Re-Introducing the Real Windows Vista
January 9, 2006 1:24 PM Subscribe
Re-Introducing the Real Windows Vista Bill Gates' demo of Vista from the CES show dubbed over footage of OS X. Apple told Microsoft to start their photocopiers and it looks like they did.
[via]
This thread is going to rule.
+5, Insightful
posted by secret about box at 1:32 PM on January 9, 2006
+5, Insightful
posted by secret about box at 1:32 PM on January 9, 2006
I really hope they added plenty more vulnerabilities, potential buffer overflows, shoddy code, and instability. Because that's what I really look for in my operating system.
posted by wakko at 1:33 PM on January 9, 2006
posted by wakko at 1:33 PM on January 9, 2006
Does it matter? Not really. The courts have established that you can't copyright a software idea (only its code); besides, Apple occasionally helps itself to Microsoft's ideas, too. Truth is, I use both Mac OS X and Windows, and I'll be happy to have these features on both platforms.
That's the relevant part of the Pogue article as far as I'm concerned. Apple has stolen its share of Microsoft's stuff. And there's nothing wrong with imitating successful ideas, it's how intra-industry competition tends to occur. Would you rather that companies didn't follow suit and the sole provider of a product or feature jacked up the price? Oh wait, Apple already does that (OK, Microsoft does too).
posted by TunnelArmr at 1:34 PM on January 9, 2006
That's the relevant part of the Pogue article as far as I'm concerned. Apple has stolen its share of Microsoft's stuff. And there's nothing wrong with imitating successful ideas, it's how intra-industry competition tends to occur. Would you rather that companies didn't follow suit and the sole provider of a product or feature jacked up the price? Oh wait, Apple already does that (OK, Microsoft does too).
posted by TunnelArmr at 1:34 PM on January 9, 2006
HTuttle, the key improvements appear to be copies of various OS X functions. Not that the OS X functions were very innovative, I mean picture organization? File searching? Dashboard widgets? Yes, Microsoft was obviously inspired but this isn't Xerox in the 70s -- it's nothing completely groundbreaking. In the business world the second guy to to the show always seems to win.
I'm not really interested in GUI gimmicks, as long as it runs as stable as Win2003, can be easily scaled down to a so-called classic interface and doesn't need a reboot everytime I install something. Most interesting was the apparent fact they scrapped a large part of Vista when things weren't going right. Looks like WindowsME was the best thing to happen to Microsoft. They realized they actually have to try to make an OS.
posted by geoff. at 1:35 PM on January 9, 2006
I'm not really interested in GUI gimmicks, as long as it runs as stable as Win2003, can be easily scaled down to a so-called classic interface and doesn't need a reboot everytime I install something. Most interesting was the apparent fact they scrapped a large part of Vista when things weren't going right. Looks like WindowsME was the best thing to happen to Microsoft. They realized they actually have to try to make an OS.
posted by geoff. at 1:35 PM on January 9, 2006
Okay, so it was like OSX. Who cares? People were acting like they had simply dubbed over videos captured from OSX.
Yawn.
posted by delmoi at 1:38 PM on January 9, 2006
Yawn.
posted by delmoi at 1:38 PM on January 9, 2006
The courts have established that you can't copyright a software idea (only its code);
Ummm... how about Amazon's 1 click shopping, as well as all those other rediculous software patents. True, you can't copyright a software idea, but you can sure as heck patent it!
posted by anomie at 1:39 PM on January 9, 2006
Ummm... how about Amazon's 1 click shopping, as well as all those other rediculous software patents. True, you can't copyright a software idea, but you can sure as heck patent it!
posted by anomie at 1:39 PM on January 9, 2006
Windows Vista had me excited until it got pushed back and had 20202 features dropped from it...
posted by AMWKE at 1:41 PM on January 9, 2006
posted by AMWKE at 1:41 PM on January 9, 2006
I really hope they added plenty more vulnerabilities, potential buffer overflows, shoddy code, and instability. Because that's what I really look for in my operating system.
Do you really think they could fit more of that in Vista? Oh wait, it's Microsoft; of course they can!
apple 4 lyfe, biatches
posted by keswick at 1:50 PM on January 9, 2006
Do you really think they could fit more of that in Vista? Oh wait, it's Microsoft; of course they can!
apple 4 lyfe, biatches
posted by keswick at 1:50 PM on January 9, 2006
AMWKE, actually that's where I got interested. When they realized that they needed to focus on getting the core system right instead of adding all kinds of features.
posted by geoff. at 1:55 PM on January 9, 2006
posted by geoff. at 1:55 PM on January 9, 2006
...and they hired some old geezer to add lame guitar music to it.
Will this Apple glee ever end?
posted by davebush at 1:59 PM on January 9, 2006
Will this Apple glee ever end?
posted by davebush at 1:59 PM on January 9, 2006
The point is that Vista *will not be released until mid 2006* and the most highly touted new features are all already in OS X and working very nicely thank you. God only knows how well (or not) they work in Vista.
