Microsoft admits they stole Apple's look and feel for Win 7. Claims Vista is more stable than OS X.

[onehandle]

They confess to having the originality of a wet paper bag and claim an outright lie in one breath.

Hoo boy...
_______________

"One of the things that people say an awful lot about the Apple Mac is that the OS is fantastic, that it’s very graphical and easy to use. What we’ve tried to do with Windows 7 – whether it’s traditional format or in a touch format – is create a Mac look and feel in terms of graphics. We’ve significantly improved the graphical user interface, but it’s built on that very stable core Vista technology, which is far more stable than the current Mac platform, for instance."

http://www.pcr-online.biz/features/328/Microsofts-new-vision

[anonymous171]

1. I hate that bubbly look anyways. On XP I always have it set to "classic"

[L0oniX]

38. +1

[reflection]

51. Same here. First thing I do on a new install. n/t

[Angleae]

181. +One more

Does Win7 even have a "classic" option?

[DontTreadOnMe]

2. "which is far more stable than the current Mac platform, for instance."

stable? In what respect, Charlie?

[SpiralHawk]

33. Bwaaa ha ha ha. MS is pimping a republicon brand of truthiness with this 'claim'

which means it is a pack of rank bullshit...

[Feron]

3. They all borrow from each other.

I've noticed that some things in Linux have made their way into OSX and Windows. And vice versa.

[cliffordu]

106. Name two things that have made it into Linux from windoze...

Aside from their craptastic media player.....

[Chan790]

112. Two?

*The graphical appearance and GUI of the Linspire OS. (Famously of the Microsoft v. Lindows civil suit.)


*much of the architecture for running Google gadgets on Linux desktops has been "borrowed" (one has to question how much that term applies when Google borrows from Google) from Google Desktop for Windows. (http://code.google.com/p/google-gadgets-for-linux/wiki/ArchitectureOverview)

That took a lot of effort...a big part of why Linux is good is because they don't co-opt from shitty OS or software. Also, neither is really central or key to Linux.

[cliffordu]

135. seek early X-free86, and google ain't part of the Linux distro.

google desktop for windoze came first, that's all...

They could have started wth Linux, but that's a much smaller user base - and I was talking about the BASE OS, not the eye candy, which are pretty much all open standards stuff...or ported to open standards.

Linux owes NOTHING to windows, or Gantes and Ballmerrrrrr would be charging everyone for it.

[Swamp Rat]

137. rAmen!

:D

[cliffordu]

140. I am an OS badass, ain't I??

:rofl:

[Swamp Rat]

148. Yes you is.

:D

You have your work cut out for you on this thread, especially when it comes to smacking down all the Windoze "fanboys" who trot out the ancient myths and insults used toward Apple users.

The first thing I do when I have to re-install XP on my PCs, is strip out all the crap and go back to the classic interface. These PCs are only used for two scientific analysis programs I need for work (the UNIX server editions cost a brazillion dollars and I don't have a Solaris-runnin' box at this time).

Fuck Vista. It is the worst piece of crap since 98. And I don't have the time or need for Windoze 7, unless I can get the professional version for free - otherwise, not worth it.

My PCs that run LINUX love me. :loveya:

And my Apples never complain or need re-installations, etc. OS X is great for safe Internet surfin', managing music and photos, and other fun stuff like making lizard pix of repukes. :evilgrin:

[cliffordu]

153. What you said!!!

I have a mac now in addition to the Linux boxen that seem to never die.....- I'm doing some music again and need Logic and Kontakt for the recording and the samples.............

OSX, of course being a kinda sorta almost UNIX it's own bad self.


Windows will NEVER be the OS that UNIX is....


Gates should have used LINUX with a fucking GUI that looks like WIN@@ whatever and called it a day.

Pucking Futz.

[msongs]

4. never had any problems with vista..none at all nt

[niceypoo]

42. Vista was, is, a disaster

I put up with it long enough to finish out the quarter at college then promptly installed Ubuntu Linux. Have not had a problem since.

[Kalyke]

102. I didn't think so. I LOVE Vista.

Maybe you guys just don't know how to use it.

[Deja Q]

152. Some of us guys do know how to use it. We should ask you the same question, for

anyone blind to Vista's faults has no frigging clue.

See my other response in this thread about why I don't bother with the level of detail I used to. Folks like you won't care, so why waste my time? Maybe you guys just aren't worth it. (how did that feel, since you felt inclined to say a pointless one-line, extremely naive insult? )



Incidentally, do you know what OS/2 is? I go back to that era, and before. I've been around the block, so don't you dare insult people.

[niceypoo]

200. I concur

The problem is we DO know how to use it

[ixion]

5. more stable than that 'Mac' platform, that is built on, you know, UNIX

So they're claiming that Vista is more stable than Unix?

...

:rofl:

Yeah, right. :eyes:

[nickinSTL]

6. Vista? Stable? What planet is this idiot from?

I've got Vista on my home computer (came with it, and I didn't realize how bad Vista was going to be at the time, or I would have had them put XP on it) - and it's a complete pain in the @$$.

We're buying a used laptop from a friend, and are thrilled that it has Ubuntu installed.

At least we won't have to worry so much about viruses.

We can't use IE on the home computer anymore because of a virus we can't get rid of. Fortunately, it only affect the computer when IE is running. So, we use Firefox and Safari.

Vista is also an insane resource-hog, and the Windows stupidity of not releasing virtual memory when an application is closed is a complete pain. Oh, time to reboot again :eyes:

[niceypoo]

59. Most virus' are written for Windows platform because...

...a virus writers goal is to infect as many computers as possible and that wont happen with virus' written to infect a niche market. It is a numbers game.

[Ezlivin]

73. Then the HUGE numbers of *nix servers that form most of the Internet are targets, right?

"About 90% of the Internet relies on Unix operating systems running Apache, the world's most widely used Web server."

A virus writer's goal is to target the easiest platform to infect.

[niceypoo]

76. What percent of PCs are unix webservers?

Perhaps .0011%, if that? They are also very, very heavily firewalled.

You are dead wrong on your 'easiest to infect' theory, but what would I know about that, Im just a lowly software engineer.

[cliffordu]

176. If you're really a software engineer you know about Netcraft and the fact they

track certain things like the number of UNIX webservers there are in service...

I suggest you go to Netcraft and read what they say about how many UNIX webservers there are and then no one can call you a liar and a fraud, or at least a complete fucking idiot when in comes to what you just wrote about UNIX webservers and the percentage they represent here in the real world.


And by the way, you're absolutely wrong when it comes to the reason there aren't more Linux or OSX viruses, too.

Fuck me teh stupid, it burns.

[niceypoo]

187. The average Unix webserver runs between 500 and 2000 websites

Unix webservers are used by webhosts like Bluehost Most webservers are Unix webservers. That does not translate to most computers on the internet are Unix webservers, which seems to be what you ignorantly believe. .

Google: virus "infect as many machines" then read any one of the 40,000+ hits, then get back to me Einstein.

[cliffordu]

204. Oh, you're talking about COMPUTERS USING the internet, not

the ones that RUN the internet.


That's different. That's like "So what"?


Google 'Internet Exploder" and Outbreak Express" if you want to see the real reason the M$ operating system gets injected with every virus written.

For about a decade anything downloaded, including a piece of EMAIL would execute whatever executable it held, and the user COULD NOT stop it. Root permission email programs. Perfect.

The numbers game as to why there are no real linux viruses is what Windoze users parrot to make themselves feel better for putting up with the endless security fixes, the relentless upgrades, the constant need for updating their security software...

It's like owning a car that you have to kick the carjackers out of every morning before work. Because the car company sold you a car with no door locks. And you buy the newest model every year.

The only safe windows computer is an unplugged windows computer

[Statistical]

207. Of course none of that exists now.

Today virtually all viruses on Windows machines (XP SP3, Vista or Windows 7) are because someone intentionally installs them (often because true nature is hidden).

The user is the security flaw not the OS.
If a user on a Linux box installs a virus guess what they will have a virus (or spyware, or malware).

Want Unix/Linux style limited users. Very easy to do.

Make a windows user account called su or root, make it admin.
Now create your user account cliffordu, make it a limited user.
Logoff su
Login cliffordu.

Need admin access for something. Right Click > Run As.. select su, enter password.
Too easy.

The idea there are no locks in windows is a joke. Maybe 3.11, maybe window 98.

Hell Windows 7 doesn't even come with outlook express (and people complain about that).
IE can now be completely uninstalled if you want.

[wolfgangmo]

219. re: The only safe windows computer is an unplugged windows computer

Bwahahahahahahahahaha. That is funny, man.

Oh shit.

In my office we run mostly apple with a few windows machines for specific medical diagnostic programs and I have pulled the fangs of the OS and the PC to make sure that it NEVER gets to go online, unless I plug the hardware back in and enable a the drivers.Why did I do this? Because I had 2 choices, either allow it internet access and hope to Christ that I could stay ahead of the security threats, or remove the threat.

As for the ridiculous theory that the reason that hackers (criminals) hack PC (dumb white kid in the hood with a 20 dollar bills hanging out of his back pocket and a "I hate N*****'s" t-shirt) is that it is a crime of opportunity. I used to be an officer and worked with gangs and they pick people to rob, not because it will get them noticed (the usual red herring held up as to why PC is "targeted"), but rather because they can get away with it. They rob because they have found an easy mark. In my mind PC is an easy mark.


Q:"Why do you rob banks?"

A:"That's where the money is"

[niceypoo]

232. This thread isnt about linux

It is about MACs. :rofl: I use linux, your preaching to the choir.

http://evil-packet.com/five-simple-steps-to-writing-a-linux-virus.html">Oh, and by the way, it is simple to write a linux virus with basic software engineering skills.

Virus writers rarely bother because the point of writing virus' is to infect as many machines as possible and targeting linux defeats that purpose. Virus writers tend to be conservative and have anger issues, they don't do it to be cool.

