the OS X interface.

Mac user who doesn't like XP, or a Windows user that does like OS X?  If there was any form of a war who do you think wins?


----------



## ColonelPanic (Oct 23, 2002)

pls. post rest of series from bluejeans.jpg


kthxbye!


----------



## n4cer (Oct 23, 2002)

Blackcomb has been scrapped. Longhorn was originally supposed to be a point release to follow XP, however MS decided to synchronize their product releases like they did with the release of Windows 95.

Now, Longhorn will be NT 6.0. All features slated for Blackcomb will instead be included in Longhorn. The technology for the Yukon database file system will first appear in the next release of SQL Server. This will then be worked into Longhorn along with a bunch of other tech that's been in the works for years.

MS has always used codenames in their unreleased products.
And, I believe XBOX is an example of them using a codename as the product's final name.

The final Longhorn release will have little resemblance to what is shown in the screenshots that were distributed on the web. This is an Alpha build. MS always uses their previous release to test new features that will be in the new release. This allows them to do such things as develop and test out new technologies, APIs and interfaces with a stable platform while the low-level teams rewrite or improve things like the kernel. If you can find old screenshots of Alpha and early beta versions of XP, you will find that it looks like Win2k and even includes Win2k references and icons. UI and other visual changes, though worked on during the entire development process, are integrated into the OS late in the beta phase. Unlike the transition from Win2k to XP, which included many kernel and other improvements, Longhorn (last I heard) is supposed to be a complete rewrite of the OS along the lines of how NT was created from scratch during the Windows 3 timeframe.

Technology improvements for Longhorn include, but aren't limited to the Yukon DB file system, integrated .NET and conversion of many, if not all APIs to managed code, acceleration of GDI+ through DirectX, support for greater than 32-bit color, UGA, Palladium, IPv6 as the default (the stack is currently included in Win2k and XP), improvements to speech, handwriting and other UI technologies, greater UI customizability, more task-based interfaces, and more dynamic content provided to the end-user, and the usual things like greater device support, and support for emerging technologies. 

You can find out some of the things going into Longhorn by looking at Powerpoint slides and other info at http://www.microsoft.com/hwdev/futurepc/winhec2002/default.asp


----------



## hazmat (Oct 23, 2002)

Honestly it sounds like it will be a good OS.  All the NTs are.  I have had way more kernel panics with OS X than blue screens with NT or 2k.  But I'm happier with OS X and will stick with it.  Where Windows gets more and more intrusive, I feel more in control with OS X.  Plus I do Unix admin, so I feel more at home and comfortable.  That's about it.  Both good OS's; whatever works best for you.


----------



## Annihilatus (Oct 23, 2002)

BlackComb has not been scrapped. IT is still being talked about by many reputable sites. I can tell you personally that ManicDevlin has a long reputation in Montreal as being full of sh*t so don't bother listening to anything he says.

There is still a plan for an XP SE, 2004 will bring with it the next major release of Windows. 

And btw, my friend just started working for Microsoft so I can honestly say I'm much more credible than ManicDevlin who just assumes everything.


----------



## n4cer (Oct 23, 2002)

Forbes magazine ran one of the original stories regarding the shift from Blackcomb to Longhorn. This was straight from Gates and Ballmer.

Other sites have interviewed Windows dev team members that have repeatedly said there will be no point release to follow XP. Everything has shifted to Longhorn. Anything else is media speculation.

Longhorn is slated for a 2004 release.


----------



## ManicDevlin (Oct 23, 2002)

Annihilatus, too bad that all my assumptions are from winbeta.org which consist of members who are EMPLOYEES of MS. And if you want credibitity proven, they were the ones who released the longhorn screenshots. Now be quiet.

Secondly, Rhino_G3

The comparison was based on an article I read in a reputable website, I don't remember which, but they compared both OSX and XP. They concluded that XP was easier to use, and I would agree on that. 

Take this for instance, if someone was to upgrade from windows 95, 98, 2000 to XP would that person have less stress in compatiblity in hardware, software and usability then let's say upgrading from previous Mac OS'es to OSX?

