Slashdot Mirror


Nonexistent Windows OS Superior to Panther

Anonymous Coward writes "A Windows user slams Panther. 'Apple has implemented some basic desktop composition features in Mac OS X "Panther." But the basic problem with Mac OS X isn't going away: It's a classic desktop operating system that doesn't offer anything in the way of usability advancements over previous desktop operating systems. Today, Windows XP and its task-based interface are far superior to anything in Mac OS X. In the future, Longhorn will further distance Windows from OS X. (sic) From a graphical standpoint, there won't be any comparison. As Microsoft revealed at the PDC 2003 conference, Longhorn is far more impressive technically than Panther.'"

408 comments

  1. Speaking of which, by revmoo · · Score: 0, Interesting

    It's kind of true. I just recently bought a powerbook, and while I've been largely satisfied with it and don't regret my purchase one bit, os X is not without it's flaws.

    Mainly, the finder. It's an unweildy, awkward interface that makes managing files on your drive an absolute chore, it has a completely useless properties menu that allows almost zero customization, and it doesn't remember choices in later instances(i.e., it refuses to STAY in a single view mode).

    While the article is largely FUD, it shouldn't be completely dismissed, because some of it is accurate.

    Anyone reccomend a good finder replacement? :-)

    --
    I would expect such blatant racism on Fark, but on Slashdot? Mods please ban this asshole.
    1. Re:Speaking of which, by Kev6 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Strange... I have all my finder so it shows everything in single view mode except for one folder that it always shows in list view after I set it that way

    2. Re:Speaking of which, by thunderbird46 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Are you running Jaguar, or Panther? I upgraded my G3/700 iBook to Panther yesterday and I'm very impressed with the improvements they made to the Finder. My first impression is that the new Finder is easier to use and seems more willing to stay in one view mode. The laptop feels much more responsive overall too.

    3. Re:Speaking of which, by bjornte · · Score: 0
      Also a PowerBook user, I must agree to this posting. The finder in OS X Panther is an improvement to the Jaguar finder. Still I find the Windows 2000 Explorer, with the folder tree and folder contents in separate windows, more useful. And there are some other strengths to the Windows Explorer too:

      - Keyboard navigation is easier. It's both more consistent and more fully integrated into the UI. This is a fact throughtout Windows, as compared to OS X.

      - The OS X Save As feature is horrible! It doesn't default to the original file's directory, but to the Documents folder. On several occations, this has made me open up old revisions of documents, which is a drag.

    4. Re:Speaking of which, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      I don't think it's largely FUD, perhaps some windows user bias against mac users, but that's to be expected. Perfect objectivity isn't possible, and as long as we place the writings in a proper context, that's where they're best understood.

      I too have bought a mac recently, waiting for the release of Panther earlier in the month. My previous desktop systems were a mix of windows and linux, and from using macs belonging to other people (and admittedly not a little amount of reading other switcher's tales) I picked up an eMac.

      Now I have the mac and panther, and I really wonder why I bothered. I waited months for this release only to find it's unix with all the disabilities of unix. While I could have been enjoying longhorn all that time, I entered the jobsian distortion field, and was sucked into waiting for a future mac release.

      It's not a bad machine, but it's not what it could be

    5. Re:Speaking of which, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Still I find the Windows 2000 Explorer, with the folder tree and folder contents in separate windows, more useful.

      I respectfully submit that you don't know how to use the Panther Finder. It doesn't work like the Windows Explorer. It's completely different. Learn to use it, then draw your comparisons.

      The OS X Save As feature is horrible! It doesn't default to the original file's directory, but to the Documents folder.

      It doesn't default to anywhere. The choice of where to open the Save dialog is entirely up to the application developer. If the developer said to go to the Documents folder, then that's where it goes.

      In any case, check out the pop-up menu of recent directories. It's darned useful.

      On several occations, this has made me open up old revisions of documents, which is a drag.

      The Save dialog can't open anything. Maybe you're just a fucking idiot?

    6. Re:Speaking of which, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. I use Jaguar, and the finder is not nearly as good as OS 9. OS X is designed for multiple users, for which it is quite effective, but it is awkward and confusing for a single user. (Multiple folders w/the same name, etc.)

      Of course you can shift things around so it's basically like OS9, but this causes its own problems.

      Still, I've gotten used to it, and I hear that Panther makes some improvements. The main problem is the general sluggishness of the interface. I hope that's fixed, at the very least.

    7. Re:Speaking of which, by PasteEater · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Unfortunately (for me), I have to agree with you. The Finder is pretty much what made the Mac a Mac, and it seems to be lacking in many ways. It's getting better, but IMO, this should have been Apple's *priority* from the get go.

      As far as keeping windows in a consistent view: open the window you want to set, configure everything the way you want it, and then CLOSE it before doing anything else. When you reopen the window, everything should be as you left it. Intuitive? Not at all, but that's the way it goes.

      I'm sure it's been said before, but maybe Apple should pay a little more attention to it's Mac users before it dives into the Windows world. Market share be damned! I want to use the GUI to manage my files!