By the time Vista is released, to resounding KLUNKs as everyone realizes how little it moves the ball forward, Apple will be shipping Intel macs which will dual boot Vista and the *next* release of OS X (10.5) which will have MS playing catch up again.
Watch the Keynote tomorrow for a taste of the way things are headed.
posted by unSane at 2:01 PM on January 9, 2006
By the time Vista is released, to resounding KLUNKs as everyone realizes how little it moves the ball forward, Apple will be shipping Intel macs which will dual boot Vista and the *next* release of OS X (10.5) which will have MS playing catch up again.
Watch the Keynote tomorrow for a taste of the way things are headed.
posted by unSane at 2:01 PM on January 9, 2006
I find the idea that GUIs have to be radically different than each other making about as much sense as Honda having to produce only 5 wheel cars because gosh darn it, they copied Renault, or Ford, or Toyota. And auto manfacturers also have variable valve timing, and, get this, fuel injection.
Why would we use a car that copied a bunch of things it features and does from other cars? And why do we accept common functionality amongst our cars. I mean, I can get in an American car and turn on the lights and use the wipers because it's very similar to the control systems in my Japanese car! Even better, they feature a throttle, a brake, and if you're fortunate, a clutch pedal. Granted, they each feel different and they're slightly different in regard to how they relate to each other spatially but still, someone's copied someone here...
Where was the outrage when Apple finally shipped an OS with pre-emptive multitasking!
posted by juiceCake at 2:04 PM on January 9, 2006
Why would we use a car that copied a bunch of things it features and does from other cars? And why do we accept common functionality amongst our cars. I mean, I can get in an American car and turn on the lights and use the wipers because it's very similar to the control systems in my Japanese car! Even better, they feature a throttle, a brake, and if you're fortunate, a clutch pedal. Granted, they each feel different and they're slightly different in regard to how they relate to each other spatially but still, someone's copied someone here...
Where was the outrage when Apple finally shipped an OS with pre-emptive multitasking!
posted by juiceCake at 2:04 PM on January 9, 2006
...which will dual boot Vista and the *next* release of OS X (10.5)...
Don't bet on it.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 2:04 PM on January 9, 2006
Don't bet on it.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 2:04 PM on January 9, 2006
you know, as a gamer I'm kind of stuck with windows, so hearing about this I wanted to go see what the original keynote address looked like, to see the OS for real.
my god, that whole keynote was the most masturbatory self-aggrandizing piece of tripe I've ever seen.
"Bill Gates is living the american dream..."
sure. that's bill. good old horatio alger personified. you know, CES is actually an incredibly valuable conference if you ignore the corporate speeches.
posted by shmegegge at 2:06 PM on January 9, 2006
my god, that whole keynote was the most masturbatory self-aggrandizing piece of tripe I've ever seen.
"Bill Gates is living the american dream..."
sure. that's bill. good old horatio alger personified. you know, CES is actually an incredibly valuable conference if you ignore the corporate speeches.
posted by shmegegge at 2:06 PM on January 9, 2006
Apple will be shipping Intel macs which will dual boot Vista and the *next* release of OS X (10.5) which will have MS playing catch up again.
Why would that bother MS? I mean, it sounds like you're saying people would have computers that had both Vista and OSX on them. Thats a win for Apple and a win for MS, as I see it. MS doesn't care whose hardware you use anymore (AMD, Intel, whatever), so long as you pay your Windows license.
[not to mention Apple has not, to my knowledge, ever said their PCs would be able to do this, in fact I thought they were doing some sort of lock-in so you couldnt run OSX on a normal intel machine?]
posted by wildcrdj at 2:25 PM on January 9, 2006
Why would that bother MS? I mean, it sounds like you're saying people would have computers that had both Vista and OSX on them. Thats a win for Apple and a win for MS, as I see it. MS doesn't care whose hardware you use anymore (AMD, Intel, whatever), so long as you pay your Windows license.
[not to mention Apple has not, to my knowledge, ever said their PCs would be able to do this, in fact I thought they were doing some sort of lock-in so you couldnt run OSX on a normal intel machine?]
posted by wildcrdj at 2:25 PM on January 9, 2006
Don't bet on it.
Why not? Apple already said its Mactels will run Windows in some fashion, either through dual-boot or runtime layer.
posted by Rothko at 2:28 PM on January 9, 2006
Why not? Apple already said its Mactels will run Windows in some fashion, either through dual-boot or runtime layer.
posted by Rothko at 2:28 PM on January 9, 2006
As Jobs explained, from day 1, OS X has always been able to run on Intel chips (I don't understand how this is disabled).