Think about that.

Also, I think you don't know what Media Center is, it's not Media Player 8 the app. It's soft of a multimedia hub program that incorporates, picture viewing, TV viewing and recording, playing DVDs and watching downloaded movies, music listening, music recording...etc

This sub-OS app will be implemented in the Freestyle pcs such as the one from HP, Visar, but it still XP just with this additional add-on.

it was made with XML which is quite remarkable, you should see it to appreciate it. You can watch some previews of it at: 

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsXP/mediacenter/evaluation/tours/default.asp

he OS has already been leaked by WINBETA. it's slated for release in december or so packaged in XP Media Center PCs.


----------



## hulkaros (Oct 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by ManicDevlin _
> *Annihilatus, too bad that all my assumptions are from winbeta.org which consist of members who are EMPLOYEES of MS. And if you want credibitity proven, they were the ones who released the longhorn screenshots. Now be quiet.
> 
> Secondly, Rhino_G3
> ...



HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Windows XP is easier to use, has better compatibility and upgradeability than Mac OS X?

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

This a good! Very good!

JOKE THAT IS!

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

One more time, Winblows users, giving us GREAT laughs!

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Oh, will you ever stop? HA HA HA HA HA HA

Then again... Please continue to make us laugh: HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA


----------



## n4cer (Oct 23, 2002)

Someone's in denial.


----------



## ManicDevlin (Oct 23, 2002)

Us? You include yourself in somekind of tribe, primate? How does Mac machines upgrade again? Throw away old mac, buy a whole new one? I see the sheer efficiency in that.


----------



## n4cer (Oct 23, 2002)

Not to mention how environmentally "friendly" that cycle is.


----------



## Sogni (Oct 23, 2002)

OMG!!! You mean people actually throw Macs away???!!! WHY???!!!

There's always someone that wants old Macs, nomater how old or how "underpowered"...

Can't say the same for PCs (I've thrown out about 4 PCs, and 2 more are being prepped to meet the dumpster soon.


----------



## n4cer (Oct 23, 2002)

PCs, especially today, hold up better than Macs. If you know how to upgrade, you save money, and don't have to throw away your PC for a while.

I have a P II 400 that runs XP just fine, in addition to my main system. I also have some Celeron 333s that run XP, Win2k and other OSes, as well as P 133s that run Win 9x. PCs are simply more econamical than Macs. You of all people should know this since you run Linux.


----------



## ManicDevlin (Oct 23, 2002)

I don't have any computer that is below 1.4 ghz, how? Cause I have sold all my old parts.


----------



## mrfluffy (Oct 23, 2002)

i dont have a computer above 400Mhz, and i've never needed any extra power (not that i'd say no to some)


----------



## hazmat (Oct 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by ManicDevlin _
> *
> Take this for instance, if someone was to upgrade from windows 95, 98, 2000 to XP would that person have less stress in compatiblity in hardware, software and usability then let's say upgrading from previous Mac OS'es to OSX?
> *



I have "upgraded" MS OS's and it is a total nightmare.  Last one I did (and I mean "last"  ) was going from NT 4 to 2k.  Total freakin' nightmare, to the point that I finally wiped the drive and did a clean 2k install.  Running fine ever since.


----------



## Rhino_G3 (Oct 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Tormente _
> *OMG!!! You mean people actually throw Macs away???!!! WHY???!!!
> 
> There's always someone that wants old Macs, nomater how old or how "underpowered"...
> ...



It's actualy been shown that Mac and Linux users keep everything till it's dead, rather than throw it away.  There's always a good use for it.  I remember seeing it in article sometime last week. 


ManicDevlin, I've already stated the upgradability of a Mac...  any upgrade you can do to your PC I can do to my mac.  If you're really interested in learning the truth  you might want to look for the post.  I believe it might even been one of yours that you completely abandoned.  You're as misinformed of the mac as you seem to think I am about the PC. 