      --
      There are two kinds of people in the world: those with loaded guns, and those who dig.
    8. Re:Speaking of which, by Echnin · · Score: 2, Informative

      The save dialog can't open anything? In Windows it can, by right-clicking. I find this a useful feature. Honestly.

      --
      Lalala
    9. Re:Speaking of which, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the grandparent meant that he would save to documents, then later open up his original document which was someplace else (thus an older version).

      It is indeed useful to be able to do those things in explorer. A couple times I've needed to copy files for backup, or extract a file. Being able to do it in the Save As dialogue is helpful.

    10. Re:Speaking of which, by Scarpia10 · · Score: 1

      Can't say I agree with your assessment of the finder, but if you really want to get rid of it, give pathfinder a try: http://www.cocoatech.com/pathfinder3/index.php Lots of folks like it, it's much more customizable, and is much faster than Jagwire's finder.

    11. Re:Speaking of which, by Mullmusik · · Score: 1

      While I could have been enjoying longhorn all that time

      You mean in 200? when it actually comes out and is more than just repeatedly delayed vaporware.

    12. Re:Speaking of which, by denzombie · · Score: 3, Funny
      Anyone reccomend a good finder replacement? :-) how 'bout /bin/bash? Sure I'm trolling a bit, but since I got comfortable with file management from the cli, the Finder, Windows Explorer, and even Nautilus are a big pain in the ass to use. I feel like my arm is running a marathon pushing windows around and dragging files.

      OHG, I'm a nerd, I'm bashing GUIs now.

      --
      --- Evil robots don't kill people, Mad scientists kill people.
    13. Re:Speaking of which, by tuxedobob · · Score: 1

      How the hell can opening from a save dialog be useful? Did you think you were going to save, then realize that you wanted to open something? How much time elapsed there? Does the save dialog go away once you open something? If so, why didn't you just use the open dialog? If not, why didn't you just save first?

    14. Re:Speaking of which, by bmorton · · Score: 1

      It's damned useful if explorer has crashed and refused to come back up on it's own. You can open explorer.exe from it. Of course, you can do this in the "Open" dialog too. All in all, I find it depressing that this happens to me enough where I find it a useful feature.

      -B

    15. Re:Speaking of which, by JelloG3 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "It's damned useful if explorer has crashed..." Now why did explorer have to crash, if the OS was stable that should not have happen

    16. Re:Speaking of which, by illogic · · Score: 1

      On several occations, this has made me open up old revisions of documents, which is a drag.

      The Save dialog can't open anything. Maybe you're just a fucking idiot?


      The only reason I respond to this post is that such a thoughtless AC remark is modded +5 insightful.

      Perhaps the accuser should have thought a little more carefully, lest he prove to be guilty of his own insult: obviously what the original poster meant is that by having a confusing save dialog, his documents were inadvertently saved in the wrong places. Therefore, when he opened what he thought was his last-revised document, it was an older version.

      Seriously, moderators.

    17. Re:Speaking of which, by tuxedobob · · Score: 1

      Of course, you can do this in the "Open" dialog too.

      Then why didn't you just use the "Open" dialog!!

      All in all, I find it depressing that this happens to me enough where I find it a useful feature.

      Hehe. Now that sounds about right.

    18. Re:Speaking of which, by darkpurpleblob · · Score: 2, Insightful
      How the hell can opening from a save dialog be useful?
      Personally, I don't know. People do make mistakes and change their minds. Maybe someone saw another file in the folder they wanted to have a look at. I occasionally will rename or delete files from the save dialog in Windows (which saves me a trip (and hence some time) through Explorer).

      It really makes a lot of sense for Microsoft to make the context menu available on files in open and save dialogs - it's clearly adding functionality that wouldn't have been there otherwise (and I suspect it wouldn't have taken much development effort to add either).

    19. Re:Speaking of which, by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

      This is a grat security hole too! At least under some circumstances.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    20. Re:Speaking of which, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Anyone reccomend a good finder replacement? :-)

      http://cocoatech.com

      http://rixstep.com

    21. Re:Speaking of which, by sapporoitchy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Launchbar

    22. Re:Speaking of which, by rixstep · · Score: 1

      I respectfully submit that you don't know how to use the Panther Finder.

      Maybe he just doesn't like it?

      After all, the Finder is hardly a speed demon. Given that it's more a 'Mac' program than an NS program, this is hardly surprising.

    23. Re:Speaking of which, by Echnin · · Score: 1

      One example: When I want to install a plugin for some program and find out that I have to install it first, it's a useful feature.

      --
      Lalala
    24. Re:Speaking of which, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Such as?

