Re: Top Ten Reasons to Not Wait for Vista
- From: TheLetterK <none@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 15:31:23 -0500
Donald L McDaniel wrote:
On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 15:05:12 -0800, TheLetterK wrote
(in article <QN6Kf.29731$X7.1378@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>):
imouttahere@xxxxxxx wrote:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ttpcworld/20060210/tc_techtues_pcwo
rld/124642&cid=1740&ncid=1729
1. Security: User Account Protection. Shipping with OS X now.
Does it matter? Third-party tools have always been developed and shipped for Windows which take over the problem of Security.
Not at this level. Strange that it took Microsoft 20 years to figure out how to write a sudo + libgksu clone.
But Windows users, for the most part, just aren't technically-minded enough to use them. Microsoft chose from the beginning to make it's OS open-ended, rather than closed, as Apple chose to make their OS.
Windows Vista will not be any more 'open ended' than Windows XP was, unfortunately.
Microsoft's choice has made a much larger market for Wintels and the software used on them. This was Bill's choice from the beginning. He chose to make both himself and his developers rich. Steve Jobs chose a different course. He chose to make only himself rich.
Which is "better"? Each person must decide for himself.
I'm wondering why you replied to my post, if most of your comments were aimed at the OP.
<sarcasm>Yeah, hold me back.</sarcasm>
2. IE7: No thanks, we've had tabbed browsing for ages now, and the
browser is already properly sandboxed.
With this, I am in full agreement. Microsoft has been too occupied with backward-compatibility for too many years, now. A compete change is certainly in order.
IE7 isn't a 'complete change'.
If you use a loose definition of the term 'properly'.
3. Aero Glass: this wouldn't be Aqua, Quartz, and QE would it? Oh, yes
it would. Zzzz..
No, it wouldn't.
I am sure this is the most important part of Vista. It's slow development is only a sign of its complexity, rather than a poor development strategy.
Considering the corporate culture at Microsoft, I'd say it's an example of poor development strategy.
I can think of more than a few things which are needed in Tiger, such as an API for adding GUI improvements, such as was built into Vista from the ground up.
OS X's UI is hardly a shning example of a well designed and highly extensible GUI. You need to compare Vista with the reigning champion--X11R7
4. "Instant Desktop Search": Spotlight. BTDT in 2003/4... so long I've
forgotten...
It would have been better if they could have included the full-on WinFS implementation that was promised originally.
It will eventually be included as a Service Pack, probably, when the server version of Vista is released. In the meantime, use Google's Desktop, or the MSN toolbar, both of which have "instant" Desktop search.
Desktop searching is almost useless for someone who's got an even moderately orgainized filesystem. WinFS is useful because it could do things well beyond merely finding a file (like extracting selected content from several files, and displaying them according to a particular set of rules).
5. "Vista does away with using Internet Explorer to access Windows
Update, instead utilizing a new application to handle the chore of
keeping your system patched and up-to-date"... um, Software Update
anyone?
Yes, so? It's an improvement over the old update system. Both platforms still have abysmally poor package management.
Why complain over small favors?
Because that's how you get big favors.
Personally, I commend Microsoft for finally getting rid of the old "Microsoft Update" system using Internet Explorer and Active Desktop controls.
I'll commend them when they fix their platform's obsolete package management 'system' (and I use the term loosely).
6. "WMP, WPG, DVD Maker". Sheez, Micorsoft is about 3 years behind
Apple here.
Behind, shehind. What does it matter? The fact is, Microsoft has always provided a rudimentary interface for various media forms. That Apple provides better media control is in its favor. That Microsoft is finally starting to come around shows that competition in the market place does work, as it should.
Don't forget,ALL windowed environments were "borrowed" from Xerox's PARC,
That is incredibly oversimplified. There was a lot of GUI work going on around then, in places other than PARC.
who actually spent the development money and did the sweat-work of INVENTING the windowed concept,
They didn't invent the concept, the developed an implementation of it.
the mouse,
The first mouse was demonstrated in 1968, well before Xerox developed tha Alto.
and other methods for accessing computers easily which we all take for granted today
Nonsense. The Alto's UI shares only basic similarities to modern UIs. Hell, even UIs from the 80's. "Window", for example. It's also difficult to grant that sort of 'credit' to a group of people that simply implemented an obvious idea.
Funny, OS X doesn't even ship with most of iLife anymore.
7. Parental Controls. Apple has some of this now, but I guess the ESRB
blocking stuff is pretty cool, from a technological standpoint.