I really don't care to see facts from specific web sites stating the usability of one OS over the other.  No matter how much we try to be free of prior judgment, as humans it's impossible.  Most people have never used a Mac but have used a previous version of windows.  To them XP would be worlds easier to use than OS X.  I can find usability reports that state OS X is easier to use than XP. It goes both ways.  I commented on what I have seen in my experience.  Nothing more, nothing less.

Also, do you remember when win2k came out? The windows compatability database for 2k was extremely small.  I do know, I had to build computers for our networking lab here in school and make sure they would run 2k reliably.  On the other hand, OS X will run on any G3 Macintosh.  Every computer built since `97. and even a few more desktops that push back to around `95.  There aren't too many people that want to run OS X on a 7 year old machine.


----------



## hazmat (Oct 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by n4cer _
> *PCs, especially today, hold up better than Macs. If you know how to upgrade, you save money, and don't have to throw away your PC for a while.
> *



Not necessarily.  Often if you want to upgrade the CPU, your motherboard won't handle the newer one, so you need a new mobo.  What happens from there?  If you had an older mobo (or proprietary one from a company like Compaq), you might need a new case as well.  It adds up.  I agree that it's much cheaper to upgrade a PC than a Mac, but neither lasts as long as most people think.


----------



## ManicDevlin (Oct 23, 2002)

Can you make your own Mac machine? No

Can you change every part of a Mac computer? No

Is Mac hardware cheaper than PC? Hell No

Is Mac as widespread as PC? No

Can Mac do more things than a PC? No

Is Steve Jobs a better person than Bill Gates? No

So how is Mac any better than PC? Steve's Answer:

By promoting dumbass comercials of drug addicts trying to explain why they switched over Mac.


----------



## Rhino_G3 (Oct 23, 2002)

I said any UPGRADE you can do to your PC I can do to my mac. 

As far as pricing for mac components.  IDE devices, SDRAM, PCI cards, USB & Firewire devices.  Many seem to be open standards...  Same price no matter what they go into.

In fact I have seen many users build their own macintosh.  Given, it was with an apple MoBo. But it can be done.  I've seen way too many people do it.  Many do it in ATX cases.  

You do seem to like to duck under sensitive topics, such as how you are wrong about Mac upgradability.

There was also another one too,  which you didn't answer.


> _Originally posted by Rhino_G3 _
> *
> Mac user who doesn't like XP, or a Windows user that does like OS X?  If there was any form of a war who do you think wins? *


----------



## boi (Oct 23, 2002)

that was a very good, unbiased answer, manic. full of facts and solid proof.
macs hold their value much better than pcs typically do, just check ebay. a four year old mac will go for around $700. 
why would you want to make your own machine? 
why would you need to change every part of a mac computer? i've never had the need to do it to my mac. whatever i want upgraded, i upgrade.
there is no 'mac hardware'. hardware is hardware. apple doesn't create any of it. 
so there are more PC owners than mac owners. there are more honda owners than ferarri owners, too.
take any typical know-nothing average joe and put them in front of a mac and then a pc. the iApp suite makes it certain that this know-nothing joe can get more useful things done than on a pc. and if you want to talk about power users, then you're comparing mac's unix capabilites with windows' abilities. so what if i can't download some obscure program? let's say i would want to, i fire up virtual pc and there we go. 
i don't see what a steve jobs vs. bill gates confrontation has anything to do with anything, really. all i know is that steve jobs isn't in court re: violations of anti-trust laws.
so how are macs any better than pcs? steve's answer: regular people, not computer obsessed nerds can use them, and use them well.


----------



## n4cer (Oct 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by hazmat _
> *Not necessarily.  Often if you want to upgrade the CPU, your motherboard won't handle the newer one, so you need a new mobo.  What happens from there?  If you had an older mobo (or proprietary one from a company like Compaq), you might need a new case as well.  It adds up.  I agree that it's much cheaper to upgrade a PC than a Mac, but neither lasts as long as most people think. *



If you knew you wanted to upgrade the computer yourself, you wouldn't by a proprietary system. You can build a full PC from scratch using standard parts. That said, many off-the-shelf PCs don't use proprietary parts anymore due to the popularity of add-ons from different manufacturers, and the fact that it may be more expensive to use proprietary parts than to use the standard ones.