    25. Re:Speaking of which, by penguinstorm · · Score: 1

      While I love OS X, and use it as my day to day OS on a Powerbook, the original post's basic assertion - that it's a nice OS that doesn't incorporate a number of advancements in user interface design - is correct. This is sold, stable, Unix with a pretty face. OpenDoc running on Classic was more innovative - as was the original NeXT interface. Both of these benefitted from the ability to either jettison the past or start from scratch. I regret that I've never used the now dead Be OS, as I had no Wintel hardware at the time. A basic flaw in OS X: when doing web work and creating new folders, I often find myself creating a folder and copying a file from another directory then renaming it. This is instead of launching BBEdit and doing a save as -> create new folder. It's faster. Even KDE gives me a menu that allows me to create a new file in a folder without having to launch an application. This is pretty basic, and it's missing. I still think OS X was hobbled by hundreds of thousands of screaming, whining Mac users wanting the interface to be like it had been for years - most of them were oblivious to the fact that the core of their OS was so crippled and hobbled it needed to be put out of its misery.

      --
      Skot Nelson music is my saviour / i was maimed by rock and roll
    26. Re:Speaking of which, by bmorton · · Score: 1

      And with that, you've hit the nail on the head.

      -B

    27. Re:Speaking of which, by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      "Maybe he just doesn't like it?"

      I don't like it much either. But Windows Explorer is pre-BASIC by comparison. Seriously, there's not much point arguing about whether Mac OSX or Win2K has the better 'Finder' when they're both about 1/10th as good as that of MacOS9.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    28. Re:Speaking of which, by kommakazi · · Score: 1

      Ummm...try using the side by side view, it's pretty much the same as the windows explorer with the folders on one side and the contents of the selected ones to the right...it's the only veiw i use and it rox.

    29. Re:Speaking of which, by kommakazi · · Score: 1

      You bash the finder like no other yet you really gave no examples why it's such a terrible chore to manage files... I just think 'manging files' is a sort of a chore no matter what OS you are using....

    30. Re:Speaking of which, by l3prador · · Score: 1

      Exactly. LaunchBar is a great substitute for mousing around in the Finder. I don't really even need to use the Finder much. You just type command-space and some abbreviation of the name of what you want like T for Terminal or IT for iTunes and hit return. If you hate navigating through the Finder, you should definitely check it out.

    31. Re:Speaking of which, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ehh?? I've never used BBEdit, but my version of OS X (10.3.1) has a nifty "New Folder" button in every save dialog. My recollection is that it's been there as long as I've been using OS X (10.1.2) but I could be wrong. Is BBEdit using its own save dialog?

    32. Re:Speaking of which, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It doesn't default to anywhere. The choice of where to open the Save dialog is entirely up to the application developer. If the developer said to go to the Documents folder, then that's where it goes.


      Unless of course, the application developer in question is - you guessed it - Microsoft. In Word for Mac OS X for example, they have gone out of their way to subvert the "remember the last place you saved" mechanism. Instead, you have to open up the prefs and put in a path to the default Save As directory, which it will use from then on. You can navigate to another place when you save, but the next Save As after that it has forgotten, and uses the prefs path. There is no way to remove the prefs path. This gets mighty old REALLY fast.... Whoever thought this was a good usable interface idea should be forced to use the app for a few days on REAL work. What gets me is if they had done nothing at all, the OS would have ensured the app worked properly!

      C'mon Apple, where's the word processing iApp?
    33. Re:Speaking of which, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a mac fan and OSX user I woulld say taht there are issues with the finder (as mentioned in the ArsTechnica review) that need to be looked at. but, as has also been mentioned here, I'd imagine that they will be fixed or altered in the next few releases and reach a stage where they can compete with longhorn's 'new' method.

      the two key points here are:

      Apple has been putting work and feedback into OS X, and it shows. Microsoft is telling people what they are getting.

      Apple is the underdog (like, linux is in its own way) and, as such, will fight twice as hard to succeed. Microsoft do have a history of complacency since most PCs come pre-installed with their OS. They have no real need to produce anything groundbreaking

  2. Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A long time ago Windows users used to blather on about how great Windows NT was going to be, even before it appeared. The funny thing was they then found it necessary to spend an amazing amount of time dissing OS/2, which was already being used happily by some of us. OS/2 users had years of using a great environment while NT users waited years for theirs to appear. It's like an OS version of short man syndrom. They know Windows sucks, so they get really shrill when they criticize other OSes. It's a repeating pattern.

    1. Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 by dbirchall · · Score: 5, Funny

      Paul in particular is an interesting case. He runs his Windows site, which includes an occasional dig at the Mac -- but he also runs his blog, which comes very close to being 24/7 Mac gloom and doom. And he appears to actually have a 500MHz iBook and a 1GHz iMac...

    2. Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 by ShadowBottle · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Jebsu man. This guy is pathetic. Three major points I can think of: 1) Mach Kernel 2) Apt 3) Usable command line interface These three things alone have made XP (and longhorn 4051) several years behind. Couple that with the intense amount of ported and free software available for OS X... geez man- OS X beta smacks XP down on it's ass. I'm not a mac enthusiast.. hell I can't even afford one.. and I game alot.. so I'm pretty much forced into the XP market. Just remember.. there's something to be said when an OS limits uptime to a 32-bit number (NT Kernel based OS's)... it's an admission that the OS isn't intended to keep working. Pax. ShadowBottle

    3. Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 by Arctic+Fox · · Score: 1

      there's something to be said when an OS limits uptime to a 32-bit number (NT Kernel based OS's)... it's an admission that the OS isn't intended to keep working. Are you sure about this? I know that there was a bug in Win95 days of only having a 90 day uptime... I'd like to see a citation.