Don't put anything pas t Apple. They have surpassed expectations again and again.
posted by ParisParamus at 2:31 PM on January 9, 2006
Don't put anything pas t Apple. They have surpassed expectations again and again.
posted by ParisParamus at 2:31 PM on January 9, 2006
Turns out you're right, Rothko. I had previously read that Apple would ensure that it's OS would only run on Mactel hardware, and erroneously assumed that meant they would also prevent Windows from booting on the same machine. Touché.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 2:33 PM on January 9, 2006
posted by monju_bosatsu at 2:33 PM on January 9, 2006
That's very funny. I posted the link to an accident law attorney discussion group. I suspect no one will notice the joke, except the 1% of attorneys on Mac.
posted by ParisParamus at 2:38 PM on January 9, 2006
posted by ParisParamus at 2:38 PM on January 9, 2006
I love when the MS speaker says "the two I like are..." Like he doesn't like the others...
posted by ParisParamus at 2:40 PM on January 9, 2006
posted by ParisParamus at 2:40 PM on January 9, 2006
I see little innovation in either OS. The features on both systems seem, well... as expected... evolutionary... common sense stuff that reflects the way that general purpose computing is evolving. So, I guess I agree with juiceCake.
To me, Google has been a lot more bolt-from-the-blue revolutionary than any of the computer or OS makers.
posted by bz at 2:52 PM on January 9, 2006
To me, Google has been a lot more bolt-from-the-blue revolutionary than any of the computer or OS makers.
posted by bz at 2:52 PM on January 9, 2006
That page killed my browser. For a while. Not sure why... maybe all those freaking comments.
posted by smackfu at 2:57 PM on January 9, 2006
posted by smackfu at 2:57 PM on January 9, 2006
When I was an intern at Microsoft in the Summer of 2003, there was a demo day for the Longhorn (now Vista) teams. There was all this hullaballoo about the new features, and as each new feature was demoed (to ooohs and aaaahs from the crowd. really.), I casually looked over to a Microsoftie friend and we would guess the date of the feature's introduction to Mac OS X. We didn't find any feature that wasn't already in there (spotlight isn't WinFS, but it sure demos like it). He was a Microsoftie who'd be poached from Adobe, and who'd had Microsoft buy him a PowerBook for one of his work machines.... Ah, good times.
posted by zpousman at 2:58 PM on January 9, 2006
posted by zpousman at 2:58 PM on January 9, 2006
Wait a minute. Are you saying that Microsoft Windows in some ways slightly resembles the Mac operating system? Because I hadn't heard that.
posted by dhartung at 3:00 PM on January 9, 2006
posted by dhartung at 3:00 PM on January 9, 2006
As Jobs explained, from day 1, OS X has always been able to run on Intel chips (I don't understand how this is disabled).
As far as I understand, it's not really disabled, it's two versions of OS X - one which runs on powerpc processors and one which runs on Intel. The clever bit really is Rosetta, which will allow old programs from current macs to run on the Intel ones.
Apple did this years ago with the move from the original macs to the powerpc ones (I'm not technically minded so not sure of the proper names)
posted by twistedonion at 3:00 PM on January 9, 2006
As far as I understand, it's not really disabled, it's two versions of OS X - one which runs on powerpc processors and one which runs on Intel. The clever bit really is Rosetta, which will allow old programs from current macs to run on the Intel ones.
Apple did this years ago with the move from the original macs to the powerpc ones (I'm not technically minded so not sure of the proper names)
posted by twistedonion at 3:00 PM on January 9, 2006
It's worthless without Monad
Monad won't be there? You're right, that sucks if it's true. I've been looking forward to a shiny new command shell.
posted by me & my monkey at 3:38 PM on January 9, 2006
Monad won't be there? You're right, that sucks if it's true. I've been looking forward to a shiny new command shell.
posted by me & my monkey at 3:38 PM on January 9, 2006
"Apple did this years ago with the move from the original macs to the powerpc ones (I'm not technically minded so not sure of the proper names)
posted by twistedonion at 6:00 PM EST on January 9 [!]"
I find this fascinating, kind of like planning for the destruction of Krypton with that Rocket with the baby inside.
posted by ParisParamus at 3:43 PM on January 9, 2006
posted by twistedonion at 6:00 PM EST on January 9 [!]"
I find this fascinating, kind of like planning for the destruction of Krypton with that Rocket with the baby inside.
posted by ParisParamus at 3:43 PM on January 9, 2006
Why doesn't Apple just sell the OS? I'd buy it.
posted by atchafalaya at 4:12 PM on January 9, 2006
posted by atchafalaya at 4:12 PM on January 9, 2006
This is so meh. It's meh-erific. Meh-tabulous. Quintessentially meh-tacular.
WindowBlinds was an alternate EXPLORER replacement, like, 5 years ago that supported desktop widgets. Search in file? You mean GREP?
For fuck's sake, just spend a couple billion and cut the size down to 50 MB. Then I'll pay for a copy.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 4:12 PM on January 9, 2006
WindowBlinds was an alternate EXPLORER replacement, like, 5 years ago that supported desktop widgets. Search in file? You mean GREP?