[cliffordu]

241. Ah, yes, the social engineering virus.....

Anyone downloading programs or porn or anything from other than trusted sites needs to have, as a user, minimal user privileges

Anyone giving away root privileges needs to be as far away as possible from any computer....

I never said there aren't trojans and malware for Linux, I just said that M$ has been a petri dish of biblical proportions......

I'll never use it again. Haven't since 1999, at an office job. Speaking of Office, I don't use that, either.........

[Kalyke]

104. I have it on my home computer. Never had a problem with it.

BTW, if you need virtual memory, plug in a thumb drive to run the background processes.

There - problem solved.

[nickinSTL]

156. uh, ok. but..

it seems stupid to me to have to deal with a workaround like that.

Great that you haven't had problems. From what I have experienced and heard from others, your experience is not typical.

[wolfgangmo]

222. It's not that he hasn't had any problems.

He just admitted to one with his "workaround" which is a fancy euphamism for "problem."

Like many people he has become so used to shitty performance and behavoir it is now "normal."

Like an American denied a decent health care system who yells like a teabagger that w/he doesn't want government involved in health care, s/he has never experience what life with a functioning health care system is like, and so s/he fears the different and considers that fact that the blue screen of death could show up at any time and end his life irrelevant. Others, having experienced a functioning health care system and government that functions as more than an enrichment to it's rich owners know better and consider the poor American as slightly daffy, much like a prize fighter who retired about 10 years too late.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

166. You've got to be kidding me.

Maybe they ought to just make it work instead.

[cliffordu]

177. wELL.....

:rofl:

[niceypoo]

201. Try turning it on sometime

Then get back to us

[NJCher]

178. I hate Vista

I never knew I could feel such hate for an OS.


Cher

[Touchdown]

7. Harry Truman said... "when given the choice between an Apple

and a Microsoft that acts like an Apple, people will choose..."

Well, I guess that wasn't a very good analogy.:dunce:

[Not Me]

8. I did the Vista->Win 7 upgrade

It was easy, and runs faster. Have had no issues whatsoever.

[BREMPRO]

50. me too.works better, faster, more intuitive graphics, no more screen freezes that I had on Vista.

Apple is rightfully worried Microsoft finally created an operating system that is as good as theirs.

[Statistical]

65. Exactly.

Mac barely gained marketshare when going up against Vista.

Windows 7 fixes and improves upon Vista. If they barely (less than 1%) gained marketshare against Vista how will they fare against a product which is getting good reviews?

[Not Me]

199. That's been my experience.

It runs faster. I didn't have major issues with Vista, but there were some times when I was pushing the limits of my system, and now with the lighter OS, it seems to handle everything well.

[SallyMander]

56. I am thinking of doing this

Would love your two cents... I've never had much of a problem with Vista, so do you think it's worth the time/money?

[DainBramaged]

9. I guess emulating is your word for stealing. Right, just make the OP inflammatory

to get all of the Linux fanboys stirred up..............


Emulation, quite the contrary, the sincerest form of flattery.

What we’ve tried to do with Windows 7 – whether it’s traditional format or in a touch format – is create a Mac look and feel in terms of graphics.

Wow, creating a Mac look and feel after the Mac fanboys bitched about the interface for a decade, and now that they've done it, it's stealing.



bring in the broad brush boys, and don't forget the popcorn................

[Touchdown]

11. Mac fanboys never bitched about Windows... ever. We just laughed at you.

It's the Windows users that bitched. We just said that we didn't want to hear it.

[niceypoo]

43. Actually the whole MAC vs PC 'debate' only rages within the MAC community

Their whole advertising scheme is based on it

[Silent3]

183. It's Mac, not MAC.

It's not an acronym, it's short for Macintosh.

[niceypoo]

188. ..as if I care

[Touchdown]

208. You care enough to shit all over other people's computer choices.

Life is pretty poor for you to take it out on others like this.

[Silent3]

243. It's just a sign that you don't have enough attention to detail...

...to be likely to know what you're talking about.

[EOTE]

57. Laughed at us? Because you willingly spent 2 to 3 times as much on hardware..

which isn't nearly as capable as ours? So you could extremely limit your software choices? So you could have a computer with a small fraction of the upgrade capabilities? I hope you got in a good chuckle.

[Touchdown]

94. It is and more capable. And then spend nothing for the next 4 years.

Upfront costs and upkeep costs are very different in Apple computers than Windows machines. Long term, Apple's cost less than Windows. Also, I've never sold an old Mac of mine for less than $400.

Try that with a 4 year old Compaq.

[anigbrowl]

111. I find that statement questionable

"Upfront costs and upkeep costs are very different in Apple computers than Windows machines. Long term, Apple's cost less than Windows."

Really? MS puts out a new operating system about every 5 years, the service packs are free. Personally, I have no problem keeping my machine fast and stable, but then I've got >20 years of computer experience. I know it's not as easy for most people, but on the other hand cost-of-ownership is usually a business issue and businesses have support staff.

I can definitely get my hardware for less by not buying Apple, and though I upgrade more frequently than every 4 years, that's mostly because I see an opportunity for it - eg when memory is on sale or I see some good deal on hard drives...like when some new technology comes out and last years graphics cards or whatever are heavily discounted or turn up in the used market.

I'm not going to put you down for preferring Mac, I'm just very skeptical of your argument about it costing less. Dollar for dollar I think it's far more economical to go the Windows route...if Apple was as good a deal as you suggest, I'd be running Windows or Linux on Apple hardware rather than my anonymous black box.

[Statistical]

113. Add to that OS X "upgrades" costs.

OS X 10.1 was free and 10.6 was $29 but the rest 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, 10.5 were $109 to $149 each.

Easy $500 in OS upgrades over last 8 years.

[Vehl]

212. Exactly!

I spent MUCH less for my windows machine and even after adding all the upgrades I did for the past 4 years(they were not compulsory..voluntary upgrades I made on my whim to make the machine faster) I spent less than I would have if I had bought a comparable(performance-wise) mac


Upped my ram on my laptop from 2 gb to 4gb,
Changed the hdd from ~120Gb 5400Rpm to 350Gb 7200 Rpm
changed from vista to windows 7 (yes Vista was slow but never had any viruses cos if one is very careful with what he does the chances are almost that he will never get a virus)
Upgraded my Battery from a 6 cell to an extended life-9 cell one
(got all of the stuff from eBay/similar places)
got a new power cable

+ some minor tweaks like
Changing the heat-transfer compound to get ~10degree less heat
etc
etc

for Less than the cost of the Equivalent mac (4 years ago!)

there is too much MAC fanboyism...ill rather have control over my hardware/upgrade choices than spend a pretty penny for something which is almost not upgradable/has to use proprietary stuff

Yeah, as some other poster said in this thread, seems to me its just the Mac fanboys who are always comparing a PC to Mac
a form of inferiority complex perhaps ?:P

[wolfgangmo]

223. I disagree but then again I own a business.

Your point that businesses have support staff is exactly the point.

In any service industry the highest cost is personel. To extend that point, within any company, service departments are heavy on personel costs. Apple requires a hell of a lot less. In my company it is one guy very part time (less than 4 hours every 2 months or so). Previous to switching to apple our clinic had a full time tech guy just to keep the windoze from dozing. And every time they dozed, I lost productivity from the rest of the employees that actually brought money in the door rather than cost money.

That was the tipping point for me. My employees are happier, spend a fraction of the down time they used to under the windoze hegemony, and our profits are up because of it. I am still running computers from apple that were purchased 8 years ago. They are still compatible with current OS. No work arounds, No fixes. No blue screens of death.

But hey I'm just a business owner who made a LONG TERM decision (as opposed to the wall street model of thinking). It would be nice if I could get all my employees to be computer gurus like you but unforunately you haven't cloned yourself enough yet to take over the world. (mad scientist music plays in the background - oooeeeeeoooooo)

[ShamelessHussy]

247. lol

as a small business owner i can testify to the same.

:hi:

[EOTE]

150. My current computer will last me at least 4 years.

And when I'm ready, I'll upgrade just the parts I want and not be forced to get an entirely new machine. I won't have to spend ridiculously inflated prices on a new GPU. I won't be stuck with my same motherboard and spend a ridiculous sum for a minor CPU upgrade. Not only will my PC remain faster than any Mac you can get for anywhere near the price for a good few years, but I'll be able to upgrade my PC far more than I could a similar Mac. And I think I'll be using my family pack of Windows 7 for a good many years as well. As for Compaqs, I wouldn't touch 'em. If I were forced to, I'd pick up a Compaq well before a Mac, though.

[Touchdown]

170. Well, isn't that nice for you.

[niceypoo]

189. I just saw a PC at fryes electronics

Latest AMD quadcore, 780 GB hd, 7 GB RAM, $399.

I could buy one of those every year for four years and still spend less than buying a MAC.

[Touchdown]

210. And good for you! Want a cookie?

[niceypoo]

230. Yes...

...and a brownie button...

[Toasterlad]

77. Funny, Because the 95% of the Population That Uses PCs Doesn't Seem to Talk About Macs Ever.

The only people I ever here talking about Macs vs PCs are Mac users who seem more than a little pathetically desperate to be playing all alone in the sandbox.

[Touchdown]

92. I'm one of that 95% (work) and part of the 9-10% (Home)

I bitch about having to use Windows at work all the time... Every Windows user I have gotten to close to has expressed some kind of frustration with their computer at one point or another. Most of them don't know what they're doing with them, so they ask me. I don't know much about Win systems, so I can't help.

When it comes time to shop for a new one, my advice of "Just check 'em out" goes ignored, and 3 weeks after their new laptop is out of the box, the phone calls come again with problems. I have very few problems with my Macs. You want a Windows machine, fine. Just don't bitch at me when you have problems with it, when you ignored me in the first place.