    4. Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Nice blog....he spends quite a bit of time taking cheap shots. So, here we go...

      He notcies that Mozilla has a new website site, then complains that part of it doesn't look right. He then goes on to say the lizard thing is getting old. But when you look at his blog, the first thing you are assaulted with is a picture of some big duffus. It completely ruins the rest of the blog. Not to ention, the links he has under his ugly mug are default blue on a black background. This makes the links very difficult to read. Isn't it time for a more professional blog?

      He also mentions in his blog that the "Kool-Aid-drinking Apple fans" misunderstand him. Well, no shit! This from someone that obviously chugs from the MS punch bowl without even bothering to use a cup.

      His post regarding "Windows Media continues to dominate QuickTime, Real" looks like it was cut and pasted from the report he is linking to.

      The rest of the gloom and doom for Mac gets kind of old after a while. How many ways can you say MS's Kool-Aid is the best and everything else sucks? It seems the duffus is going for a world's record or something.

    5. Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 by joey+shabadu · · Score: 1

      You have a little stubby OS and I have a big fat honkin' 13" OS !

    6. Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I'd never seen this guys blog until now. Its really quite bizarre.

      He owns macs. He obviously likes macs, because he goes to the apple store to consider purchasing one. But he really, really hates Apple.

      Is it some sort of twisted personal therapy he's going through? Or does he really feel it's his responsibility to spend hours publishing negative comments about a particular platform?

      And his reasons for not buying a 12" iBook is just funny (no, you can't get 1GHz in the 12" iBook.... Just buy the damn Powerbook!!)

    7. Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 by dbrutus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The funny thing is that Longhorn is not a competitor to 10.3. It'll be a competitor to 10.5 or 10.6 depending on the final release schedule pursued by both companies.

      Japan Inc. stole a march on US manufacturing by putting out a product and then putting out a better one far faster than the US could do it. By the time the US got its first generation competitor rolling, Japan, Inc. was rolling out their third generation. Eventually the US got its act together but they lost a lot of ground and have never really regained it.

      The current situation between Apple and Microsoft is very similar. By the time Longhorn is out, Apple will have put out another couple of versions. Anything that Microsoft announces that truly progresses the state of the art (see, no MS bashing here, they do come up with useful ideas) will be imitated while Apple's innovations will be refined and on their 2nd, 3rd, or fourth generation while MS is still trying to put together SP1.

      Quick cycle turnaruond is no less valuable in software than it is in manufacturing.

    8. Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 by squiggleslash · · Score: 1
      Old Usenet Amiga hands will remember a character by the name of Marc N. Barrett (not to be confused with Dan Barrett, of BLAZEMONGER(tm) fame) who had an Amiga and insisted it was the worst machine he'd ever seen. He could have just gotten a Mac, but no, he insisted on sticking with his A3000 and insisting it was worse than a Mac simultaneously.

      I think the truth is every computing group has the nut that insists on using something he doesn't like and going on and on and on about its alleged "faults". Sounds like Paul's another Marc Barrett.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    9. Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 by numpins · · Score: 1

      Great post about duffuses and Kool-Aid. :)

      Don't forget to grab Paul's head and move it around the lower part of his face -- like folding a dollar bill in weird places.

      Thanks, Paul!

    10. Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...the links he has under his ugly mug are default blue on a black background. This makes the links very difficult to read.

      In Mozilla, I changed any page's individual colors for background and visited/unvisited links to one set to avoid problems like this.
      (edit->preferences->appearance->colors)

      Maybe you already knew that feature.
      And maybe the blogger used it, too.

    11. Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 by TedNugentRules! · · Score: 4, Insightful

      and .NET vs Java, and Mac vs PC, and Ford vs FM and all the other utterly *nonsensical* little arguments we seem to find ourselves embroiled in ! Why are 'intelligent' humans repeatedly sucked into marketing-inspired stoushes regarding the *one true technology* ? Religious wars are hilarious, and our friend has clearly gone looking for a flaming, but we've accomodated him to a tee.

      For what its worth, here is my take on it (laugh if you must) : both MS and Apple build products which have pros and cons : its up to each of us to weigh those up, sift the reality from the marketing hype and make a choice.

      Personally, my desire to play games like HL2 means that a PC sits near my Mac, but a desire to access a truly powerful command-line environment means that the majority of my *work* is spread between my iBook and the desktop G4. At this point in time, I dont believe that there is a *single* perfect all-round OS for every application, and thats probably a good thing. We need to embrace diversity : use what works, and leave the remainder for someone else to tinker with.

      Finally, a thought for Apple : you've wooed many of us across with the strong Unix core and aggressive pricing - time to capitalise on that and get more developers pushing out product for the Mac. The glossy sheen of Aqua will only ever be as impressive as the range of apps available for the 'average' user, and thats one area where Windoze retains a huge stranglehold.

    12. Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 by the+web · · Score: 1

      Hmmm, he's got issues.