For fuck's sake, just spend a couple billion and cut the size down to 50 MB. Then I'll pay for a copy.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 4:12 PM on January 9, 2006
Search in file? You mean GREP?
Sure, if you regularly run grep on the entire file system.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 4:20 PM on January 9, 2006
Sure, if you regularly run grep on the entire file system.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 4:20 PM on January 9, 2006
WindowBlinds was an alternate EXPLORER replacement, like, 5 years ago that supported desktop widgets.
Well, if you wanna play that game, Apple had desk accessories in 1981 (and I wouldn't be surprised if they'd stolen them from someone else before that).
posted by kirkaracha at 4:37 PM on January 9, 2006
Darnit, I knew I should have made these an FPP, rather than burying them in a deleted thread.
posted by VulcanMike at 4:43 PM on January 9, 2006
posted by VulcanMike at 4:43 PM on January 9, 2006
Neither Apple or Microsoft make half of the glitzy flashy innovations they release, they just buy (or rip-off) little guys that do.
The linked video even uses widgets as an illustration of one of the things that Vista is ripping off from OSX, well I call bullshit on that - isn't it more likely that Microsoft is ripping the idea off from Konfabulator? You know, the same place Apple got the, uh, inspiration for Dashboard.
In other news... This whole Apple vs. Microsoft thing is fucking childish. Just use your goddamn computer.
posted by The Monkey at 4:47 PM on January 9, 2006
The linked video even uses widgets as an illustration of one of the things that Vista is ripping off from OSX, well I call bullshit on that - isn't it more likely that Microsoft is ripping the idea off from Konfabulator? You know, the same place Apple got the, uh, inspiration for Dashboard.
In other news... This whole Apple vs. Microsoft thing is fucking childish. Just use your goddamn computer.
posted by The Monkey at 4:47 PM on January 9, 2006
MSH (Monad) will not ship with Vista.
Just use your goddamn computer.
Oh, I'll use my computer... my APPLE computer! HAHALOLP0WN3D!
posted by mkultra at 4:51 PM on January 9, 2006
Just use your goddamn computer.
Oh, I'll use my computer... my APPLE computer! HAHALOLP0WN3D!
posted by mkultra at 4:51 PM on January 9, 2006
> As Jobs explained, from day 1, OS X has always been able to run on Intel chips
Does anyone find that surprising? BSD Unix (which OS X is icing on top of) has run on Intel hardware for a very long time.
posted by jfuller at 5:01 PM on January 9, 2006
Does anyone find that surprising? BSD Unix (which OS X is icing on top of) has run on Intel hardware for a very long time.
posted by jfuller at 5:01 PM on January 9, 2006
This whole Apple vs. Microsoft thing is fucking childish. Just use your goddamn computer.
Absolutely perfectly said.
posted by davebush at 5:14 PM on January 9, 2006
Absolutely perfectly said.
posted by davebush at 5:14 PM on January 9, 2006
As Jobs explained, from day 1, OS X has always been able to run on Intel chips (I don't understand how this is disabled).
Basically, the core operating system of OS X, called Darwin, has been available to the public on Intel chips from their website (and other means) for quite some time.
However, that "core" operating system is -very- core, as in "no GUI" and whatnot. The rest of OS X, from the windowing system to the bundled apps, has been maintained and tested on Intel chips from day one *internally* (ie within apple's confines), but source code and compiled binaries of those applications have not been released.
The above explanation assumes you understand this basic fact: programs compiled to run on a PowerPC chip CANNOT run on an Intel chip, and vice versa, even if the same source code is used for the compliation.
So apple could have released OS X for Intel when they released it for PowerPC, but it didn't make business sense for them to do so, and keeping the source code/binaries of non-open source elements close to the vest was their mechanism for preventing the release of the Intel code.
Hope that answers your question.
posted by davejay at 5:17 PM on January 9, 2006
Basically, the core operating system of OS X, called Darwin, has been available to the public on Intel chips from their website (and other means) for quite some time.
However, that "core" operating system is -very- core, as in "no GUI" and whatnot. The rest of OS X, from the windowing system to the bundled apps, has been maintained and tested on Intel chips from day one *internally* (ie within apple's confines), but source code and compiled binaries of those applications have not been released.
The above explanation assumes you understand this basic fact: programs compiled to run on a PowerPC chip CANNOT run on an Intel chip, and vice versa, even if the same source code is used for the compliation.
So apple could have released OS X for Intel when they released it for PowerPC, but it didn't make business sense for them to do so, and keeping the source code/binaries of non-open source elements close to the vest was their mechanism for preventing the release of the Intel code.
Hope that answers your question.
posted by davejay at 5:17 PM on January 9, 2006
This whole Apple vs. Microsoft thing is fucking childish. Just use your goddamn computer.
Okay.