This has never been a problem of mine, so I really have no comments, other than to say that it has always been a "problem" for ALL OS manufacturers. After all, we adults are fighting against our own children, who in most cases are MUCH MORE knowledgeable of computers than we, and are usually able to get around any limits we might set.
8. Backups: DotMac's had this covered for a while. "System Restore"
functionality is debatable, more an indication of instability than a
useful feature really.
Pretty much all OSes require the use of third-party back-up software, if one is to back up his software and data incrementally, and onto external media, such as DVDs or CDs or even FireWire or USB drives.
Most *nixes include some sort of incremental backup tool. Dump, if nothing else.
A) .Mac is not included with OS X.
Nor is a membership in MSN included with Windows. Even free email is getting rarer and rarer with MSN.
And more common with many other services.
Just what does .Mac membership include which is so great, anyway? A small amount of disk space on an external server to send our private files? Why not just pay for an external server account for a few bucks a month, rather than $99 per year for a .Mac account?
It includes some other things, like a system backup utility, virus scanner, web space, and some other less important things. It's also reasonably well integrated with certain functions in OS X.
B) System Restore is actually quite useful for residential users.
Having used System Restore from time to time (because of that hideous Registry on Windows), I did find it useful every now and then. But System Restore will not restore improperly installed software or drivers. It only restores a previously saved Registry.
Which is still very useful.
Of course, this is all because of Microsoft's use of dynamic link libraries and the Registry. This crippled package management system also requires the reinstallation of some products or drivers after a System Restore.
The registry is a bad idea, made even worse through real-life implementation, but Microsoft *could* work around it. If they had some rigourously managed package system, it wouldn't be nearly as much of a problem.
But the writer is correct in saying that System Restore is useful for residential users, who usually have little or no knowledge of computers and software.
However, I have found that using System Restore is no substitute for properly maintaining a Windows machine. And I eventually always wind up reinstalling the OS cleanly after 6 months, anyway, just to get a decently-clean Registry.
Bah, it's faster to just clean out the bad registry entires by hand.
If Microsoft continues insisting on using the System Registry and DLLs, a newer iteration of an old, broken method will not help.
9. P2P. Hello Zeroconf.
Zeroconf is a standard and already supported by XP.
10. "Jim Allchin, Microsoft's co-president, says that Windows Vista
boasts a re-engineered install routine, which will slash setup times
from about an hour to as little as 15 minutes". LOL.
Having installed Windows hundreds of times, a 15 minute install is definitely an improvement. However, I do not believe this will be the "normal" install, unless a "Quick" format is chosen, rather than a "Full" format, which will almost always take a minimum of 30 minutes by itself.
Seems like a waste of time to me. It's not like their 'full' format is a so-called low-level format.
As long as Windows uses the Registry, longer than usual installs will be a necessity.
And OS X takes at least 40 minutes to install.
Or an hour or more if the complete ("write-zeroes") format is chosen (depending on disk size).
Let's face it, it takes more time to write zeroes before writing sector marks than it does to simply erase the FAT table and re-write it (or whatever OS X does for a "Quick" format). It is going to take quite some time on our
modern (>100gig hard drives), whether one uses OS X, or Vista.
Even a 'quick format' on Windows takes ages. It's just plain slow, when compared with something like ext3 or reiserfs on GNU/Linux.
I don't even like Windows, and I know you're grasping at straws with these.
Each of us has our "tastes", don't we? Your "taste" is limited to Apples,
Uhh, no. I'm a GNU/Linux advocate, though I use all three platforms daily.
while many other's "tastes" are more expansive. Does it make OS X any better because your tastes are limited, or Windows any worse because many of its users have broader tastes? I think not.
I think OS X is almost as bad as Windows, though for different reasons.
If you want to compare OS X with Windows, a much different set of criterion must be applied than just the time it takes to install the OS.
You are responding to the wrong person. I *don't* think OS X is anything special.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Top Ten Reasons to Not Wait for Vista
- From: Donald L McDaniel
- Re: Top Ten Reasons to Not Wait for Vista
- From: Dan Johnson
- Re: Top Ten Reasons to Not Wait for Vista
- References:
- Top Ten Reasons to Not Wait for Vista
- From: imouttahere
- Re: Top Ten Reasons to Not Wait for Vista
- From: TheLetterK
- Re: Top Ten Reasons to Not Wait for Vista
- From: Donald L McDaniel
- Top Ten Reasons to Not Wait for Vista
- Prev by Date: Re: Well, I guess it's time, finally.
- Next by Date: Re: Why doesn't this stupid OS know Acrobat is installed?
- Previous by thread: Re: Top Ten Reasons to Not Wait for Vista
- Next by thread: Re: Top Ten Reasons to Not Wait for Vista
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
