Slashdot Mirror
Why Panther May Tear Up Longhorn
Sophrosyne writes "Microsoft Watch has presented an article on Longhorn, which is due not before 2005, and compares it with Mac OS X 10.3 (Panther), which may be released this September. The article touches on some of the areas where Windows is ahead in operating system design and technologies, as well as how Panther plans to compete. Included in Microsoft Watch's article were links to a Extreme-Tech article on Desktop compositing, and 3D User Interfaces. It also contains videos of Longhorn's 3D Quartz-like user interface in action." If processor power is so important, why are we so willing to waste it on making windows do funny things when we move them around? Just wondering.
Yet another way windows can useless tax the entire systems resources. It seems as computers get faster, windows gets more uselessly taxing. We never get to experience something new in how fast windows load and apear because windows adds so much to take advantage of everything we have.
I was a UNIX head 10 years ago, then I was a mac head about 7 years ago, and finnaly I moved to windows when windows 3.1 came out. Now I am going back to UNIX/Linux/Mac. I would like to redefine windows use as a proff of concept platform. When a new tech comes out it seems like it only works for windows for a while, then it moves to Mac and later UNIX/Linux. Windows is so restrictive and not very powerful. It forces me to things their way and conform my system to them and their products and technologies. Unfortunatly they have a software and hardware dominace in the market place. I think thats what they call a monopoly. Well I hope this will change with the new release of the Mac OS. The new MacOS already does things that Microsoft says it will include or be able to do later. Maybe this will end the monopoly that they hold if more companies switch. Go Apple!
No.
microsoft single largest source of revenue is licenses bundled with the sale of new PCs. If they release something new that runs just great on existing old computers they lose *tons* of revenue. All MS operating system and software updates will require new computers for that reason.
What I got out of the article is that because OS X 10.3 will be released before Longhorn, it's gonna "tear up Longhorn".
What a load! I love OS X but just because its out first doesn't mean it will be better than Longhorn. That list of longhorn's feature set is full of HUGE features and while Apple doesn't have to worry about things like providing a digital image catalog (a la iPhoto), other things like file system search features that takes english language strings and not query language are not so easy to deflect.
I do believe by 2005 when Longhorn is out, Apple will have made amazing OS X gains, heck it might even be OS XI by then, but I do NOT buy first to market wins.
Resistance is futile.
I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
"What do you mean Panther will tear up Longhorn? Apple to suddenly have 90% market share?"
Tear up meaninging... that Apple will lengthen the gap with which its OS is better than Windows.
"Shiny spinny stuff is cool and all that, but windows doesn't have huge market share because of an amazing interface."
That's for sure.
"It is because they arrived at market at the right time, with the right product, with the right marketing strategies.
The vast majority of consumers don't CHOOSE windows... it is chosen for them as the result of illegal business practices which caused microsoft to dominate the industry...
"(Perhaps not morally right.. but the proof is in the pudding as far as $$ go)"
You bring up an interesting point... The best way to gauge user preference is to measure boxed OS sales... something Apple has consistently outpaced Microsoft by a large margin.
For a while now, I've been thinking that OSes ought to have a couple of different graphics modes. When you're just sporting around the internet or moving files about trying to look busy, the windows should dance and swoosh and have shadows and transparency. Use up all those extra processor cycles. When you start rendering your hour long video composition, they should chill out. Window borders should drop down to 256 colors, shadows should disappear, windows should just close, rather than slither away. It would be nice to have a switch somewhere ( EyeCandy: On/Off ), and even nicer for the OS to flip that switch automatically when the processor load gets really high for more than a few seconds. My 2 cents.
Actually what apple has that STILL blows ms away is the ability to script the UI, it's called applescript, and it's little spoken of and even more rarely seriously used because people on macs don't like to do things like type. So apple made it possible to record your actions and it would make the script for you... people still don't use it *sighs* that does more for the UI and productivity than any flashing, animated, wiggly, snap to dock effect could ever begin to consider. They develop these things because sadly enough people don't often buy things for real features and benefits... they buy what's pretty.
And this presentation coming from Microsoft I wouldn't be surprised if it ran on a Mac.
Regarding Extremetech's article: How extreme can their IT knowledge be if some forum member (!) has to enlighten them on that "Apple has being up and running with their Quartz Compositor engine in OS X, which is now hardware accelerated as Quartz Extreme in Mac OS X 10.2 (Jaguar), and that MS is once again playing catch-up and acting as if it's new stuff." Hiding under stones much?
Besides: The public beta of Mac OS X came out September 2000 and Quartz was demo'd to the public half a year before that by Steve Jobs. So implementing wiggly windows takes MS 5 years. More like 6 (see above)...
Microsoft doesn't have to be formally unseated for the playing field on the desktop to radically change. If MS had a 80% share instead of a 90%+ share of the regular desktop market the other 20% would be a large enough market that *everybody would make multiplatform versions.
Where the article goes wrong is that it presents the fight like it's one about UI or OS features. It isn't. It's about legal and financial issues. Linux, Mac OS and Windows are all capable enough to write a letter, surf the web, and do your accounting on which is the vast bulk of PC use to this day. MS is trapped by the market and its own business decisions to need to increase growth in order for those options not to stay underwater (thus invalidating their entire company compensation scheme). Their efforts to extract more money from existing customers, to break the informal contract they have kept for decades on casual piracy, and creating more and more restrictive EULA's will end up with their market share eroding. Apple will benefit from this as will Linux but Linux will be hampered by their reliance on the GPL which is and will remain the main focus of MS' FUD attack.
It is like comparing a 2003 car to a 2005 one.
But the scariest part is that the 2003 wins. gofigure