(returning to browsing metafilter threads using Gnome et al running on Debian stable/sarge 2.6.8-2)
/smug
posted by davejay at 5:19 PM on January 9, 2006
Okay.
(returning to browsing metafilter threads using Gnome et al running on Debian stable/sarge 2.6.8-2)
/smug
posted by davejay at 5:19 PM on January 9, 2006
I've been running Longhorn/Vista for quite a few months now (MSDN) and I'm very impressed with it actually. Installed it on the latest Dell laptop and it picked up on everything and ran with it - oddball wireless card included. Hasn't bombed once, then again neither does XP Pro ... unless you really hose something.
Mac has its following, I guess. I'll stick with XP though, and will merge to Vista when the time comes. I might give Apple a look if they'd get off their proprietary high horse crap. Want a machine that's every bit a Mac ? That's easy, install one of the various flavors of Linux. I prefer Fedora personally. Want a machine to use as a server to blow the doors off a Mac ? FreeBSD.
Although when at Best Buy or CompUSA I admit I sometimes play around with the "latest and greatest" Mac incarnation they have setup. Why does it take soooo long for things to load on them ? Other than that I usually walk away after a few minutes with a glazed look (unimpressed) in my eyes.
Yeah well ...
posted by madderhatter at 5:42 PM on January 9, 2006
Mac has its following, I guess. I'll stick with XP though, and will merge to Vista when the time comes. I might give Apple a look if they'd get off their proprietary high horse crap. Want a machine that's every bit a Mac ? That's easy, install one of the various flavors of Linux. I prefer Fedora personally. Want a machine to use as a server to blow the doors off a Mac ? FreeBSD.
Although when at Best Buy or CompUSA I admit I sometimes play around with the "latest and greatest" Mac incarnation they have setup. Why does it take soooo long for things to load on them ? Other than that I usually walk away after a few minutes with a glazed look (unimpressed) in my eyes.
Yeah well ...
posted by madderhatter at 5:42 PM on January 9, 2006
Want a machine that's every bit a Mac ? That's easy, install one of the various flavors of Linux.
Not even close.
posted by gyc at 6:14 PM on January 9, 2006
Not even close.
posted by gyc at 6:14 PM on January 9, 2006
madderhatter writes "I prefer Fedora personally."
Heathen. If you aren't using Slackware your OS sucks.
Seriously, how's that screwy rearranging-the-file-menu stuff working out on Vista - is it as annoying to retrain yourself to find it as I expect it to be?
posted by caution live frogs at 6:15 PM on January 9, 2006
Heathen. If you aren't using Slackware your OS sucks.
Seriously, how's that screwy rearranging-the-file-menu stuff working out on Vista - is it as annoying to retrain yourself to find it as I expect it to be?
posted by caution live frogs at 6:15 PM on January 9, 2006
Sounds like your local best buy doesn't know how to install RAM.
posted by Hildegarde at 6:16 PM on January 9, 2006
posted by Hildegarde at 6:16 PM on January 9, 2006
I might give Apple a look if they'd get off their proprietary high horse crap.
What crap would that be?
posted by jjg at 6:16 PM on January 9, 2006
What crap would that be?
posted by jjg at 6:16 PM on January 9, 2006
Back on topic, these videos are shit.
posted by cillit bang at 6:18 PM on January 9, 2006
posted by cillit bang at 6:18 PM on January 9, 2006
Want a machine that's every bit a Mac ? That's easy, install one of the various flavors of Linux.
Will it run AppleScript?
posted by effwerd at 6:33 PM on January 9, 2006
Will it run AppleScript?
posted by effwerd at 6:33 PM on January 9, 2006
The linked video even uses widgets as an illustration of one of the things that Vista is ripping off from OSX, well I call bullshit on that - isn't it more likely that Microsoft is ripping the idea off from Konfabulator? You know, the same place Apple got the, uh, inspiration for Dashboard.
posted by The Monkey
I call bullshit on your bullshit. Educate yourself.
Mac has its following, I guess.
Either that's one of the most idiotic things I've ever read on metafilter or a great bit of comedy.
posted by justgary at 6:42 PM on January 9, 2006
posted by The Monkey
I call bullshit on your bullshit. Educate yourself.
Mac has its following, I guess.
Either that's one of the most idiotic things I've ever read on metafilter or a great bit of comedy.
posted by justgary at 6:42 PM on January 9, 2006
all the macsturbation always makes me laugh.
Who the fuck cares? Either pay a bunch for an overpriced/underpowered but aesthetically pleasing WYSIWYG computer/OS or but a cheaper un-regulated PC with an OS that is spectacular if you know how to take care of a computer and have a billion more software options.
All you people remind me of those people with Apple logo tattoos. Mac for life!
Think different, indeed.
posted by Espoo2 at 8:15 PM on January 9, 2006
Who the fuck cares? Either pay a bunch for an overpriced/underpowered but aesthetically pleasing WYSIWYG computer/OS or but a cheaper un-regulated PC with an OS that is spectacular if you know how to take care of a computer and have a billion more software options.
