Windows Vista VS Mac OS X Tiger

New Member
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Jun 17, 2003
Messages
3,397
Best answers
0
Which do you perfer?

Windows Vista is going to compete with the Mac OS Tiger somehow, and yet they have some features that are better and bad.

I personally tried them both even with the beta and it's pretty good, but I perfer Vista more than the Mac OS. It's okay but it's good for like web graphics and such things as that.
 
Lost in space
Banned
Joined
Oct 21, 2003
Messages
814
Best answers
0
Which do you prefer:

An "upgrade" operating system with hardly any worthwhile features that requires you to go out and buy a ton of hardware to support it, drop a good chunk of change to acquire it (when it's out, you'll be able to pick from 7+ versions), won't be out for another 2 years (they'll continue rolling back the release date and dropping features like they have been for a few years now), will attempt to make more strict DRM a part of everyday life, and will be "fanboy"ed by every single computer-illiterate person because "it has a cool GUI".

or:

A proven, reliable, hardware-accelerated operating system that looks good, runs fast, is built off of a sturdy base (BSD/Unix), is designed so that a complete idiot can use it and still maintain high levels of security, and designed by a company that actually innovates rather than attempting to make their products look better by buying out the competition.

Of courses there's plenty more arguing points supporting MacOSX and bashing Vista, but I'm sure you can find plenty of them by yourself here: http://google.com

Edit:

Oh yes, Vista will support "symbolic links". As a testament to Microsoft innovation and "features", Microsoft has been around for 20 years and is just now implementing one of the basic features of UNIX (An OS older than everyone on this board, including Cucumba). gg.
 
Cunning as Zeus
Banned
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 23, 2003
Messages
6,079
Best answers
0
I'll go with Vista since I've always used Windows.
 
Lost in space
Banned
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Messages
3,608
Best answers
0
Windows hands down, but i'l always use OS X Tiger gui (as I do currently). Don't like all the vista themes iv'e used & seen recently, but when vista is out iy should look better maybe. & why should I go spend heaps of money just to get my pc up to scratch? Do i really need 2gb of ddr2 memory to run it (or so some magizine said once :().
 
Live free or die by the sword
Retired Forum Staff
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 1, 2001
Messages
7,416
Best answers
0
Linux is not older than me. I am older than Linux by 15 years. I am almost close enough to be an Irish twin of C.

I agree with Kurt though, Windows Vista will be vastly inferior to Max OS-X Tiger. What I have seen of vista thus far has convinced me that I should stay with Win XP untill I am forced to change OSes. Of course, if the world developed for Linux and Mac, the tune would change. Games are practically windows only.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 29, 2004
Messages
1,626
Best answers
0
What the hell is a symbolic link?
 
Lost in space
Banned
Joined
Oct 21, 2003
Messages
814
Best answers
0
Cucumba said:
Linux is not older than me. I am older than Linux by 15 years. I am almost close enough to be an Irish twin of C.
I said UNIX not Linux :p
 
Lost in space
Banned
Joined
Nov 4, 2003
Messages
47
Best answers
0
IIRC, UNIX is older than C, by at least a few years....

I won't be touching Vista if I can avoid it. I doubt we'll switch at work for a long time (our clients need their systems to work, not crap on about how shiny the latest incarnation of their GUI is, and so far Vista is really nothing but XP with another GUI slapped on top of it)

I'll probably switch to Mac and some flavour of *nix at home (Gentoo Linux or FreeBSD most likely) since I've little need for Windows anymore.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 3, 2002
Messages
2,490
Best answers
0
DISCLAIMER: If you're a fan of the mac, you probably shouldn't read the following. It is admittedly heavily biased, as I have even stronger than usual feelings about Macintosh in general.

I'm going to stick with Windows. For two reasons:

1.) I want to be able to do something other than photoshop and iTunes
2.) I kind of feel like there has to be a good reason why the mac took more than a dozen tries at their OS before finally scrapping it for this new OSX action.

OSX is great, don't get me wrong, and basing it off of Unix was a very smart decision from what I can figure...but it just makes me gape in awe sometimes that they've been through so many different incarnations of their operating system and it took them until 2005 to figure out "Maybe we should make it so you can quit a program when it crashes instead of locking up the whole computer and requiring you to yank the plug out to turn it off" or "Maybe we should have higher speed ports for the peripherals and lower the interrupt requests on these USBs so that the mouse and keyboard don't randomly die," etc.

In the newspaper business, I have a lot of personal experience with Macs, all the way up to OSX/G5's, and though OSX is pretty good, I still can't do 1/10th what I can do with Windows (or even Linux, since it at least uses the same file system as Windows, I believe...though I may be wrong). I can't do things like change file extensions because of that stupid ass binary file header table crap, and unless I'm playing like WoW I can pretty much never play anything on it anyway, yet they throw these super jacked video cards in them and crank the price up a grand. I don't want to have to spend $250 bucks on an Airport because it won't like my Windows-favoring router...I don't want to have to fly blind when designing websites because all the mac versions of the browsers have craptacular support for new web specs...and most of all, I don't want to pay $3000 for a computer that looks pretty and can't do anything I want to do.

I agree totally that I wish Microsoft would start a new OS from the ground up, maybe based on open source stuff like Linux, etc., but I guess they are taking an approach where doing tons of extra work for the same result profit-wise is a no-no.

Admittedly I know little of Unix or Linux, but to be honest, I don't think I need to, my feelings about the Mac in general are undoubtedly gonna keep me from swaying.