[Toasterlad]

98. Fair Enough.

:thumbsup:

[rucky]

184. You Mac people think you're so cool just because you're dating Drew Barrymore. n/t

[tritsofme]

10. The first thing I did in my Windows 7 computer was ungroup all the programs

on the task bar.

I don't know if the combining was supposed to give it a "Mac look" or if that is what they are talking about.

But now it feels a lot more like XP to me.

[Forkboy]

12. Mac/Windows...the "grown up" XBox/PS3 war.

[DainBramaged]

15. My ignore list grew exponentially because of Mac-attitude this year

but when they had to concede to Intel processors because IBM wasn't making money on Macs, all they have left is an operating system. Someday mac will be on 95% of all the computers in the world just like Windows, but not in mine (or their) lifetime.


:hi:

[Forkboy]

20. Oh shit...I meant to send you my address.

DU was fucked when I read your PM and I couldn't reply. Then I just plain old forgot. Doh!

Check your PM. :)

[DainBramaged]

22. Got it!!!

PC Care package on the way.........


:hug:

[Forkboy]

24. Thank you, kind Sir!

:toast:

[niceypoo]

37. MACs will never be more than a niche market for several reasons

One is their advertising, which preaches to the choir. Another is their being overpriced. Finally is their rigidity, your stuck with their overpriced hardware AND the training wheels don't come off.

I saw an ad last night at Fry's electronics, AMD Phenom quad core, 750 GB hd, 7 GB RAM for $399. I want to pay 2 grand for a MAC why?

[Bonobo]

53. Because not everyone else wants to "mess around" with Linux. nt

[niceypoo]

69. No need to 'mess around' with linux

This isn't 2001

[Bonobo]

70. So are you saying it is so easy that it really requires very little effort to "catch up"?

Serious question. No flames please.

I am just so busy that it is hard to imagine adding more to my plate...

[niceypoo]

99. There is really no catching up to do

Anyone who has ever used Windows will have no problems with the look and feel of Ubuntu Linux. Of course if you use a flavor like Debian, which is mostly command line driven, you might.

Is there 'Catching up' to do when MS comes out with a new OS like Vista or 7?

When I moved from Windows to Ubuntu my computing life became less complicated, not more. My 16 year old daughter got my webcam working, she installed and configured the software for it in about two minutes on the first try with no Linux experience whatsoever. She merely searched for 'webcam' in the package manager then clicked 'install' on the simplest looking one (of the about 20 webcam software packages that came up). Ubuntu found, downloaded, and installed the software for her. Best of all, everything is free.

[Hippo_Tron]

100. Linux is GUI these days, it looks a lot like Windows and OSX

[Bonobo]

101. Ah! That is what I wanted to know!

Thanks to you and Nicey Poo!

[Hippo_Tron]

105. Don't get me wrong, I still don't use it and I don't blame anybody who doesn't

It's just that quite frankly the days have long since passed where I used my computer for anything other than writing papers and surfing the net. Windows does that stuff just fine. But if I ever decided to build my own machine or go back to being a computer geek, I would not be intimidated by Linux one bit. I've used it on my friends' computers and there's nothing to it.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

217. One of the school computer labs has about 15 PCs and about 7 Macs

I always have a hell of a time finding a free PC. Nobody ever uses the Macs because most of our work at school requires Office or Visual Studio. In addition, people are just more comfortable with PCs.

[Touchdown]

237. Here's a hint. Use Pages and change the suffix to Word.

Stalinwasadouche.pg to Stalinwasadouche.wd No more waiting.

It's compatible. Pages/Numbers/Keynote all read Word/Xcel/Poewerpoint docs no problem. Creating in them just requires a suffix change.

[berni_mccoy]

85. Would that be "Macitude"? LOL

[mmonk]

34. Yep

[targetpractice]

13. MS went for eye-candy just as Apple decided it was passé...

With Leopard and Snow Leopard, Apple has made an effort to "flatten" and minimize the appearance of the UI. Windows 7 is way too colorful... like the Land-of-Oz-color compared to the Kansas-grey UI of Snow Leopard.

I use both systems regularly, but there is no way that Microsoft can claim that Windows is "far more stable" than Mac OS X... It just isn't. The only thing that gives me problems on OS X sometimes is Adobe's Flash plug-in.

[ananda]

14. LOL

OS X is completely stable.

You can't get more stable than that.

[niceypoo]

44. Actually you can get more stable than that

We have issues constantly with our MAC labs at work.

Get Debian Linux if you want 'more stable than that'

[nemo137]

16. Sigh. In some ways, I'd rather have anothe Kucinich War thread.

I feel like they're more useful, in some weird way, than these Mac vs. PC fights.

[boppers]

19. No, you wouldn't.

I'm certain of it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y

[Vinnie From Indy]

17. Microsoft has always stolen from Apple

It's what they do!

[NYC_SKP]

18. IIRC, Vista also "borrowed" some things, like "widgits"... More Stable??? LOL! nt

[ecstatic]

21. They tried... but why? Some of us don't like Apple's "look and feel"

all the silly icons, clutter and dumbed down menus don't appeal to me.

[nadinbrzezinski]

23. More stable than... vista core....

really?????

[paulsby]

25. and apple stole it's GUI

from the xerox sparc, etc.

[Touchdown]

26. Xerox invited Apple. Apple hired PARC engineers. It was symbiotic.

Xerox didn't know what they had. Apple showed them what they had. Apple gave some ideas on improving it to Xerox, and Xerox let them use it in their future computers for a licensing fee, which Apple paid. Apple continued to improve upon until the final Lisa computer was announced.

Paying a licensing fee is not stealing.

It was not stolen. That story has never been true. It's been revisionist history since Microsoft doesn't like being called the only thieves in the computer biz.

[paulsby]

27. i have no problem with that

i was making the comment more in a "nothing new under the sun" way, not an apple is evil for stealing somebody else's idea.

i saw a LISA the other day at re-pc in seattle. now THAT was an innovative computer

[Touchdown]

30. It was also $10,000 smackers. Which is why it failed.

Macs came out a year later, for a fraction of the price. Those got bought instead.

[1]

28. look and feel is what you do in a bar. software types never experience that. thus the confusion...

[Egnever]

29. Maybe but they did it oh so much better.

The memory on the pinned apps is a stroke of genius. And apple aint got nothing like it.

Besides having one mouse button is like having one arm. Talk about wasted movement.

[Touchdown]

31. Where have you been the last 10 years? Macs have 4 button mice configs.

...and have had at least 2 since OS 8.

Yeah, you know your stuff.:rofl:

[Egnever]

35. So they send em out the door with one mouse button

Just to be dicks then eh?

[onehandle]

46. Macs haven't shipped with one button mice in years.

Their brand new mouse, which shipped a couple of weeks ago, has a built in multi-gesture 'track pad.'

[niceypoo]

63. Every MAC we have gotten at work for years came with a one button configuration

[Touchdown]

96. When's the last time you got one?

"for years" isn't an argument. How about a year.

[Egnever]

108. so take a pic and post it

Should be easy on a mac. Cause it looks to me like this year they got rid of the button entirely.

[TCJ70]

117. You're referring to the Magic Mouse?

It still has click capability. The entire surface of it is like a trackpad on a laptop. You scroll with a finger motion and there are a few other gesture based features of the mouse. The left and right click capability is still there as it has been for many years.

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB829LL/A

[Touchdown]

130. Here you go. All dragged into DU.

Text...also held & dragged in. No C&P necessary.

• Building a Better Mouse
Multi-Touch technology has migrated from the innovative iPhone to the iPod touch to the MacBook Pro, and now to Apple's Magic Mouse. Multi-Touch offers a smart and dynamic method to interact with portable devices via intuitive gestures. What's more, the Magic Mouse is wireless, so you won't have a cord getting in your way when you're controlling your computer. The Magic Mouse will work with any Bluetooth-enabled Mac with OS X 10.5.8 or higher
• Make One Great Gesture After Another
The Multi-Touch technology allows you to use intuitive gestures to control your computer. Using gestures is a lot like touching what's on your screen -- swiping through web pages in Safari gives you the feeling of flicking through pages of a magazine. The mouse also supports momentum scrolling: the scrolling speed is determined by how fast or slowly you perform the gesture
• Gestures - Click
The entire surface of the Magic Mouse is a button. Simply click and double click anywhere on the Multi-Touch surface
• Gestures - Two-Button Click
You'll be able to use the mouse to perform the functions of a traditional two-button mouse by enabling Secondary Click in the OS X System Preferences menu. Left-handed users can swap the functions of the left and right buttons if they desire
• Gestures - 360° Scroll
Brush one finger along the Multi-Touch surface to scroll in any direction to pan a full 360°
• Gestures - Screen Zoom
Hold down your keyboard's Control key and scroll with one finger to enlarge items on your screen
• Gestures - Two-Finger Swipe
You can use two fingers to swipe left and right along the Multi-Touch surface in order to advance through pages in Safari or browse photos in iPhoto
• Customize to Meet Your Needs
The Mouse preference pane in OS X allows you to customize the functionality of the Magic Mouse. You can disable gestures that you don't use, ensuring that the mouse acts as you want it to.

The Magic Mouse features a symmetrical design, making it equally comfortable for left-handed and right-handed users. It's easy for left-handed users to swap left and right button functionality in the System Preferences menu

[niceypoo]

193. Last August we outfitted a new MAC lab

OS X Snow Leopard

[TCJ70]

206. If you bought new Macs...

...then they definitely had left and right click capability. Even though the mice are not cut away to show the buttons, they are there and have been for quite some time.

[EOTE]

64. As in around 4 years.

Decades after Wintel machines started shipping with them. To ship a single button mouse in the 21st century gives a pretty decent impression of who Mac markets its computers to.