      --
      __
      Thou hast besquirted me, O leotarded one.
    13. Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      His seemingly contradictory behavoir can be explained in 1 word: Astroturf.

      I don't think this is just Some Guy who happens to own Macs but blog all day about how great Windows is. It's a Microsoft contract employee who is being paid to simulate a grassroots anti-Mac anticipation of Windows Longhorn.

      Just a theory... but not one that is at all inconsistent with past MS marketing tactics.

    14. Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 by FaasNat · · Score: 1

      Not defending the guy or anything, but maybe he likes the hardware and wants to run YellowDog or something.

      He does seem kinda indecsive though....

      --
      There's never enough when you have too little
    15. Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 by pvt_medic · · Score: 1

      Its like saying the gamecube is better than a playstation 1. There years appart good thing they made a product that is more advance than something that has been out for a couple years.. Go progress.

      --
      30% Troll, 50% Underrated, 10% Interesting
      Score:5, Troll
    16. Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 by c13v3rm0nk3y · · Score: 1
      Finally, a thought for Apple : you've wooed many of us across with the strong Unix core and aggressive pricing - time to capitalise on that and get more developers pushing out product for the Mac.

      Jeepers, we've got an armlength of customers asking for a port of our (mostly) Java-based client to OS X, but we still don't have a business case for it.

      So this G4 sit next to my desk and serves iTunes.

      I did the proof-of-concept, and other than some weirdo Look And Feel problems related to the completely new (to us) Aqua LAF, it seemed to work ok. Some of the Swing widgets behave badly the way we use them, but ain't that Swing?

      Of course, there is more to porting apps than just getting it to build and run. The QA schedule and Support resources and post-release maintenance have to be taken into consideration as well. This is especially so given I'm the only Mac guy in the entire company, so we'd have to educated people in a hurry. Developers know it's a good platform, but everyone else does not want to get saddled with having to support another potentially marginal platform.

      So, it looks like we'll never port our enterprise app over to OS X. From a business standpoint, it's still not a viable platform regardless of how many companies want us to support it.

      --
      -- clvrmnky
    17. Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 by bjohnson · · Score: 1

      Glad I don't for for your company...generally any company that has 'an armload' of customers asking for something would catch a clue.

      But hey, 3/4's of businessses fail, anyway, keep your resume buffed, dude...because those customers you're ignoring?

      They go elsewhere, and so do your profits...

    18. Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 by c13v3rm0nk3y · · Score: 1
      Glad I don't for for your company...generally any company that has 'an armload' of customers asking for something would catch a clue.

      *shrug*

      We've been in business for over 2 decades now. Pretty old for a software company. Our app suite has had to change with the times, as have the platforms we support.

      I guess I was just saying that regardless of what developers think of OS X as a development platform, not everyone is in a hurry to port their apps to the Mac. There are just too many other considerations.

      An "armlength" of customers is just that: a tiny handful compared to the rest of our Win32 and Unix-dominated customer base. Don't get me wrong: I love my Mac, and development on it is fun. It's just that no matter what developers like or what customers want, market pressures and day-to-day business concerns will always eclipse those desires. Honestly, those customers will just move their apps to another platform. At this point nobody stops buying our client-server app because we don't have a Mac client. They make those Mac users switch to something else.

      I've learned that the actual development of an app is actually one of the smallest parts of selling to an enterprise market. I'm still holding out for a Mac client, though. What I'm not looking forward to is being the only person with Mac expertise once we release it.

      --
      -- clvrmnky
    19. Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 by TedNugentRules! · · Score: 1

      Cmon, BJ - CleverMonkey didnt say that he was *personally* unwilling to port the app to OS X, only that we needed to be aware that most companies have to look beyond initial demand when making a porting decision. If CM is the *only* Mac person in the company, how the hell are they supposed to support the thing in a cost-effective manner ? Whether we like it or not, the business world remains very PC-centric : having to look for an *additional* skillset on top of Java ($$) just isnt in the wish list of many IT managers. The 'new' Apple is doing a great job, but it cant hope to change the PC stranglehold overnight.

  3. The basic problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is that Mac's desktop is classic?

    Innovate because it's a innovation is wrong. There's nothing wrong with classic solutions.

    1. Re:The basic problem by GreyWolf3000 · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Innovation should result from perturbation, not masturbation.

      --
      Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
    2. Re:The basic problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      moo.

  4. I'll believe it when I see it by Paladeen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As Microsoft revealed at the PDC 2003 conference, Longhorn is far more impressive technically than Panther.

    Is? IS? Longhorn isn't even out yet, so there's no comparing them. So what if Microsoft says Longhorn will have features X, Y and Z? I don't see Longhorn on millions of computer systems today. By the time Longhorn comes out (late 2004 at best), there will in all probability already be another MacOS X revision.

    It's just stupid to claim the superiority of software that doesn't exist in terms of users. I might as well go on a Mac-advocacy rant and say something like "Yeah, well, Longhorn sucks because Apple are developing MacOS XI, due 2006, which has features X, Y and Z, which Longhorn doesn't have. Therefore, MacOS X is just way better than Longhorn." This is childish and stupid, and worst of all, flamebait. Damn me for just responding to this rubbish!