All you people remind me of those people with Apple logo tattoos. Mac for life!
Think different, indeed.
posted by Espoo2 at 8:15 PM on January 9, 2006
The linked video even uses widgets as an illustration of one of the things that Vista is ripping off from OSX, well I call bullshit on that - isn't it more likely that Microsoft is ripping the idea off from Konfabulator? You know, the same place Apple got the, uh, inspiration for Dashboard.
And Konfabulator just ripped off Desk Accessories from Classic MacOS.
posted by Space Coyote at 8:15 PM on January 9, 2006
And Konfabulator just ripped off Desk Accessories from Classic MacOS.
posted by Space Coyote at 8:15 PM on January 9, 2006
It's stupid to fight about this stuff, but at least it's less depressing than being outraged about Bush again.
posted by fungible at 9:00 PM on January 9, 2006
posted by fungible at 9:00 PM on January 9, 2006
Thanks Espoo2, you took the words right out of my mouth.
Just to add to the pile, I have a PC Desktop and a Mac laptop. I use both, but prefer my PC for the "real stuff"
posted by BlackLeotardFront at 9:23 PM on January 9, 2006
Just to add to the pile, I have a PC Desktop and a Mac laptop. I use both, but prefer my PC for the "real stuff"
posted by BlackLeotardFront at 9:23 PM on January 9, 2006
From the NYT article: The talk opened with mocked-up demos of the wizzy future, like Bill sitting down before a triptych of 30-inch computer monitors that, as in the movie "Minority Report," appeared to be nothing more than sheets of clear acrylic.Uh- does anyone have videos of THAT?!?! I find it vastly more interesting than the OS wars crap. The acrylic screen with infrared sensitive human interface, using a 3D "desktop"... far more interesting and evolutionary in how we use our computers (hence the Minority Report comment) than simply adding "carousel" features for image or media viewing, or even database file systems.
I've seen this before, it's not a mock up. MS has apparently been squatting on this for quite a long time, and I am curious if they're finally unveiling it to the public.
posted by hincandenza at 10:04 PM on January 9, 2006
"I've seen this before, it's not a mock up. MS has apparently been squatting on this for quite a long time, and I am curious if they're finally unveiling it to the public."
Coming to an iMac near you, circa 2010.
posted by ParisParamus at 10:08 PM on January 9, 2006
Coming to an iMac near you, circa 2010.
posted by ParisParamus at 10:08 PM on January 9, 2006
Look. How many ways can you design a GUI operating system?
Going back to the original 1980s bitch about Windows copying Mac - I mean, you tell me how you're going to have a GUI without windows, menus, icons, a mouse pointer... If you've got any great ideas, please share them.
This seems like a similar deal. Desktop widgets are a great idea. They aren't revolutionary, though, when you think of what they consist of. Do you really expect Microsoft to say "Well, Apple has desktop widgets, so we'd better not copy them. We'll do...nothing...instead."
Same with the search feature...the ability to search for words in files isn't some secret, revolutionary feature. It's just something you should expect in a modern desktop. It's like claiming Apple copied Microsoft when they got a real, multitasking kernel. No they didn't. It's just something you fucking expect them to have.
Personally, I want to see more copying in desktop operating systems. I've been waiting half a decade for Linux to copy all the features of OSX, and it hasn't happened yet.
posted by Jimbob at 10:36 PM on January 9, 2006
Going back to the original 1980s bitch about Windows copying Mac - I mean, you tell me how you're going to have a GUI without windows, menus, icons, a mouse pointer... If you've got any great ideas, please share them.
This seems like a similar deal. Desktop widgets are a great idea. They aren't revolutionary, though, when you think of what they consist of. Do you really expect Microsoft to say "Well, Apple has desktop widgets, so we'd better not copy them. We'll do...nothing...instead."
Same with the search feature...the ability to search for words in files isn't some secret, revolutionary feature. It's just something you should expect in a modern desktop. It's like claiming Apple copied Microsoft when they got a real, multitasking kernel. No they didn't. It's just something you fucking expect them to have.
Personally, I want to see more copying in desktop operating systems. I've been waiting half a decade for Linux to copy all the features of OSX, and it hasn't happened yet.
posted by Jimbob at 10:36 PM on January 9, 2006
Some (quite) amusing Quicktime movies illustrating the issue.
posted by TheDonF at 11:57 PM on January 9, 2006
posted by TheDonF at 11:57 PM on January 9, 2006
What?! TheDonF, is that some weird meta humor, or did you so completely miss the whole thread and post the original link?