[Touchdown]

128. It sure does. Apple makes the OS so that multi-buttons aren't necessary.

...but useful for speed, etc. I haven't used a single button since Panther, but I think Snow Leopard still is made to be one button compatible.

drag & drop, not necessarily cut and paste is the rule for Mac OS, although C&P is still an option.

[EOTE]

129. You do know why Mac stuck with a single button for so long, right?

It's because they knew their user base would be just daft enough that they'd get confused when on tech support and asked to "right click". At least on the Wintel platform, they gave their users the benefit of the doubt. You can make all the excuses you want as to why Apple waited until the 21st century in order to provide a 2 or more button mouse with their computers, but it all boils down to them making a dumbed down machine. And you should know that copy and paste is maybe about 1% of what the right mouse button is used for. Even game companies had to dumb down their interfaces when porting to Mac in order to account for the single button. It really didn't benefit anyone aside from the idiots who were incapable of handling more than one button.

[Touchdown]

131. You know you're full of shit, right?

I told you that they built it in in the 90s. After USB became standard on all Macs in 1997.

Computers are not XBoxes. 8 buttons are necessary on a game machine, not a computer.

[EOTE]

134. You know you've got a reading comprehension problem, right? 2004 is in the 21st century.

I specifically stated that Macs were SHIPPING exclusively with 1 button mice until the 21st century. 2004 is when they started shipping a more advanced model. And why you bring up USB is puzzling to me as well considering that Macs were late to the party on that front too. No one mentioned anything about 8 buttons, but having 2 or more can be really handy if you're not daft. Mac OS 8.6 had 2 button mouse support, but no Macs shipped with them at the time. You'll also notice that they were a good deal more than a decade late in that regard. Once again, games, applications, user interface, all hobbled because Apple knew the limitations of their user base.


http://www.gearlive.com/index.php/news/article/why-apple-makes-a-one-buttoned-mouse-01280820/

[Touchdown]

138. You are still full of shit.

You don't know why Apple did what they did. You're just applying your own prejudices to motives you just pulled out of your ass.

And... all those Hollywood types that make SFX/CGI/Animated features, mostly on Macs are also "daft" in your opinion, right? Photographers... daft? Quick! Is F2 a larger aperture than F22?

Apple was falling way behind before Jobs took over again in 1997. It's taken years, but he put the company about to go bankrupt back in the top seat. The USB issue was previous management. Jobs killed the out dated Apple SCSI connectors on day 1. Day 2, he killed the clone program.

A dumbed down computer doesn't last on the market for 25 years by being and expensive worthless box.

[EOTE]

143. You don't think there's a 10% market share out there for a dumbed down computer?

I never said that Macs are useless, just that they appeal to the crowd that needs their hands held every step of the way. And visual fx work may have been easier on a Mac at one time, but that's certainly not the case any more. The great bulk of visual fx work done now is on PCs. They may have a greater proportion of users compared to their installed base, but it's still a small minority. And I do know very well why Apple did what they did, it's no secret if you follow the computer industry. Funny though that after I call you out on your own bullshit, your reply is basically "Oh yeah, well you still don't know what you're talking about." There will always be a market for people looking for a dumbed down product, Apple has got that market cornered.

[Touchdown]

145. I got friends in the industry. The majority is still Macs.

In truth, all systems are used (Silicone Graphics, Apple, Linux, Windows, Sun Micro etc), and the SFX software is usually custom built. At times the OSes for the CGI work are custom built as well.

Add liar to full of shit.

Put up or shut up. If you know for a fact, then there's unbiased documentation out there that says that Apple was one button for dumb people. Prove it. You are, after all "In the Industry".

[EOTE]

149. Once again intent on proving you lack the ability to read?

No shit all systems are used for SFX work. Where did I say this wasn't the case, Shercock? I simply said that Macs are indeed the minority when it comes to doing FX work. So you continue to be full of shit as well as a fan of the strawman. I already provided you with a link that explains why Macs shipped with a single button so long, but you go on believing the voices in your head. Here are some Mac users who will tell you the exact same thing:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=129785

http://www.city-data.com/forum/computers/227978-macs-why-one-button-mouse.html

But then again, what the hell do they know?

[Touchdown]

165. Users! Not industry insiders. Simple opinions.

You put that forth as a fact. You need to defend it with actual facts, not feelings from users. An Apple internal document stating "Our customers are daft. We can only provide one button." would suffice.

[EOTE]

186. Found it. How does Jef Raskin work for you?

Here's what he had to say on the matter:

"As for the one-button mouse, I’d observed at Xerox Parc which had a 3-button mouse, that people were very confused as to its use and when I was designing the software for the Macintosh, in designing the interface, I figured that if there was only one button, there would never be any question on what you have to press the number of ways of using a one-button mouse."

In other words, they were concerned that Mac users were too daft to figure out using more than one mouse button. You said wanted industry insiders? But what does he know? He only started the Macintosh project.

[ShamelessHussy]

246. lol

you obviously have no idea how hard, and how much extra effort goes into making things easier to use. nor appreciation for progress, apparently.

FYI: and just because something as complex as a computer is easier to use does not mean it is less powerful, please.

[EOTE]

248. For the money, it's a good deal less powerful.

The cheapest Mac you can get today has a two generations old processor. for the same money, you can get a PC with a current generation processor and a good deal more RAM and storage space. You pay heartily for the OS when you buy a Mac. Once again, I could build a PC for less than a third the price of an equivalently powerful Mac. And as for me having no idea how hard it is to make things easier to use, I beg to differ. I provide IT support for hundreds of people. I know how the luddites (don't) think. It's not too difficult to get into their heads.

[Touchdown]

87. 3 buttons, but thanks for playing.

:eyes:

[Egnever]

91. Yea? When did those start shipping as standard equipment?

[Touchdown]

97. My first was 2004, but they were out before.

So... 2003 maybe.

They had the capability for them since 1996. We just never needed them for cutting and pasting. We just held and dragged instead. C&P is a Windows thing. Convoluted and step heavy. Hold and drag is much better.

See? I can even do it from an M$ site...

[Egnever]

107. I am not sure what you are talking about

I can drag things anywhere I want and have been able to as long as I have usd windows.

Where are thy hiding the other two buttons in this pic?



or is that from before 2004?

[Touchdown]

114. It's a toggle bar.

:eyes:

[Egnever]

174. oic where are they hiding the mouse?

[Romulox]

205. They recognize two finger input. Click with two fingers for right click, drag two to scroll

It works a LOT better than most laptop based two button solutions (with tiny trackpad scroll strip.)

You aren't just wrong on this, you're out in left field! :hi:

[Romulox]

203. My MBP has one huge mouse button. You right click + scroll with two fingers, dufus. nt

[PVnRT]

32. I love you Apple fanboys

You just have to be the poor, little persecuted minority, striking back at the big corporate machine by mocking anyone not in your club on the internet.

[onehandle]

39. I like being in this minority. Also, Apple is poised to become valuable than Microsoft.

Quality and Quantity.

Nobody's persecuting me.

Certainly not Microsoft with Bill Gates' inept college roommate at the helm.

[Statistical]

45. Where is the quantity?

OS X marketshare ~ 5%.
2 weeks after launch Windows 7 marketshare ~ 4%.
Pretty soon there will be more Windows 7 machines then Macs.

Even during the "Vista years" the period you would think is the most likely period that Apple would gain MASSIVE marketshare, Apple marketshare "jumped" from 5.02% to 5.43%. Lets be nice and round up to 0.5% over 2 years. So at that rate it will only take 200 or so years before Apple has 50% marketshare.

[onehandle]

49. I was talking about the value of the company.

Market share is hovering around 10% right now and that's fine with me.

I'd rather drive a sports car than a Pinto anyway.

[Statistical]

54. What hovering around 10%?

[onehandle]

61. Market share.

Sorry I wasn't clear. I fixed it.

[Statistical]

62. Mac OS share is ~5% same as it has been for a while now.

http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/11/october-2009-os-stats-windows-7-passes-snow-leopard-linux-1.ars



2 weeks after launch there are roughly twice as many Windows 7 machines as Snow Leopard machines (which launched 6 months ago).



Likely by end of year there will be more Windows 7 machines then all Macs.

[onehandle]

68. Do you have Internet access?

Apple hit 10% earlier in the year. Just as Steve Jobs predicted a few years ago. Currently, it's around 9%. Market analysts expect it to hit 10% again at the end of the year.

Will it stay there? I'd ask Steve Jobs.

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2009/01/apple-nabs-10-share-in-december-market-share-survey.ars

[Statistical]

71. Will it stay there? Nope. It has already fallen.

You didn't notice the source for both articles is the same.
Check the dates. Yours is from a year ago and mine is the latest data available.

The 10% number also included iphone & ipod as "small computers".

Apple marketshare is ~5%. It has been for over a year. It likely will be for another year. Even with Vista horrible launch Apple gained <1% marketshare over the course of 2 years.

If you Want, go straight to the source.
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=8

[onehandle]

79. Oh, yeah. That's a really accurate listing.

Apple and Microsoft are really worried about competition from the Nintendo DS operating system.

Watch out. SunOS is on your heels, FreeBSD.

I think Microsoft bought Web TV, so can you add those numbers to Windows 7.

LOL!

Hardly 'Statistical.'

Macs grab record U.S. market share
http://brainstormtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2009/10/15/macs-grab-record-u-s-market-share/

[Statistical]

84. You do realize this was the source for your article also.

Strange you were praising the numbers when they were pro-apple.
When they are anti-apple you attack the source.

So which is it is the source good or bad?

Did you even read what you linked to in your post.
Did you happen to notice the arstechnica article used this as their source in Dec 2008 article.


Your most recent link is to US RETAIL SALES.

Just a couple points to get you thinking:
1) computers are sold outside the US
2) computers sold in the past still exist (i.e 10% of current sales =/= 10% marketshare of computers)
3) computers are sold outside retail (well except Macs)

[niceypoo]

55. MACs will never be more than a niche market

Overpriced. Inflexible. Not compatible with most software.