If you are smart about your purchasing decisions, upgrades to computers which include memory, motherboard, and CPU can be done for about $300. Even if you were to scrap every component and buy all new stuff, you can still get a very good system for $600 - $1000 -- still far cheaper and more performant than any Mac.


----------



## Rhino_G3 (Oct 23, 2002)

still far cheaper than any mac?  What about the CRT based iMacs?


----------



## Rhino_G3 (Oct 23, 2002)

Apple is just like any other proprietary PC manufacturer.  Using Specific cases and motherboards... everything else is standard, run of the mill, PC parts.

The majority of PC users do not build their own PC's, Giving them the same options we have with our Mac's.

Boi, it is kinda nice getting $600 to $700 from a computer made in '98.  That's something that PC users aren't used to.


----------



## n4cer (Oct 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Rhino_G3 _
> *I said any UPGRADE you can do to your PC I can do to my mac.
> *


* 

When's the last time you upgraded your Mac's CPU without buying a new computer.

Apple killed the upgrade and clone markets. If you want to really upgrade your Mac, you must go to Apple.
This is especially true for Apple's main seller, the iMac.*


----------



## n4cer (Oct 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Rhino_G3 _
> *still far cheaper than any mac?  What about the CRT based iMacs? *



The cheapest CRT iMac on Apple's site is $799.
The lowest price I stated for a full PC was $600. That price is still lower than the iMac, and even that price is well above what you can get a good full PC w/ larger monitor for.


----------



## Rhino_G3 (Oct 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by n4cer _
> *When's the last time you upgraded your Mac's CPU without buying a new computer.
> 
> Apple killed the upgrade and clone markets. If you want to really upgrade your Mac, you must go to Apple.
> This is especially true for Apple's main seller, the iMac. *



Well,  2 days ago actualy.  I replaced my 350 G3 with a 550 overclocked to 650.  I'm waiting until January to buy a new comp.

I have never went to apple for any of my upgrades.  My video card came straight from ATI, my RAM came from Crucial, my DVD drive came from Comp USA, My HD's came from a local computer store, my Zip came from a Compaq that a friend had, and my processor came from Other World Computing.


----------



## kendall (Oct 23, 2002)

Round and round we go.  Where we'll stop, nobody knows!


----------



## Rhino_G3 (Oct 23, 2002)

no doubt.  Wasn't this post originaly something to do with longhorn?


----------



## kendall (Oct 23, 2002)

Longhorn, what's that? 

Anyway, My BeBox can beat up both your Macs and PCs.

Neener, neener, neener!


----------



## Rhino_G3 (Oct 23, 2002)

[drool]Ohhh,  you've got a BeBox?[/drool]  I've wanted one for a long time!


----------



## dave17lax (Oct 23, 2002)

One has to wonder what the hell these people are doing in this forum if they aren't interested in the name in the title. (macosx?) Maybe I should've read all 5 pages, but I figured it was just like every other mac vs win thread since ::loud echoing voice:: THE DAWN OF TIME....

Oh and I'm sure that MS named this one longhorn and made the cute logo to cut into UT Austin's traditionally higher mac support. There I go adding to the fire.


----------



## onegoodpenguin (Oct 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Rhino_G3 _
> *Well,  2 days ago actualy.  I replaced my 350 G3 with a 550 overclocked to 650.  I'm waiting until January to buy a new comp.*



haha.  eat that.  rhino is on fire.


----------



## boi (Oct 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by dave17lax _
> *Oh and I'm sure that MS named this one longhorn and made the cute logo to cut into UT Austin's traditionally higher mac support. There I go adding to the fire. *




boo! down with t-sips! for that reason alone i'm sure never to touch it! i'll wait until mac comes out with iAggie or something ^_^.


