http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1985 points the fact that Vista may never exist. After all, it will become a DOA product by next year or next century wherever comes last. 
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Vista is gettings suckier and lousier!
- Thread starter princealfie
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Im patiently awaiting my Beta copy of Vista to arrive in the mail (had it been Apple Im sure it would be here already!)
I'll let you know what I think, though you can probably guess.
I'll let you know what I think, though you can probably guess.
As we follow Vista, it is hard to fathom that MS is still an operating system softwware company. Their speed of turnaround on new systems is a joke, while it took them 5 years to finally get XP in pretty good shape. Some of this is probably the byproduct of their arrogance...like Big Blue suffered from, until they got their lunch eaten real bad and put out of the PC business, basically.
I am afraid that Vista is a purse made from a previous purse that was made from a sow's ear....it will be a passe product, and still no file journaling...pretty sad for the LEADER in OS's ??? Just my humble opinion --
I am afraid that Vista is a purse made from a previous purse that was made from a sow's ear....it will be a passe product, and still no file journaling...pretty sad for the LEADER in OS's ???
Just my humble opinion --
BadRambo said:
To be fair IMO SP2 made XP pretty good and that came out in 2004, which is after 3 years, other than that you make an interesting point in that Vista won't be usable until SP1 which will probably come out a year after Leopard, if Apple can keep up their rate of change Windows in it's current form will get further and further behind, by 10.6 this could become very embarrassing.
"if Apple can keep up their rate of change Windows in it's current form will get further and further behind..."
----
Yes, and the only thing saving Windows in this scenario, is the poor software support Apple has, when compared to the HUGE amount of third party support Windows has. If I were the strategist at Apple, I would make SURE that BootCamp becomes HIGHLY FUNCTIONAL on all the mainstream Macs (the newer ones) which will set the stage for a real attention-getting scenario, where people can move into state-of-the-art desktops, have OS X too, run their Windows software when desired, and can have high-end performance (eg the Mac Pro) when they want it for gaming, etc.
Apple has a TIGER (pun) by the tail --- let's hope they play their hand right.
Cheers ---
----
Yes, and the only thing saving Windows in this scenario, is the poor software support Apple has, when compared to the HUGE amount of third party support Windows has. If I were the strategist at Apple, I would make SURE that BootCamp becomes HIGHLY FUNCTIONAL on all the mainstream Macs (the newer ones) which will set the stage for a real attention-getting scenario, where people can move into state-of-the-art desktops, have OS X too, run their Windows software when desired, and can have high-end performance (eg the Mac Pro) when they want it for gaming, etc.
Apple has a TIGER (pun) by the tail --- let's hope they play their hand right.
Cheers ---
Vista sucks. One of the first on the forum here to get Vista Beta 2 running on my macbook, I thought it was utter rubbish, a total memory hog.
BadRambo said:
Apart from games, (and industry specific programs like Auto-CAD, which most people don't need) I have had no problems finding software for my Mac, lots of it is free too
, compared to my old PC. For the majority of consumers who aren't gamers, Mac's offer all the software they need already. I think it's a bit of a myth that there is no software for the Mac, the current situation is that it's easier to buy a Windows PC as most people know how it works.
I have a post-Beta 2 build of Windows Vista installed on my Macbook Pro, which according to the Official Windows Fanboy (a.k.a Paul Thurrott), is supposedly a lot more stable and better than the public Beta 2 released by Microsoft. It's more or less as stable as Windows XP, but it's obviously faster than its predecessor. However, despite all the eye-candy, the UI is a complete mess from a usability point of view; It's even worse than Windows 3.1!
Eraserhead said:Apart from games, (and industry specific programs like Auto-CAD, which most people don't need) I have had no problems finding software for my Mac, lots of it is free too
Some good points, yes and no. What does get ignored by a majority of the "users" as opposed to "enthusiasts" is the vast array of Linux/Unix software that will run nicely on the x86-based Macs. After just installing the X11 graphic server, it opens a HUGE array of "stuff" up for users. My most used favorite is OpenOffice, ver. 2.0 which works well for many applications. I think in the future, with a more gray area between the Intel-based Macs and the PC, more outfits will be motivated to produce games, utilities, etc. for BOTH platforms. To date there obviously has been a preference for the monster PC aftermarket. I only wish Apple had made their move sooner and gotten away from the "G-world" sooner. But now, with the huge profits from the Ipod, they have some cash to make market moves that were not so easy before. If they play it right, the Intel-based machines could take a nice bite out of the PC market share, especially given VM software, quality hardware and more versatility. The Mac Pro is a good example of a major jump in that direction.
Microsoft cuts ANOTHER feature full HD playback in 32bit Vista goes
Seen at /.
http://www.apcstart.com/site/dwarne...other-feature-full-hd-playback-in-32bit-vista
I guess this means no protected HD content on 32 bit XP either...
B
Seen at /.
http://www.apcstart.com/site/dwarne...other-feature-full-hd-playback-in-32bit-vista
I guess this means no protected HD content on 32 bit XP either...
B
That there are 32-bit and 64-bit variants of Vista sounds pretty horrible. And that just makes it sound worse. I wonder how much else the 32-bit version might not be able to do by the time all's said and done.
BadRambo said:
One major version of an operating system for 5 years is actually good news for developers. It means you know what to expect of your users. You know what features are probably there and what features aren't.
I've heard OSX developers complain about the way each new version of OSX breaks something in their code or adds a new "must support" feature.
reflex said:
On windows? You must be kidding. There are so many variations on Windows XP alone that may be very similar, but are not 100% compatible
XP Home (Original/SP1/SP2)
XP Pro (Original/SP1/SP2)
XP MCE (2002/2003/2004/2005/2005RU2)
XP Tablet Edition
XP Pro 64 bt
Not to mention Whether Plus! is installed or if you have an OEM or volume licensed version... And I'm not talking about hotfixes, which I would consider similar to OS X point releases.
Even though XP has been around for 5 years Service Packs, Hotfixes and broken hardware drivers break plenty of apps and drivers all the time.
B