The bottom line here is that I am very anti-Macintosh; I always have been. There are decisions made for Macs that just seem to me like Jobs wanted to proprietize and screw Windows over; unfortunately, as we've all seen, it went the other way, because Gates got more of a hold on things early on. Now the two are comparable and in many/most cases, the Mac is actually better...but that doesn't stem my absolute hatred of them. So unfortunately I don't really care how good or allegedly stable the operating system is, or even what great systems its based off of...I'll be going Windows Vista, simply because OSX is mac, and I will never ever find a place for a mac on my computer desk, no matter how good it is.
 
Lost in space
Banned
Joined
Oct 21, 2003
Messages
814
Best answers
0
I don't want to have to fly blind when designing websites because all the mac versions of the browsers have craptacular support for new web specs
You have that backwards... browsers like Safari are some of the FEW that actually ATTEMPT to support web standards. (Safari is one of only 2 browsers at this time that can render CSS1 perfectly).

What you're doing with websites (as I build websites using HTML/CSS1/Javascript/PHP/MySQL for a living currently, and I'm filthy at all 5 of them), is designing them around the shortcomings of IE (piss-poor CSS support, requiring you to have to use tables, and generally do filthy hax to get stuff to render correctly, "popup" descriptions on image links use the img tag's "alt" attribute instead of the a tag's "title" attribute, etc. etc.) rather than standards comformity, since at least 80% of the internet-using population uses IE. If you can find a mixture of complete standards compliance and usability across multiple browsers, then you are leet. Takes alot of work though getting stuff to properly render in IE.

And as yet another testament to how much Microsoft cares, IE7 (in vista, not beta) will have marginal support for CSS2, but not even properly implemented CSS1. So as you can see, they really care about people who target their platform.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 3, 2002
Messages
2,490
Best answers
0
Really, the web browsers are the least of my concerns, honestly. More the games and the general functionality of them as a whole, that makes me dislike them. The website bit is just a sort of decorative icing on the cake, as it were.

I had written a big thing, but instead I can sum it up in a much shorter paragraph: Pretty much nothing I've ever looked at on a mac browser has looked right. Ever. My work or otherwise. So for me, working 100% of the time is better than integrity at the cost of usefulness. That aside, I have seen many effects attained on IE that couldn't be done on other browsers anyway, and I know of the hacks and such that need to be done for IE. But to be honest I have never had to use anything of the sort, as everything I've ever made I had no trouble getting to do exactly what I want. so my loyalties remain unswayed in the browser department (though I freely admit the OSX browsers I've used were a lot better about this sort of thing).

Even if the browsers are better, that's only one small step away from the countless aggravations I've had with macs. Like I said before, there is really no argument from me as to which may be better; I am staying Windows only out of pure unadulterated hatred for the Mac, plain and simple...not any actual logical 'good' reason, heh.

I wish I could have a more mature, unbiased point of view, but I can't. I work in an office full of both macs and PCs...the PC people are always finished early and never crash or anything...the mac folks, almost every 15 minutes someone is going "God dammit!" and reaching for the interrupt key. Files that mysteriously don't open, Adobe Distiller constantly crashing, OS always crapping out, mouse and keyboard locking up cause some asshat thought it would be brilliant to run all controllers through daisy-chained high interrupt USB ports, having to partition your drive into four chunks because the computer doesn't recognize after 4 gigs of space on any HDD (that's my g4 at work)...just so much BS over the years, I just can't ever see myself willingly doing anything with a mac.
 
New Member
Joined
May 30, 2003
Messages
842
Best answers
0
Definatly going to have to go with Windows. For the obvious fact that Mac is not an x86 OS. When Mac supports x86 processors (and it will, there is a functioning beta version for it available), then I will definatly give it a try. Until then, there's no way in hell I'm buying new hardware just for a system that can pretty much only run Blizzard games.

Wikipedia said:
In April 2002, eWeek reported a rumor that Apple had a version of Mac OS X running on x86 processors, code-named Marklar. The idea behind Marklar was to keep Mac OS X running on an alternate platform should Apple become unsatisfied with the progress of the PowerPC platform.[2] The rumor was confirmed by Apple's CEO Steve Jobs in June 2005, when he announced that future Macintosh products will run on Intel processors starting in 2006. After pre-release x86-based Macs were released to developers, a copy of the x86-based version of Mac OS X was leaked onto the Internet, and hackers managed to get it to run on non-Apple x86-based PCs.
When their Marklar OS is released (South Park anyone?) then I'll consider Mac as an alternative.

*EDIT* lawl
Wikipedia said:
The code name is a reference to a fictional race of aliens who appeared in an episode of the television show South Park.
 
New Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Messages
652
Best answers
0
Im gonna go with neither and stick with XP, unless Vista has some features that I like. And im not a mac guy so no Tiger for me.
 
Lost in space
Banned
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Messages
3,608
Best answers
0
Apple is switching to Intel x86 based chips for the next series of Apple pcs. This decision was made due to apple not being happy with IBM's PowerPc platform, and may open up the possibility of running both mac OSX & Windows on the same machine. Hackers recently got hold of a leaked version of the new Mac OSX being delveloped for Intel macs & got it running on standard x86 hardware.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Apr 14, 2005
Messages
4,022
Best answers
0
I'm staying XP until my computer breaks down beyond repair and I'll need to get a new one. If it so happens to have Vista, then so be it.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top