----------



## ManicDevlin (Oct 23, 2002)

Well if you look at the the chain of responses, you will see that is was the Macers who started the debate. And I can't believe you guys still here while i went and studied an exam.

You guys have something to do on your macs other then post here?


----------



## Rhino_G3 (Oct 23, 2002)

I'm not too sure about the other guys here but I've been decorating for a hall halloween party for my dorm.  When I was waiting for something else to do I came back to my room to check the forums.

Are you just sad because you don't feel as adamant about your computer as some here or is it just because you realized you were wrong?  Regardless of who starts it you do really like to egg it on.

The post was settling down until you now try to throw something else into the mix.  When you're wrong instead of trying to bring up another point why don't you try to just let the topic die.  Personaly I don't feel the need to prove myself to you.  I think I'm done here.

Man the lifeboats! lifejackets on!  This post is going under... FAST!


----------



## kendall (Oct 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by ManicDevlin _
> *
> 
> You guys have something to do on your macs other then post here? *



On the contrary.  Do you have something better to do with your PC other than post in a Mac forum?


----------



## vanguard (Oct 23, 2002)

Yeah, I was doing my homework for grad school.  I guess we do have something in common. 

Vanguard


----------



## ManicDevlin (Oct 23, 2002)

Rhino_G3 you assume too much, it doesn't matter though, I still love you. Peace my brother.


----------



## n4cer (Oct 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Rhino_G3 _
> *Well,  2 days ago actualy.  I replaced my 350 G3 with a 550 overclocked to 650.  I'm waiting until January to buy a new comp.
> *


* 

What happens if Apple has little/nothing new to offer in January (in terms of system architecture)? I'm not trying to bash the platform. I am just wondering when Apple will make credible  improvements.
They can't wait too long without providing a solution for those here who, despite having systems on the higher end of Apple's product line, still think OS X is slow, let alone those with lower end Macs.*


----------



## Rhino_G3 (Oct 23, 2002)

Maybe I do.  Like I said, I'm just tired of the Mac vs PC thing.  You may be too for all I know.  I do like seeing what microsoft is doing, just in a tasteful way, without all the bickering.  Oh well,  thankfully this discussion is done.


----------



## Rhino_G3 (Oct 23, 2002)

It will be a mediocre update.  I really don't care though.  I figured I'll buy a computer whenever I need it.  I'm beginning to now.  When that's slower than what I need I'll start upgrading again.  More than likely that won't be for a while, just like the computer I'm using now. 

I think everybody is banking on the next major processor switch.  Namely, right now everybody thinks it's going to be the IBM 970.  Word is that it'll be produced mid to late next year.  There have been a few threads on that processor both here and at slashdot if you'd like to see what it'll entail.


----------



## n4cer (Oct 24, 2002)

I've seen the info, but thanks. I hope the rumors are true (or there is something better that hasn't been revealed).
And, you're right, this discussion should end here. Or, at least, go back to the original topic.


----------



## kendall (Oct 24, 2002)

> _Originally posted by n4cer _
> *What happens if Apple has little/nothing new to offer in January (in terms of system architecture)? I'm not trying to bash the platform. I am just wondering when Apple will make credible  improvements.
> They can't wait too long without providing a solution for those here who, despite having systems on the higher end of Apple's product line, still think OS X is slow, let alone those with lower end Macs. *



As a PC user you don't seem to understand Mac users in general don't care about whether or not their Macs are the latest and fastest.

As long as their Mac does what the they need it for, most Mac users are perfectly content.

Mac are typically not gaming machines so a new video card and CPU every year is not necessary.

IE and Office v. X are going to run just as good on that 450 MHz G4 with a 8 MB Rage Pro as they would on a 1GHz G4 with a 64 MB Radeon 9700.

Having to have the fastest processor is something breed into PC-fanatics who are likely more concerned with playing video games than actually doing some real work.


While I do agree, Mac OS X feels considerably less responsive on old and even new hardware compared to other OSs, Mac users either a) don't realize it, b) don't care, or c) are in denial.