    1. Re:I'll believe it when I see it by dbirchall · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Late 2004? Hmm, Microsoft bigwigs have been saying it's 3 years away...

    2. Re:I'll believe it when I see it by adamjaskie · · Score: 1

      Maybe he likes bright colours...

      "Windows is better than Mac, because Mac has such cool and subdued boring colours. Windows has bright reds, yellows, blues and greens. .`. Windows == TEH ROXORZ!!!"

      I have personally found bright colours to be annoying and distracting. I turn off eye candy in Linux. I run FVWM2. The best thing to do is to give the user options.

      --
      /usr/games/fortune
    3. Re:I'll believe it when I see it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
      From the article:
      Longhorn will include new anti-virus (AV) APIs that will help developers more easily integrate their wares into the base OS.

      NO! Those are the things we do NOT want virus writers to have -- special APIs that help developers write simply code that seamlessly integrates into bowels of the OS! :-)

    4. Re:I'll believe it when I see it by nachoman · · Score: 2

      Since when does flame articles posted by anonymous cowards constitute news. I'm a windows user, and a mac user and a Linux user. They all have their uses. The article reads like marketing technobable. Well, enough said, Don't want to feed the flame.

    5. Re:I'll believe it when I see it by ColMustard · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree that eye candy can be useless. It often exists for users to say "oh wow." But not all eye candy is bad.

      OS X uses a lot of effects to actually help users. For example, shadows on windows. It's a fast way to see which windows are on top of other windows (an already easy thing, usually; just easier/faster). Zooming windows across the screen when they could just disappear and appear at their destination: easily see where things are, or went. This relates to Expose, too.

      Then there's eye candy that doesn't increase productivity, like the rotating cube animation for switching users. Transparency might also fit here, although it's sometimes useful, too, when dragging large things to make sure you drop dragged things where they need to be.

      In the last category, there's eye candy that decrease productivity. I can't think of any good examples in OS X, but I'm sure there are some.

      In the end, though, you should find that there are relatively few effects in OS X which don't have a purpose, and even fewer which decrease productivity.

      Just my opinion, though. To each his own.

      --
      Moof.
    6. Re:I'll believe it when I see it by afantee · · Score: 5, Informative

      How the hell does he know that "Longhorn is far more impressive technically than Panther" when the thing doesn't even have a firm release date and many of its promised features are still in the conceptual stage?

      The guy is clearly a troll who knows little about Panther, but his ignorance is obviously not enough to stop him making bold claims that he doesn't bother to back up with facts or logic reasons other than the utterly meaningless concept of task based UI. And then in his
      <a href="http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/longhorn _4051.asp"> Longhorn Build 4051 Review </a>, he confessed:

      "I had joked with Microsofties and coworkers that the PDC almost had to be a letdown after all the pre-show hype. And as the Longhorn build 4051 download completed, I thought back on what I'd been told to expect from this build, poured over my experience with previous builds, and came to a simple conclusion. There was no way this build was going to be anything less than excellent. It would kick the pony out of the recently released Mac OS X "Panther" and quiet the doubters. Longhorn build 4051 was The Promised Land (tm) and it would not just meet, but exceed, my expectations.

      Reality sets in

      Of course, we had to get it installed first. Contributing news editor Keith Furman and I eventually headed over to the Los Angeles Convention Center (LACC) for our pre-show press briefings, which mostly consisted of background technical information for the largely uneducated media types who probably had no business being at a developer-oriented show anyway. Bored and not learning anything, Keith worked on figuring out how to get the Longhorn 4051 ISO to install without blank CDs, which we had forgotten to bring. It didn't take long, and Keith was soon installing the build on his Compaq Presario X1010, a widescreen notebook with sufficient muscle to handle the build. By mid-afternoon, I had also installed the build on an IBM ThinkPad R50 and a Dell Latitude D800, and was starting my first install to a Virtual PC-based virtual machine.

      And it was horrible. Longhorn build 4051 features a new Luna-like visual style called Slate, which basically takes the Aero user interface (revealed first on the SuperSite) and back-ports it to Windows XP, and it's decent looking, if only half-realized. In other words, it looks like XP. Worse, it performs horribly. Most damning, build 4051 doesn't appear to offer any dramatic changes over previous alpha builds, the most recent of which came out way back in June, and the much-vaunted WinFS (Windows Future Storage) stuff is broken. Hardware detection lasts an eternity, especially on the notebooks we had at the show. A memory leak in explorer.exe quickly killed whatever performance the systems had left. It was almost heartbreaking.