[onehandle]

58. How 1996 of you. nt

[niceypoo]

66. Well, that was informative...

:rofl:

[Ezlivin]

75. Inflexible: My MacPro is currently running four separate OSes

And if I want to I can run them concurrently and easily cut-n-paste between Ubuntu, Win XP, Snow Leopard and FreeBSD.

[niceypoo]

190. Try throwing the latest souped up Video card and a RAID hard drive into it

Then tell me how flexible it is.

[alfredo]

78. The Mac is more than computers. They have those little hand helds called

iPod Touch and iPhone. They (Steve Jobs) are the top stock holder in Disney. His people control the creative content of Disney. Apple has changed the music industry, is changing the movie industry, and maybe soon, publishing. The music industry was crashing and burning until the iTunes Store. Much of the remote content you see on the news is created using Apple software (final Cut Pro).

Market cap is what is important. Cash on hand is important, debt is important. Apple is very strong on those three points. Apple pushes innovation, forcing other makers to play catch up. Apple also commands mind space. It's better to act than react.

Apple out performs the market. MS stock mirrors the market, Apple outperforms.




Apple is more valuable than Dell and IBM. Apple hovers around 3rd in sales in computers.

It's not how much money you make, it's what you do with that money.

[alfredo]

81. BTW, that niche is quite large. MS is software, Apple is hardware.

When comparing Apple to MS, you are comparing a software company to a hardware company. OSX adds value to the hardware. If Mac were Windows machines they'd be just another box, a commodity. OSX sets them apart, so does design.

Apple has always felt that a 10% market share is more than enough. Apple has become quite wealthy and powerful with that "niche" market.

[4lbs]

110. The interesting thing is that before Windows came out, Bill Gates actually wanted to help Apple

bring the Mac OS to the PC platform.

Steve Jobs refused. However, it's an interesting what-if on how ubiquitous the Mac OS would have become if Steve Jobs allowed the Mac OS to be ported to the PC.

In essence, with current OS X systems running on what are, for all intents and purposes, PC hardware systems, that has now happened.

Intel dual-core CPU
PCI slots
USB 2.0 ports
SATA drives

Is that a PC or Mac?

[alfredo]

123. I think it was a wise decision. The biggest headache for Windows is dealing

with a wide array of hardware, including legacy hardware. Keeping control of the software and hardware has kept it simple for Apple. That cuts costs.

It isn't the individual components, it is how it is put together.



Dell



Mac

[niceypoo]

191. Actually you have it backwards

With a MAC you are paying for an OS and you are stuck with the hardware they provide. MACs use the same hardware PCs use and very inflexibly (try upgrading to the video card of your choice) which I assume they do to avoid driver issues.

PCs are hardware that can use multiple OS's, MS, Linux, Unix.

The 'PC = Microsoft' meme only works among MAC users.

[Touchdown]

218. And what quality hardware it is.

:D

[niceypoo]

228. It's the same hardware available to anyone

...except it is overpriced.

[Touchdown]

239. Hardware is specfically chosen to maximize OSX's efficiency.

Which is why Macs can get away with less RAM and less clock speed, and still work faster.

[alfredo]

233. dupe

[alfredo]

234. dupe dupe

[alfredo]

235. Even before they switched to Intel, I was running Linux on my Mac.

PC = Personal Computer.

It started off being associated with IBM clones.

I like the tight integration between hardware and software. I don't want to think about anything but what I am doing. I don't want the OS to get in the way of doing what I am doing. I want an OS that operates under the assumption that I know what I am doing. I don't want an OS that comes with a bunch of shovelware installed.


Apple is a HARDWARE company, not a software company. That's why they didn't want to license the software. It adds value to the hardware. It give the customer something different from the beige boxes you can buy at Wal Mart.

where I started:


Where I suffered:



Where I was enlightened:

[EOTE]

67. Sports car vs. Pinto.

I put together my system in February of this year for less than a grand. I've got a quad core (8 logical cores) CPU overclocked to 4.2ghz. I've got 6 gigs of triple channel RAM. I've got 1.5 terabytes of storage in a rather fast RAID 0 configuration (plus backup). I've got a GTX 285 with a gig of memory connected to my 24" CRT (with better image quality than any Mac LCD I've seen). I've put my system up against Macs which cost two or three times what I paid for my system and none of them come close to the performance of my rig both in terms of games or office applications. Your sports car vs. Pinto analogy doesn't hold up unless the Pinto is the Mac and you just spent $20 grand on one.

[LiberalLovinLug]

115. You are a niche market

The only way a PC running Windows is economically or practically better than a Mac is if you build it yourself. Good for you. Of course that doesn't solve the virus and adware problems. But if you go out of your way to shop for the very best parts at the very best prices. Spend the time to get all the parts and then sit down and construct your machine from the ground up, you will get a powerful machine for the money spent.

But first off you have to be technically savvy with not only the knowledge of what to get but also putting it all together. I can completely understand someone who cannot stand that Mac is already built and ready to go with everything you need, on a stable system that has exclusive quality control on standardized parts. You want to 'do it yourself'. But understand that you are a minority. Then there's the time (is money) factor. Shopping for the parts and the time to build it and test it. How much is your time worth? I'd rather be working on the computer than building it. That's me.

You are like a college kid who buys an old Pinto 'shell' and then replaces the motor, suspension, tires, gear shift, drive train, etc..with top of the line parts. Spends a year in the garage getting everything to run together smoothly. And when its finally all done you can take it out on the streets and compete with the brand new top end sports car, that you only paid 2/3 of the cost, by the time you add up the bills. (who's counting the time).

Some of us would just rather pay the extra 1/3 and be driving around much sooner and have a system that was built to work well and efficient from the get go. But I make exceptions for the tinkerer like yourself, you actually ENJOY that type of problem to solve, and any future problems you will encounter, and you will. Have fun.

[EOTE]

121. The analogy still holds.

I spent all of a couple hours sourcing out my parts and that's only because I built my system for gaming and wanted to get the best bang for the buck. If I wanted to, I could spend about 5 minutes sourcing out the parts on Newegg.com for a $500 build and it would still be faster than any Mac for under $1500 or so. And it took me less than an hour and a half to actually assemble my computer and that includes the Windows 7 installation. And as for antivirus/anti-malware, I use free versions that keep me running smooth and stable 24/7.

I am an IT professional, but I've helped people assemble their own systems and they now do it themselves. It's rather easy to do and you'll save a boat load of money every time. And don't kid yourself about paying an extra third. How about paying 3x extra? You'd have to spend at least 3 grand to get a Mac that's as fast as the system I put together for a grand. And even when you factor in the time I spent online picking out the parts and home putting it together (I'll be generous and say 4 hours), I still made out like a bandit compared to if I purchased a Mac. When doing freelance work, I typically charge $50 an hour, so that means I could add another $200 to the cost of my build (even though putting together a new system is one of the things I most look forward to). Even at $1200, there's not a Mac that can touch the performance I have for twice the price. I purchased good quality parts, not all top of the line, but it will still smoke any Mac anywhere near the price. And believe me, my system works very well and never experiences any down time. Future problems are not a concern of mine.

In spite of all this, you can get pre-assembled PCs for a small fraction of the price of any Mac out there. Check out Slickdeals.net or Fatwallet.com and you'll see a variety of Dell or HP desktops for around $300. You can get a Mac Mini for around $500 or so, but it won't be anywhere near as fast. Granted, building your own is always the best way to go, but even if you don't, you can get a much better deal with a PC.

[Touchdown]

132. That explains your ignorance on Macs, and your hostility towards them.

You're a gamer. Games aren't on Macs, therefore NOBODY on Earth should use them.:eyes:

The analogy doesn't hold if you have to have a Windows OS with the cheaper machine you bought. We use Macs because we don't want to use Windows.

[EOTE]

136. Then don't use Windows. I certainly have no desire to use OSX.

Even though I could put it on my computer and have it run better than just about any Mac out there. You may be perfectly content spending 3x as much on hardware that's far less capable, but I'll make my own and spend my money on more worthwhile things. And it's not just games that run much better on my computer than on any Mac up to twice the price. Adobe CS4, After Effects, Office, Visual Basic, Pro Tools, all run a good deal better and smoother on my computer than any similarly priced Mac. And I've been using Windows 7 since February and haven't had a single lock up, malfunction or BSOD.

[Touchdown]

139. I have no problem paying for quality. Value is a perception.

I'm sorry your too poor to consider the finer things in life.

[EOTE]

146. Ahhh yes, it's quality that I'm missing out on.

I've got a CRT with better image quality than anything Mac has ever made. My graphics card is the fastest single GPU card available right now and it would cost $150 more if I bought it for a Mac (the hardware is identical, the BIOS is simply changed to allow it to work on a Mac). I'm not sure exactly what you're referring to when you speak of "quality", but I want my computer to be fast and reliable, something my computer has in spades. It looks and performs exactly as I want it to.

And for you to try and insult me by calling me poor just shows what an incredible douche bag you are. You don't know me, you just have to lash out because I hurt your fragile, little ego. For you to think that just because I don't want to throw away an extra few grand so I can have a computer which would be far less capable means that I don't enjoy the finer things in life just means that you're an idiot who doesn't know what the finer things are. I'll give you a hint, there's not always a direct correlation between the quality of something and how much it costs. Steve Jobs better hope that you and your ilk never realize that or else he'll be very upset. I've got tons of other things I'd rather spend my money on than enriching AAPL stock holders.

[Touchdown]

169. Ah' yes. Now I remember you.

That little browbeating Randesque screed in your second paragraph jogged my memory.

You're the flake that pushed that "market presence" strawman argument for Macs having less viruses sometime last summer, and got pissed when I said that argument is stupid and makes no difference.