So in closing, if Apple produces little to nothing in terms of hardware come January, some Mac users will be disappointed but for the most part, most could care less either way.

My concern with new Mac hardware is not so much in that its necessary, but considering the war that Apple is attempting to wage on the PC, they really have little to show to make the average PC user want to switch.  Unfortunately, OS X alone isn't going to do it, especially considering the price of Mac hardware compared to PC.


----------



## ApeintheShell (Oct 24, 2002)

i read the news on architosh about the G4, the superfast moto processor they took away, and the Power PC 970. Seems like it is panning out well enough for my tastes.
I'm not concerned with raw speed and certainly think people switch to mac because of quality and plug and play. 
Longhorn looks to long to wait for an operating system of any kind. People are making assumptions that Microsoft will blow all the competition out of the water.
There will always be minority computer users,  "Be, Mac, Linux,Palm, Sun..etc."
Let the meek inherit the earth.  
There is no average computer user anymore. With the creation of these operating systems it's been engraved into our civilization. There is though the new computer user who will look at the macintosh or wintel and than decide what they want.  Simple.
Longhorn will have tons of advertising and people will use it and maybe switch to mac in 2004. Who knows!


----------



## kommakazi (Nov 5, 2002)

The Journaling FS is supposed to be released in 10.2.2, not Panther.


----------



## kendall (Nov 5, 2002)

Actually, what sounds like a JFS hack may or may not be introduced in 10.2.2.

Switching to a true JFS would mark the demise of HFS+.

It is likely to be introduced in 10.3 because you're going to need more than a patch to accomplish that.  Most likely a format and reinstallation which 10.3 would provide the install media to do so.

As for the pictures of Longhorn, they are completely fake.


----------



## fryke (Nov 5, 2002)

It's in 10.2.2.


----------



## kendall (Nov 5, 2002)

I don't believe in its finished form.  Especially with a 10-15% performance penalty.

Hopefully 10.3 will move away from HFS+ completely.  There should be no performance penalty then.


----------



## NoahJ (Dec 4, 2002)

> _Originally posted by itanium _
> *I don't believe in its finished form.  Especially with a 10-15% performance penalty.
> 
> Hopefully 10.3 will move away from HFS+ completely.  There should be no performance penalty then. *



JFS is there in 10.2.2, they have only made it a feature that htey are speaking of in 10.2.2 server however.  Do you really believe that Apple would put an unredy hack to the FS  as an advertised feature for a aerver OS?  Also, I have enabled JFS on both my Macs and the performance hit is so negligable that I do not even notice it.  That may be because I have a lot of RAM but whatever the reason the performance hit is overstated.

Remember, BSD uses RAM very aggressively and puts as much as possible there to avoid HDD swapping.  The JFS will only cause a performance hit while you are hitting the HDD.  SO it is not like the system in total slowed down 10-15%, only that the disk access has slowed down and I am not even sure that the % is verified.  Let me state once more.  I have noticed no huge performance hit.  Don't overstate the issue.

Oh, and one final thing.  JFS is not a hack to HFS+, it is built in.  My understanding is that this is what it will be.  It may become faster, but overall it is there for security of your data not speed.  Same thing if youare running RAID5, you take a performance hit due to the parity striping, but overall your data is more secure in case of some sort of failure.


----------



## Giaguara (Dec 4, 2002)

Uhh... i saw only this: 

"VirtuaNews Message    You have specified an invalid id, if you followed this link, please inform the webmaster here"

:?


----------



## unlearnthetruth (Dec 5, 2002)

i got the same from the link... regardless this thread seems to me to just be turning into a "my pc is better than your mac" war, and vice versa... *sigh*


----------



## Pengu (Dec 6, 2002)

So it goes like this... 
Billy: I saw screenshots of Longhorn!
Sally: They're Fake.
Harry: No They're Not.
Mary: Microsoft is the $H!T. Their next OS will Kill OSX, whatever it is, even if it's a Wheaties box with a Microsoft logo on it.


----------