      At 1:45 pm, Keith and I finally provided an update about the new build to our daily live posts to WinInfo Daily UPDATE. "At the risk of sounding a bit negative, Longhorn build 4051 is, sorry, boring," we wrote. "Once you get over the mildly amusing Slate theme, and the slow and painful hardware detection, it's basically the same as previous alpha builds, albeit in more usable form. Explorer windows feature the Aero-like look that I first revealed on the SuperSite for Windows and ... well, that's about it. There really isn't that much more to say, at least not yet. We've installed 4051 on three machines so far and we're not that impressed." Later that night, after spending a few hours playing with the build, we updated the posting with some more thoughts. "While we're still not overly impressed--tomorrow's Gates keynote better kill or these guys have some explaining to do--we have at least gotten the gist of what's going on in this build. First, it's a dog on any system with less than 512 MB of RAM, so consider that a base amount (up from 256 in Windows XP). The new content aggregator Libraries are more usable in this build than in previous alphas, and it's clear that a lot of the graphical elemen

    7. Re:I'll believe it when I see it by Malfourmed · · Score: 1
      This is childish and stupid, and worst of all, flamebait.

      Kind of an ironic statement from a poster with the following in his sig:
      The only good Microsoft is a dead Microsoft.
      ;-)
    8. Re:I'll believe it when I see it by Skasta · · Score: 1

      hen there's eye candy that doesn't increase productivity, like the rotating cube animation for switching users. I consider this animation quite useful for the mom and pops of the computing world. It gives them a visual cue that the other user's desktop is still around, much easier to understand than just changing the screen. But that is just my opinion

    9. Re:I'll believe it when I see it by diverman · · Score: 1

      I was going to post pretty much the same. Although, I would have more specifically pointed out that by time Longhorn actually DOES release, Apple will have likely released at least 3-4 minor revisions to Panther, and quite possibly be on the NEXT major release of OSX.

      As far as I can tell Longhorn is still mostly a bunch of broken ideas. So its IDEAS might be more impressive technically. But apparently there are problems with making those ideas a reality, as is often the case when some marketing shmoe oversells the abilities of a product, both before consulting with the engineers to see what is even possible, and before the product has been researched fully. I expect that many if the marvels of Longhorn will never see the light of day, and it will be a POS as many of the Windows releases have been.

      And when it comes down to it, technical impressiveness isn't what sells it. Microsoft knows that. It's what it can do for people who don't give a rats ass about how impressive it is technically. And that's where MacOS X does things well. Hell, I actually have a Windows Systems Engineer (15-20 years of experience) wanting a Mac because of a small handful of VERY useful features and abilities I showed him.

      -Alex

    10. Re:I'll believe it when I see it by diverman · · Score: 1

      What annoys me is that this stupid TROLL of a post made it to the front Apple page. I knew slashdot was going down a bit in quality, but this is just freakin' rediculous.

      -Alex

    11. Re:I'll believe it when I see it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, the Register claims Microsoft bigwigs have been saying it's 3 years away. Given the Register's track record this means Microsoft bigwigs haven't been saying it's 3 years away.

    12. Re:I'll believe it when I see it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll take thereister's reporting to MS's
      lies anyday.

  5. ROFL by fulldecent · · Score: 0

    ROFL

    --

    -- I was raised on the command line, bitch

    1. Re:ROFL by SpaceLifeForm · · Score: 1

      They are truly smoking some bad-ass shit.

      --
      You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
    2. Re:ROFL by saden1 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Q: What's with this Palladium stuff I keep hearing about?

      A: One of the most exciting aspects of Longhorn is its optional integration with Palladium


      Ok, this guy must either work for Microsoft or is getting some serious kick-back. I wonder what he's getting because no sane person would use exciting and Palladium in the same sentence.

      --

      -----
      One is born into aristocracy, but mediocrity can only be achieved through hard work.
    3. Re:ROFL by Bishop923 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I wonder what he's getting because no sane person would use exciting and Palladium in the same sentence.

      I can come up with one:

      "The RIAA, MPAA, and Proprietary software vendors, are all excited about the amount of choice taken away from users with Palladium"

    4. Re:ROFL by SharpFang · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes, I've seen one of Microsoft's slogans in one of their flyers:

      Our software makes your daily work more interesting

      Yes, that's exactly it. Not "easier". Not "more effective". Not "fun". Not "better quality". Exactly, "more interesting". When opening your email is connected with all the thrills "Does it contain a virus or not?", when setting up some network is a challenge, when finding TCP/IP networking in the bunch of "non-technical-sounding" wizards in XP takes half a hour, it certainly makes your work more interesting... to anyone who happens to watch you fuming over that stuff.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    5. Re:ROFL by Drakon · · Score: 2, Funny

      excite
      tr.v. excited, exciting, excites

      1. To stir to activity.
      2. To call forth (a reaction or emotion, for example); elicit: odd noises that excited our curiosity.
      3. To arouse strong feeling in: speakers who know how to excite a crowd. See Synonyms at provoke.

      It sure as hell is stirring activity and it's DEFINITLY arousing strong feelings in me

      I find palladium very exciting. Exciting me to acquire plastic explosives, but exciting none the less...