It seems that you fall on the browbeating lectures often. And for the record, I don't care what you make, how rich you are, or anything else. You seem to think everybody like me is wasting our money because there should be no choice in computer OSes. I just played your game "because I'm fucking loaded, burn money in my fireplace and have no kids, so I throw it away on toys." I'm glad it got to you. :rofl:

[EOTE]

185. I assume you mean to say Randian?

As in, pertaining to Ayn Rand? You using that (incorrect) term proves you know nothing of what it means. And I'm sorry if you get facts confused with strawmen, but I assure you it has nothing to do with me.

And you may not care what I make, but you thought enough of it to use as an insult, your douchebaggery is there for everyone to see. I'm afraid you've completely misunderstood me. I have absolutely zero problem with you paying a 200% stupid tax, you're doing your small part to keep components cheap for me. It's just like those massive cell phones marketed to old folks. Sure, you could get a full featured cell phone for the same price, but those huge buttons and operator who assists you with retrieving your voice mail don't come cheap, you know? You know that being stupid has a price and you're more than willing to pay that price, more power to you. I'm very much for an open market (even better, open source).

And as for me showing you insider quotes as to Apple realizing their users are too stupid to use a mouse with more than one button? Well, as hard as I tried, I couldn't find a Steve Jobs quote saying that his followers were dumb as rocks so that's why they waited 20 years to get on the 2 button mouse bandwagon. I did provide an article on the subject as well as two links to Mac users who would even admit to as much, but apparently those people have really low self esteem and were just aching to prove that they're morons.

[Touchdown]

209. Oh' you speak for everyone now? You are really in love with yourself, aren't you?

"...douchebaggery is there for everyone to see." Actually it's only you that's seeing things.

No, it's a strawman. The facts are that Macs get very few viruses. It's also a fact that Macs have between 7 and 10% of market share. It is not a fact that those two are related in any way. It's never been proven, only asserted... over and over again like Goebbels' propaganda until it becomes unquestionable. News flash. It's still questionable.

You obviously have a problem. You saying you "have no problem..." is negated by your hostility towards Mac users and anybody who refuses to apologize to you for using them. You might think you should be listened to, but nobody gives a shit what you say, or cares if you work in IT or not. I work in telecom, that doesn't mean I know everything about the world wide telephone network.

Posing as an authority is what attracted me to knock you down. Very little else of what you said is relevant.

[EOTE]

213. I already posted the link you were looking for.

The one where the man who Apple hired to head Project Macintosh and one of the world's foremost computer-interface experts said that he thought that Mac users would be too beguiled by a second button and that's why he left it out. You accused me of lying when I said that, and now you've got your proof that you were the one who is full of shit. Care to address that at all or will you conveniently forget about it? And once again, I have no hostility towards Mac users, just idiots like you who think they have a clue, but are sorely lacking. Once again, your purchases help to make my purchases that much cheaper, please make more of them. And I've knocked you down so many times already, I'm amazed you're still getting up. When you find yourself in a hole, it's best to stop digging. Oh, you're still a douche.

[Touchdown]

214. I read it. It was in the beginning when no computers used mice. Sounds reasonable.

To extrapolate that into years later when engineers are working on evolutions of an already established computer with a sizable customer base, who could be angry at the purchase of a two button peripheral, is stretching it at best.

By reading your rant here, I'm concluding you are wishing me to bow before your superior intellect. Sorry, but I can't stroke your dick just yet. Get a hooker.

Ironic that you expect me to concede an argument to a post you didn't respond to, and ignored everything I said in the post you did. Still clinging to that "Macs don't get viruses because they only have 5% of the market" fantasy?

"When you find yourself in a hole, it's best to stop digging." Good advice for you.

and EDIT: Call me names all you want, Child. You are still not an authority.

[EOTE]

215. Funny how you have to bring up an old argument to distract from the current one.

You may think it's "fantasy" that virus makers wouldn't bother with a computer market that represents 5% of the total (excluding handhelds), but most thinking people think it's apparent on its face. But it's ridiculously stupid to argue any further than that, because you're just gonna say "Nuh uh!!! You can't tell me what virus makers are thinking!!" Which is true. Apparently you think people who write viruses do it for the coding practice, rather than infecting as many computers as possible.

And this was at a time when computers did use mice, Raskin even used Xerox PARC as an example. And yes, it took more than twenty years from that point for them to develop a mouse with more than one button. What does that tell you about what they thought of their user base? Hell, it was almost twenty years before they even gave their users the OPTION of using one. You can try to spin it any way you want, but you're wrong. Flat wrong, stupidly wrong. And yes, I'm very much an authority. You can ask the 400+ FDA users I support.

P.S. I notice your posts get even more rambling and grammatically incorrect when you get angry.

[Touchdown]

216. Actually I'm having a ball with you.

First name calling, now grammar critiques. Such an authority.

Most thinking people use the term "Death Tax". Most people who watch cable news watch Fox. So what most people see as readily apparent is to be taken with extreme skepticism. Your agenda is showing, as you still refuse to come into 2009 and acknowledge that the market share for Macintoshes is 9-10%, which is more of that "Most thinking people" argument.

I said nothing about virus makers. You, being a "thinking people", seemed to have missed the point, and looked around me to find how you want to frame this argument. It's the Mac/UNIX resistance to viruses that is the issue. Market share is just a convenient excuse for the DOS/DLL crowd.

You might see condescension in the one button issue. I don't. We don't agree on this. Even when the company was on the ropes in the 90s, they still survived. Not on stupid people, but magazines, Hollywood SFX houses, University labs, Stephen King, newspapers, graphic artist studios, photography labs, porno studios, University libraries, Art Schools, High Schools, and a few small businesses thrown in for good measure. And they produced... with one button mice. I don't think any of these people were daft, stupid, dumb, or naive to have a second button mouse. The Macs of the day never needed one.

EDIT: Fixed a run-on sentence for you, Teacher!

EDIT AGAIN: What's your real name so I can ask those FDA workers about you?:evilgrin:

[EOTE]

221. That 9% figure includes mobile devices. The actual number is around 7%.

And talking to you about viruses is slightly less fruitful than banging my head against the wall, so I'll stop.

And it's also quite apparent that Apple managed to survive as a company for a long time while having a small market share. Sure, they were used at schools where children might be intimidated by real computers and in the arts where Apple invested quite a bit in R&D in terms of making intuitive software along with 2nd and 3rd party developers. None of that negates the fact that the Mac mouse was originally designed because the people on the Macintosh team thought more than one mouse button would be too damn confusing for its base. And they weren't being condescending, they were being smart. That's why it took them over 20 years to rectify the issue. And if it was such a non-issue, why'd they even bother to correct it?

http://community.winsupersite.com/blogs/paul/archive/2009/04/22/mac-market-share-in-q1-2009-3-36-percent-apple-earnings-strong.aspx

On edit: As to my real name, it shouldn't be all that difficult to find. And my clients give me their highest recommendation.

[Touchdown]

236. I don't need your real name, I'm just joshing you.

And you really might know your stuff when it comes to your clients.

Regarding market share. This is nit picking, but you throw that "fact" word around a lot. 9.63% for Macs alone.

Apple's share is just over 10 percent, if one combines the market share for both Macs and iPhones. Macs account for 9.63 percent of computers online. (Windows Mobile devices are included in the 88.7 percent figure.)

http://www.tuaw.com/2009/01/02/apple-market-share-tops-10-windows-share-lowest-since-tracking/

AS far as the resons for one button mice are concerned, I thought you might be cherry picking your sources, and since I demanded it of you, I looked a few reasons up...

Since the first Apple Macintosh came out, Apple has been supplying Mac users with a single button mouse. The reasons have been largely that of usability and ergonomics. Graphic designers, in particular, have often preferred the single-button mouse, as it was easier to control for precise design work.

http://www.designtalkboard.com/design-news/apple-mouse.php

This next one includes your reasoning (which I get now, since I also read that 70% of Windows users never right click anyhow), but it's not the only one...
Secondly, Apple wants all developers to follow their interface guidelines. The reason for this is tied into what I wrote above. If every application can be expected to work the same way, the learning curve for the user is minimized. Apple has gone through great pains and great expense to study human-computer interaction. Because of these studies, one thing Apple insists on is that every feature of an application should be accessible through menu items. It’s great and even encouraged to create additional ways of accessing features, but at a bare minimum, you should be able to reach it from the menu.

There are more reasons why multibutton mice are not appropriate and it is not just beginners. I beleive there is an issue of ergonomics. When you click on a multi button mouse especially the left button, the most used button, you are forced to use the index finger. This strains the tendons in this finger after a long day of use. With a single button mouse, especially the ‘no button mouse’, you use a couple of fingers to push the ‘button’. This puts less strain on one finger.

http://www.gearlive.com/index.php/news/article/why-apple-makes-a-one-buttoned-mouse-01280820/

There is another reason, which can't be verified that Apple never wanted their developers to overload a right click menu with a plethora of options.

Why'd they bother? Correcting it is your framing, not mine. It may have been 2 button compatible since OS 8.2, but even Snow Leopard can be used just fine with a single button.

Many reasons, but not the least of which is users like you, who make claims on the inferiority of a single mouse architecture. This being used as an argument to not get Macs, when there's IT stories out there in Googleland that shows that 70% of computer users never use the right button anyhow. If the fun-makers in this thread alone are any indication, Apple started shipping multi-button mice because of consumer demand/percieved capability of it. Another would be industry standardization/accepting the inevitable. A third would be attractiveness to game makers (and in fact, since they started shipping with 2 button mice, there have been twice as many games available).

Correctness is a matter of perspective. I am inclined to agree with you. Two buttons are better, and makes for quicker use. It does depend on what the person is doing with the computer though.

And... it seems that Apple is going back to one button, only this time with movement gestures & multi touch. Oh' what will the idiot Mac users do now?:rofl:

Regarding that. I have never met a Mac user who is a computer neophyte or an idiot, school children not withstanding. They all seem to be Windows users who have HP/Acer/Compaq/Dell/Gateways.