Besides, I wasn't asking for your thoughts on mocked up/not mocked up, but on where I could get the video of this presentation at CES.
posted by hincandenza at 12:32 AM on January 10, 2006
keswick: What part of "mocked-up demo" is confusing you?The part where I've interfaced with a very smoothly functioning example of this technology with my own two hands, some time ago, just like TC in Minority Report, in a way that was definitely not a mock up but a prototype. The part where I have heard rumor that this technology will be coming from MS as a real-world, buy-it-from-Circuit-City technology as soon as this coming fall/winter 2006.
Besides, I wasn't asking for your thoughts on mocked up/not mocked up, but on where I could get the video of this presentation at CES.
posted by hincandenza at 12:32 AM on January 10, 2006
Mmmm, massive lack of sleep, read thread, more lack of sleep *really good idea to post that link I saw earlier*, post link, think nothing more of it. I need more sleep and coffee. Or, maybe it's some kind of weird meta humour. Yes, that's it, weird meta humour. Where's the coffee? Ftang
posted by TheDonF at 1:13 AM on January 10, 2006
posted by TheDonF at 1:13 AM on January 10, 2006
For me it's just humorous to hear a CEO talk about all of the great new things his company thought up and will be giving you as if it's all somehow really new and innovative and without precedent. All with that tone of "we're doing this for you, because we care about you."
posted by moonbiter at 2:11 AM on January 10, 2006
posted by moonbiter at 2:11 AM on January 10, 2006
justgary & Space Coyote, I've read that page - before I posted, in fact - and I don't buy the argument.
Maybe you believe the notepad and calculator (and game, coded in assembler) are the same as all of the user (and other third party) built javascript & html widgets &widgetsgadgets, but honestly I don't. All OSes have a notepad and a calculator and some stupid games. Minesweeper and notepad aren't widgets, they're utilities. (Wait, not Minesweeper, it's the opposite.)
Maybe I'd feel differently if I'd used desk accessories more recently than like 1989, but I haven't, so I don't really recall what the interface was like.
I also don't buy going to a partisan site if I want facts, I mean, talk about your spin-zone. "[...] for Apple users by Apply users." No shit.
Christ, I can't believe I've been sucked into talking about something so ludicrously trivial.
Let me paraphrase something I said earlier: Shut the fuck up, and just use your goddamn computer.
My last word on this:
The only blue screen I get in XP is Metafilter.
posted by The Monkey at 2:50 AM on January 10, 2006
Maybe you believe the notepad and calculator (and game, coded in assembler) are the same as all of the user (and other third party) built javascript & html widgets &
Maybe I'd feel differently if I'd used desk accessories more recently than like 1989, but I haven't, so I don't really recall what the interface was like.
I also don't buy going to a partisan site if I want facts, I mean, talk about your spin-zone. "[...] for Apple users by Apply users." No shit.
Christ, I can't believe I've been sucked into talking about something so ludicrously trivial.
Let me paraphrase something I said earlier: Shut the fuck up, and just use your goddamn computer.
My last word on this:
The only blue screen I get in XP is Metafilter.
posted by The Monkey at 2:50 AM on January 10, 2006
Say, is Apple still "beleaguered"? I think that was a flawed marketing strategy. I would have gone with "persecuted", which seems to be working well for Xtians.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 3:22 AM on January 10, 2006
posted by Kirth Gerson at 3:22 AM on January 10, 2006
I'd like to buy an original thought, please. Yes, I mean a mac.
posted by uni verse at 6:34 AM on January 10, 2006
posted by uni verse at 6:34 AM on January 10, 2006
Do you want that in a white box shape, or in a white laptop shape? You have options, you know.
When and if someone releases a hack for installing OSX on generic hardware, I have a feeling a lot of people will give it a shot. Until then, we will get this shit. How many Mac addicts are going to actually buy an OSX/Windows machine? Very few - unless they need to use Windows at work or test things on different platforms, I'm not seeing the draw. How many Windows users might like to see what OSX is all about? Probably a lot. How many of them want to buy a whole new computer just to check it out? I'm guessing zero.
posted by caution live frogs at 9:55 AM on January 10, 2006
When and if someone releases a hack for installing OSX on generic hardware, I have a feeling a lot of people will give it a shot. Until then, we will get this shit. How many Mac addicts are going to actually buy an OSX/Windows machine? Very few - unless they need to use Windows at work or test things on different platforms, I'm not seeing the draw. How many Windows users might like to see what OSX is all about? Probably a lot. How many of them want to buy a whole new computer just to check it out? I'm guessing zero.
posted by caution live frogs at 9:55 AM on January 10, 2006
Either pay a bunch for an overpriced/underpowered but aesthetically pleasing WYSIWYG computer/OS
I paid C$1250 for my late-05 iBook G4, and got a free iPod in the deal, so the effective price was $1000.
For this $1K I get: 512Mb, 40Gb, CDRW/DVD, Firewire, component video out, bluetooth, and wifi -- all in a very small, sub-5lb package that's sleek and so far proven very durable.