[wolfgangmo]

226. FDA - as in Food and Drug Administration?

So what Pharma or Big insurance companies do you work for?

[EOTE]

229. I guess by extension, all of them.

:shrug:

[wolfgangmo]

225. Translation - oooo I gotta big processor babeeeee.

And my penis is big too? Wanna, um, dance?


...Where are you going?

[EOTE]

231. Processors are pretty tiny. Hardly analogous to my penis.

If you'd like a more appropriate metaphor for my junk, you should take a look under the hood of my car.

[Toasterlad]

80. Is It Just Me, Or Are the "I'm a Mac" TV Ads Getting More and More Desperate?

They're on at least their third generation of ads since Windows 7 came out. They haven't really pointed out any flaws in Windows 7; at first they said that Microsoft can't be trusted because they released faulty OS before, now, they're saying that, since you have to upgrade and move your stuff anyway, why not move it to a Mac? But nothing about any actual problems with Win 7.

[PVnRT]

83. They were stale a while ago

"Oh, look! Windows users are, like, NERDS, man! Apple users are all cool and shit!"

Yeah, it would be nice if they actually spoke about their features, performance, and the like. When I upgraded our new desktop to Windows 7, I had no problems with my stuff; nothing got lost at all. Funny how that worked.

[Toasterlad]

86. I Actually Still Like Them, Because I Think John Hodgeman's Funny, And Justin Long Is Hot.

But since I recently upgraded to 7 as well, with only one minor hiccup that was not Windows' fault, I've become more conscious of the commercials and what they're saying. Seems to me, they should be focusing on the good things about Macs, which is what they used to do. Trying to trash an upgradge that's gotten overwhelming approval seems to be a no-win strategy.

[niceypoo]

36. The MAC 'Slacker' commercials are worn out

Apple never touts MAC strengths, instead they just attack windows, whom they dishonestly refer to as "PC". Apparently they cannot sell MACs on the strengths of the OS, instead opting for a 'buy us because We're not them' strategy.

The 'MAC vs PC' debate rages only among MAC users. it is a never ending obsession amongst MAC users.

[Dreamer Tatum]

60. Apple seems to insist that computers are for managing music, pictures, and video

Unlike every single solitary Mac user, I'm not a professional videographer and I don't
need to share pictures of my dog in a funny hat with everyone on the Internet. I also
couldn't give two shits about how sleek my computer looks. Mac users seem to want other people
to watch and admire them as they seamlessly manage gigs and gigs of (apparently) highly
consequential personal media.

I'm a number cruncher. The software I use is available for Mac, but maybe 1 of every 50 people
in my professional community uses one. And I've never, ever had any trouble with Windows.

[L0oniX]

40. Meanwhile ...I won't be paying a dime for FreeBSD, KDE and all of the apps.

Oh and you might want to notice that DU is running DCForum+ which is about to go GPL. It won't run on XPuke, Pista, or Winsux7.

[KatyMan]

116. That was mature

What are you, 12?

[L0oniX]

142. What are you ...an asshole?

[KatyMan]

162. Guess I was right

isn't it past your bedtime?

[L0oniX]

163. So put another fucking gold star up by your name ...pffft

"What are you, 12?" Punks like you are what the ignore function is for. Go fuck yourself ya asshole.

[KatyMan]

171. Guess you won't read this one, then

When you grow up you'll learn that operating systems aren't worth getting that worked up about and the cute little names you give them don't go over well in interviews.

[Statistical]

122. PHP runs just fine on windows servers.

http://www.dcscripts.com/dcforump_require.shtml

[L0oniX]

144. Like I said ...it won't run on XPuke, Pista, or Winsux7.

NT or 2000 ...yea.

[Statistical]

157. or 2003 oe 2008.

Vista, 2003, Windows 7, and 2008 share same NT kernel (NT 6.x).

Lastly php will work just fine on a desktop OS like XP/Vista/W7. A server grade OS is recommended (Microsoft or otherwise) but it isn't like PHP refuses to install if it is a desktop OS.


Also Xpuke? Really? Are you 9?

[L0oniX]

159. Typical insulting asshole.

[Statistical]

160. Sorry you found facts to be insulting.

They are what they are.

[L0oniX]

161. ...

"Also Xpuke? Really? Are you 9?" ...I suppose that's not an insult huh. What I read and said came from the DCscript site. If you have a problem with the info then go insult them or maybe it's that you have an inferiority complex and you have to try to put down others so as to make yourself feel better?

[Bonobo]

41. The only thing that needs to be said in the Mac VS. PC "war".

For an everage user like myself, a mac will give you an easy-to-use device that you don't have to worry about in terms of viruses, malware, etc.

A PC, without taking the effort to get anti-spyware, anti-virus software, will get gummed up in no time with so much malware that it will soon be a piece of useless shit.

That's how my experiences have been. Surely others have had other experiences, but I suppose this is a common experience for MANY.

[niceypoo]

47. I use a PC and have never had spyware OR viruses

Because I run LINUX on my PC

I believe it is 'Windows' you are refering to, not 'PC.' PC is hardware, 'Windows' is software.

[Bonobo]

48. Yes, thank you. That is, of course, what I meant. Windows. nt

[supernova]

52. Vista more stable than Mac OS? Really?

:rofl:

Macs aren't perfect but they are far more stable than Windows. Mac OS is a form of UNIX. You don't get more stable than that with the current state of technology.

edit: Working in IT, I know plenty of folks who put UNIX or Linux on their PCs and they work just fine. It's very possible. But most laypeople don't know how to program that OS to customize it for themselves.

[gkhouston]

82. Sure it is... as long as the power switch is the the "off" position.

Otherwise, it goes up and down like a pogo stick.

[StarfarerBill]

72. Bill Gates has been stealing other people's ideas since day one...

...and making billions off of them. Why is this news?

[Statistical]

74. You are aware Bill Gates hasn't run day to day operations at Microsoft for almost a decade.

You will need a new villain to beat up on.

Doing more to stop spread of Aids in Africa than most govt has done is a full time job.

[StarfarerBill]

88. Do you think Gates didn't leave in place the same basic system that he initially set up?

Micro$oft is the Wal-Mart of the software world, and Gates is its Sam Walton.

All those billions he stole would do a lot more good in the hands of NGOs than him doling out dribs-and-drabs as he sees fit.

[Touchdown]

89. By paying for circumcisions which won't do shit to curb the disease.

He's being duped. For such a savvy guy, Gates was sure taken in by them.

[marlakay]

90. I love the new mac commercials

they are the only ones I don't mute.

[Egnever]

93. they are funny no doubt about that

[niceypoo]

202. Problem with their 'Slacker' advertisments is...

...they never tout MACs on their strengths, instead relying on the logical fallacy, 'He is bad, and I'm not him, therefore I am good'. They also misguidedly refer to Microsoft as 'PC,' which it isn't. My PC runs Linux.

The ads have gotten really absurd with windows 7 release. They now use the ol' 'guilt by association as an ad hominem' fallacy in an attempt to associate 7 with previous releases, rather than comparing windows 7 to the MAC strengths. They are beginning to look desperate.

[slackmaster]

95. Vista is quite stable

It sucks consistently all the time.

[RedCappedBandit]

103. My macbook is the shittiest computer I have ever owned

I fail to see how apple, as a company, is any better than microsoft. They're both a friggin joke, and if I couldn't get Windows 7 for 20 bucks thanks to being a student, I sure as hell wouldn't be switching to it.
As for shelling out thousands of dollars for a mac that has the same hardware as a system I could put together for half the price, don't make me laugh.

[4lbs]

109. All GUIs almost have the same look and feel nowadays. Be it OS X, Win 7, Gnome, or KDE.

The whole "look-and-feel" argument was settled by the USSC in the 1990s.

You can copy a GUI's look-and-feel, as long as you don't use the same code and images.

When you get down to it, everything was copied from Xerox's PARC. That includes the original Mac OS in the early 1980s.

[Statistical]

119. That is the truth. Slowly evolving to all look very similar to one another.

[KatyMan]

118. I think most Windows problems,

and by most I mean nearly all, are down to user errors. I admit I'm in the IT biz, but I don't deal with desktops beyond my own, and can say I've never had any of the problems people complain about. Occasional malware might get in because the kids downloaded something they shouldn't have, but I've had no chronic crashing problems, or IE problems. I'm fine with MS products, they work, they're fairly uniform in terms of tools (the MMC, for example), and I find them stable and intuitive. I dont' have Mac experience, but I'm not anti Mac, just don't see the need for change.

[Statistical]

120. I would say a substantial number of problems is poor driver support from vendors.

Microsoft has worked to reduce that with certified drivers but often poorly behaving drivers can cause system crashes, freezes, even blue screen of death.
Most BSOD once you look up debug information are related to failed video driver.

I am not sure what the solution for that is. Microsoft has little control over what hardware its OS is installed on.

[CRF450]

126. I've seen many kids/teens download music through Limewire...

And end up getting crap on their computer because they dont know what to look for or what to look out for, they see a name of a favorite artist or song and just double click on it without checking out the file in detail.

[Touchdown]

133. I've used LImewire on my Macs. It's a PIA.

So many choices, and most of them don't yield what I really want. I'm not a kid, so I can afford the 99¢ for a song, so I just download from stores.

[KatyMan]

172. Yep, they just click the name

and expect it to be legit. Easy enough to block those sorts of sites, you just have to keep up with which ones!

[CRF450]

220. I've come accross many of those files that try to make you...

Download a separate type of media player, dunno what it is but I suspect its something NOT GOOD. Now I check if the Artist, Album, Bitrate, and name of the song to be sure its legit. Oh and make sure its an mp3 file before downloading too.

[Odin2005]

180. Exactly. People need to quit blaming others for their PC screw-ups.

[HopeOverFear]

124. Until Apple brings their prices down, fuck them

I'm staying with PC.

[ShamelessHussy]

155. You get what you pay for

Though you can get a brand new mac for $599

FYI

[Statistical]

164. Well no Apple gross profit margins are 42% highest in industry.

A $2000 machine is $1200 in hardware/software (mostly commoditized) and over $800 in profit for shareholders. :)

So sometimes you don't get what you pay for (unless the intent it to increase shareholder value).

[ShamelessHussy]

194. You get high quality via tightly coupled hardware and software

Plus apples ledegdary attention to detail and support.

Well worth the investment, IMHO.

[Touchdown]

240. Pick these up quick before the lawsuit forces them to stop.

http://www.psystar.com/

[DainBramaged]

125. Macintosh, the penis for people who can't afford a Hummer.....

:rofl:

[Touchdown]

141. Oooh! Real ballsy for a coward who put all Mac users on ignore.

.... Why? Chickenshit?

[Hawkeye-X]

127. I just installed 7 Ultimate on my ancient Dimension 3000

and it's running SO smoothly like it's new.

Only issue is graphics, but I'll fix that soon enough. (wields a big hammer)

[Warren DeMontague]

147. I like some of Apple's stuff... I also like some of Jesus's stuff.

It's their fucking proselytizers I can't stand.

[Deja Q]

151. I played with Win7 a tad... they stole more from KDE this time around...

Which is okay as KDE was rubbish to begin with... free, open source rubbish...

If shitsoft is openly saying they're copying Apple - eradicate them with a lawsuit. MS would lose on enough misadvertising and other misleading claims and situations alone, never mind brazenly admitting they're copying the competition. And never mind the quality of their products, for which I will thank Microsoft yet again -- without their products, I wouldn't have migrated to Apple to begin with. (which I've said in the past with enough detail people won't care about because they don't like details so forget about 'em)

And Win7 is shoddily scribbled bloatware, little better than Vista (which was a hell of a lot worse than XP). I was a beta-tester.

Even offering me free copies won't drive me back. They've screwed their customers time and again and I don't see why mediocrity should be rewarded, especially with a lot of other issues they've engaged in that I won't bring up right now... mostly because I've responded to those in the threads where those actions get brought up in.

Maybe when MS axes the registry, replaced NTFS with a real file system, and develop a proper user interface where the icons have a unity and not appear as a gaggle of disparate graphics that were made for the fisher price crowd... that is when they'll begin to develop a proper OS. I doubt it'd be any more stable, however.

[ShamelessHussy]

154. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery

Apple has always paid much more attention to detail when it comes to the user experience and is why they get my hard earned money.

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

158. That's called SOFTWARE PIRACY.

There aught ta be a law... Oh, wait... :shrug:

[Nikki Stone1]

167. Microsoft was like the kid who cheated over everyone's shoulder. They never did their own work.

From the beginning, Microsoft never did its own work: it took taxpayer-funded DOS from Xerox, then it stole Mac's "interface" for Windows. Now it steals OS X.

[Bravo Zulu]

168. Mac doesn't run my favorite software!NT

[Stinky The Clown]

175. Mac can run ANY software.

My MacPro is the best Windows machine you ever saw. I can run Windows native and never see the Mac OS or I can run Windows program on the Mac desktop faster than any Windows machine we own.

If you want to run Unix or BeOS or any other OS, you can, native or on the Mac desktop.

[Statistical]

182. If the goal is to run windows, unix, or linux why would someone pay 2x to 3x as much for a Mac.

Mac is just PC hardware at higher price. There isn't a single component in a Mac that isn't available on PC.

$2800 Mac Pro system = $1400 PC system with comparable specs.

The only reason to pay the 100% to 200% premium for a Mac is to have access to OS X.
Of course the Hackintosh community will grow and someday installing OS X on PC hardware will eventually be no harder than Linux.

[ShamelessHussy]

244. Quality Hardware/Software/OS + Service and Support

I use 3 OS's (Windows, Linux, and Mac) daily, and I appreciate the tight coupling of the OS to the app UI's, as well as to the hardware of the apple products the best.

not to mention that i can run all 3 on 1 laptop, at the same time... saves me money from a development and trouble shooting stand point, to boot.

:hi:

[niceypoo]

198. Try running some newer video games that require the latest instruction sets

...only found in the latest cards. Good luck with that.

WHy spend 2 grand on a PC to run windows programs when you can get one for under 300$ that does the same?

[Stinky The Clown]

173. Depending on when that was actually uttered, it might factually be true.

We switched from PC to Mac a few years ago and will likely never go back. That said, we upgraded one of our Macs from Leopard (OS X 10.5.n) to Snow Leopard (OS X 10.6.n). The computer on which it is installed (our only I-Mac) has had serious issues ever since. The other three Macs we have all run great. All four have pretty much the same software installed. The only big difference is Snow Leopard. Our I-Mac has a date at the Apple Store to get rolled back to Leopard.

Snow Leopard is shit software that, like so much from Microsoft, was released before it was ready.

I can't speak to Vista, but we have six PCs of various age, all with XP on them. Apart from viruses, which are a scourge, the machines are very stable. We chose to run Macs because they are (so far) immune to viruses and far more user friendly. PCs, just to install software, are a massive ass pain. Networking is also a pain in the ass. Macs just seem to know what do and do it without drama. If, for example, they see a network, they simply ask if you want to join it and if you say yes, the OS does the rest. Try **that** with a Windows machine!

[Odin2005]

179. Mac: The computer for wannabe armchair radicals.

because supporting a CORPORATION that makes overpriced, underpowered, cutesy-looking computers is so radical! :rofl:

Windows 7 works very well, thank you.

[niceypoo]

192. Yet the training wheels dont come off

[anonymous171]

211. Seriously. I prefer windows

But I recognize that Microsoft is an evil corporation that would do anything to maximize its profits. Apple cultists will refuse to acknowledge this fact about their precious company. They have been taken in by Apple's ingenious marketing campaign (Cool people own macs, if you do not own one, you are a totally uncool nerd.)

[Lyric]

195. I don't get all the Vista hate.

Anyone with half a brain and Google can get past the irritating "Do you really want to do this?" popups, and although I can only speak for my household, we've been using it for over a year and a half with no crashes or freezes--not even one--even though I run a myriad of intense games, music software, movies, and photo imaging software. Internet Explorer sucks, of course, so we never use it, but Vista itself seems fine.

:shrug:

[Statistical]

196. Vista w/ SP2 is much better than Vista at launch however perceptions are difficult to break.

As a comparison ask GM. GM vehicles today are actually pretty damn competitive however a decade of utterly burning the consumer can't be turned around with a recent fix.

Vista w/ SP2 + sufficient resources (no trying to run it w/ 1GB or ram or some piece of crap intel video card that chokes on Aero) + proper drivers + clean install is very stable however trying to change the perception is far more difficult for Microsoft then simply moving past Vista. Product launches are very important for brand, support, and pubic perception and Vista launch was just about as bad as anything I can remember.

Windows 7 is a chance to start from clean slate. Also I like that virtually all Windows 7 machines are being pushed w/ x64 version which means improved support for x64 drviers.

[niceypoo]

197. Microsoft blew it with Vista

They made everything irritating. People dont like the OS breathing down their neck. You have to be an administrator to defrag....wouldnt want hackers defragging our computer now, would we?

They took 'security' to absurd levels and drove away a lot of customers in the process. They also made it a resource hog, my new laptop came with Vista and with a dual core processor and 3 gigs of RAM it should run fast. It ran so slow that my laptop was barely usable. I put up with it for the rest of that quarter at school then immediately erased it and put Ubuntu on it which I use to this day with zero problems.

Not sure what microsoft was thinking when they did Vista, but it sure cost them a lot of money.

[RoyGBiv]

224. Microsoft did not say that ...

I'm not reading this obvious train wreck of a thread to see if this has been mentioned already, but Microsoft, as a company, said no such thing.

Two days ago a specific manager in a department that didn't actually work on the design of Windows 7 said that.

The next day Microsoft, the company, denied it.

Of course, the article itself mentions these facts. The OP headline is just so much stuff and nonsense with the clear intent to inflame.

Now I say this as someone who positively loathes Microsoft and do not use their products to the absolute best of my ability. (I don't use Apple either, if it matters.) They, combined with RIAA, the MPAA, and the cable networks are a monolith of astronomical proportions that seek to do nothing else but define for us how, when, and under what circumstances they dictate we have access to information and communication.

But this kind of hyperbole doesn't help. Nor does it matter in the Apple vs. Microsoft war particularly. Both companies steal from others on a regular basis while at the same time attempting to establish legal brick walls for everyone not willing to pay their pieces of silver.

I guess this is the kind of thing that gets people's attention. Mention the legal trickery both companies are attempting at this very moment and people's eyes glaze over, refer to anyone trying to inform them of these issues as hopeless geeks who can't get laid.

Pffttt

[KamaAina]

227. Hell, they stole Apple's look and feel for Windows 3.1

with such minor tweaks as changing the Trash Can to the oh-so-green Recycle Bin.

Apple actually won a court case against Micro$oft, but like ever so many judgments against the big corps, it got tossed out on appeal.

[951-Riverside]

238. Its amaing how many netbooks/nettops still run XP

I think XP is still going to have a dominant role until Microsoft comes out with a less bloated OS.

[WillowTree]

242. These PC vs Mac threads are always among the most entertaining on any board.

So many people, no matter which side of the debate they're on, who feel the need to convince themselves that they're so superior that anyone with different needs, perspectives or preferences must be idiots rather than just different.

Very entertaining indeed.

[ShamelessHussy]

245. I think that the computer is such an ubiquitous and important tool to most folks lives these days

they are bound to have strong opinions on the subject.

sure, some posts may be low brow, but on the whole i think these debates are very worthy and are a part of what helps keeps the innovators, innovating ;)

:hi:

edit: typo