This is overpriced? Please, send me a link to a comparable Wintel product at a lower price. Bluetooth, wifi, 512Mb, and excellent video out included, please, and in a small, light package, backed by a brand name, thanks.
This is underpowered? It feels fast to me, the graphics are all smooth as can be, the damn thing handles umpteen open apps day in and day out, with no reboots for weeks at a time. I know I wasn't so fortunate with my old Toshiba laptop.
In the end, most of the nay-sayers have no idea what they're talking about. It's easy to spew uninformed crap about a computer you've never owned.
Funny how so many people that have had experience with both platforms more often than not find themselves favouring the Apple product.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:01 AM on January 10, 2006
I paid C$1250 for my late-05 iBook G4, and got a free iPod in the deal, so the effective price was $1000.
For this $1K I get: 512Mb, 40Gb, CDRW/DVD, Firewire, component video out, bluetooth, and wifi -- all in a very small, sub-5lb package that's sleek and so far proven very durable.
This is overpriced? Please, send me a link to a comparable Wintel product at a lower price. Bluetooth, wifi, 512Mb, and excellent video out included, please, and in a small, light package, backed by a brand name, thanks.
This is underpowered? It feels fast to me, the graphics are all smooth as can be, the damn thing handles umpteen open apps day in and day out, with no reboots for weeks at a time. I know I wasn't so fortunate with my old Toshiba laptop.
In the end, most of the nay-sayers have no idea what they're talking about. It's easy to spew uninformed crap about a computer you've never owned.
Funny how so many people that have had experience with both platforms more often than not find themselves favouring the Apple product.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:01 AM on January 10, 2006
FFF, you may have a Mac, but...
posted by ParisParamus at 11:36 AM on January 10, 2006
posted by ParisParamus at 11:36 AM on January 10, 2006
I love watching the hackles of Mac zealots rise threateningly, especially now that they've taken a back seat to even Linux in terms of desktop OS percentage.
I don't care how exciting OSX is - the best that operating system can manage is less than 3 percent of the entire market (at least from 2004's figures.) As Xerox, VisiCalc, and so many other dinosaurs figured out, it's not enough to be first.
Besides, if desktop OS percentage equated to zealous stridency, somewhere out there is a NeXT guy bursting blood vessels in his neck because of his screaming.
posted by FormlessOne at 3:06 PM on January 10, 2006
I don't care how exciting OSX is - the best that operating system can manage is less than 3 percent of the entire market (at least from 2004's figures.) As Xerox, VisiCalc, and so many other dinosaurs figured out, it's not enough to be first.
Besides, if desktop OS percentage equated to zealous stridency, somewhere out there is a NeXT guy bursting blood vessels in his neck because of his screaming.
posted by FormlessOne at 3:06 PM on January 10, 2006
For this $1K I get: 512Mb, 40Gb, CDRW/DVD, Firewire, component video out, bluetooth, and wifi -- all in a very small, sub-5lb package that's sleek and so far proven very durable.
No CPU speed? A similar specced Dell is $280. 512 mb, 4gb HD, and a CDRW/DVD. (the cheapest desktop + 256mb ram - monitor) Firewire cards cost less then $720, but thanks for playing.
posted by delmoi at 6:29 PM on January 10, 2006
No CPU speed? A similar specced Dell is $280. 512 mb, 4gb HD, and a CDRW/DVD. (the cheapest desktop + 256mb ram - monitor) Firewire cards cost less then $720, but thanks for playing.
posted by delmoi at 6:29 PM on January 10, 2006
er, that's 40gb, not 4 of course.
And for someone like me with old cases and whatnot sitting around, I could build a machine with those specs for less then $100.
posted by delmoi at 6:35 PM on January 10, 2006
And for someone like me with old cases and whatnot sitting around, I could build a machine with those specs for less then $100.
posted by delmoi at 6:35 PM on January 10, 2006
It's a laptop, delmoi. And of what use is CPU speed, when comparing a PowerPC laptop to an Intel laptop? But, hey, thanks for playing. Next game, don't forget size, weight, battery life, and reputable brand name.
posted by five fresh fish at 1:24 AM on January 11, 2006
posted by five fresh fish at 1:24 AM on January 11, 2006
Between the two companies I would rather give my money to Microsoft. I actually see them as the lesser of two evils for a variety of reasons. With all of the DRM nonsense on the horizon, the future looks grim either way.
posted by weretable and the undead chairs at 10:44 AM on January 11, 2006
posted by weretable and the undead chairs at 10:44 AM on January 11, 2006
And of what use is CPU speed, when comparing a PowerPC laptop to an Intel laptop?
Maybe Jobs can answer that question.
posted by juiceCake at 10:33 AM on January 21, 2006
Maybe Jobs can answer that question.
posted by juiceCake at 10:33 AM on January 21, 2006
« Older Prognosis | Make the Kessel run in less than twelve par-secs! Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by HTuttle at 1:28 PM on January 9, 2006