    6. Re:ROFL by rspress · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I have talked to a lot of MS junkies and most really don't know what they are talking about. Stuff they rave over we have been doing for years on the Mac. Since I have used PC since day one and Macs as well. I can usually tell when someone is clueless about the other platform. I use both Panther and XP Pro on my Mac and PC and there is no contest as to which one is better or more stable. MacOS X wins that hands down. Those that do know both and work with them in their jobs like MS for one reason and one reason only. Without MS they would not have a job....Macs network too easily and don't need to be maintain as a much as a network of PC's. It makes them kings in their own little world and thus indispensable to a company or institution. We call it Microsoft, they call it job security.

    7. Re:ROFL by FattMattP · · Score: 2, Funny
      Ok, this guy must either work for Microsoft or is getting some serious kick-back. I wonder what he's getting because no sane person would use exciting and Palladium in the same sentence.
      "As we removed the Palladium code from the revision control system and erased all the backups, I couldn't help but think how exciting it was to do this."

      I know what you meant, but my sentence gives me the warm fuzzies whereas his sentence just made my skin crawl.

      --
      Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
    8. Re:ROFL by sameerd · · Score: 1

      Are you saying that you are not sane? LOL. Because you just did.

    9. Re:ROFL by saden1 · · Score: 1

      My sanity is not in question but since you brought up the subject I'll tell you. I am sane...just ask Santa Claus.

      --

      -----
      One is born into aristocracy, but mediocrity can only be achieved through hard work.
    10. Re:ROFL by qengho · · Score: 3, Funny


      Our software makes your daily work more interesting

      In the sense of the old Chinese curse: "May you live in interesting times."

    11. Re:ROFL by tuxedobob · · Score: 1

      How to tell when you're talking to a Windows user that doesn't know jack about Mac:

      You: "Do you use a Mac?"
      Him: "No."
      You: "Why not?"
      Him: "I just don't."

      More often than not, people don't like the Mac because they just don't like the Mac. (or as they say, the MAC). See how far circular logic will get you around here.

    12. Re:ROFL by tuxedobob · · Score: 1

      Um, oops. Change that first line to, "Do you like Macs?"

    13. Re:ROFL by otterpop378 · · Score: 1

      In much the same way, I'm sure it would be "exciting" to watch the guy sitting next to you get mauled by a lion. Draw your own parallels.

      On an unrelated note, I once had a co-worker tell me how much my mac sucked, WHILE he was reformatting his hard drive after windows started inexplicably crashing. hmm.

    14. Re:ROFL by rspress · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Any PC user that I know that has spent any amount of time on the Mac (more than just moving the mouse around at the local best buy) really has nothing bad to say about it and usually likes it.
      A lot of them switch over to the Mac after a while or use both. Some do not switch but still don't rag on it and are honest about the flaws of both platforms.
      I remember going into a computer store in the 80's and someone was showing me Windows 1.0. She was telling how bad the Mac was and how powerful Windows 1.0 was. I said show me something this can do the Mac cannot. She said, "Well you can use a mouse and it has this neat little calculator". I said "And?" She said "Well you can run programs". I said "And?", She said "Well that is more than the Mac can do" and she cheerfully went about playing with the Calculator.
      I wonder if she ever went on to work in Redmond.

    15. Re:ROFL by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1

      No, he's just a little confused in the vocabulary/spelling department.

      Obviously, he meant inciting.

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    16. Re:ROFL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'cause I can't afford it.

      PC is junk, but many people just don't have enough money to afford something better.

    17. Re:ROFL by aonaran · · Score: 1

      Palladium is exciting like a horror movie is exciting.

    18. Re:ROFL by Golias · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Okay, I use both and prefer the Mac, but I gotta call BS when I see it, and you just repeated a very common myth.

      Any PC user that I know that has spent any amount of time on the Mac (more than just moving the mouse around at the local best buy) really has nothing bad to say about it and usually likes it.

      The details of Mac OS's has always been part of the required training for Microsoft certifications, because an NT admin in a mega-corp frequently needs to support the small network of Macs that the advertising department or some such area. While most of them just learn barely enough to get their precious MCSE pieces of paper, many others delve into the Mac OS a lot further than the typical "I only use Macs" school teacher ever will.

      Not every Windows user who disses Macs does so out of complete ignorance. More often than not, they dislike Macs for one of two reasons:

      1. They are more comfortable with the familiarity of Windows, having spent months learning the finer details of COM libraries, the system registry, and .NET
      2. They play computer games, and will always choose the platform that has more state-of-the-art games available

      That said, I have an X-Box for games, and a UNIX background that's at least as strong as my Windows knowledge. OS X 10.3 rocks my world.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    19. Re:ROFL by meme_police · · Score: 1
      I didn't buy a Mac until 10.1 came out because:

      1. I couldn't stand the Classic GUI. 2. Classic's horrible multi-tasking.

      I love my dual 800Mhz now (expect for some current hardware problems).

      --

      The meme police, They live inside of my head

    20. Re:ROFL by ferret70 · · Score: 1

      How about:

      Myself and the rest of the Ashcroft family are excited about the new features that will be spooged into Palladium!

    21. Re:ROFL by rspress · · Score: 1

      Maybe I did not get my point across but that is pretty much what I meant in as many words.
      I know PC users who will not touch Windows because they prefer DOS. They hate Windows for the same reason they hate the Mac. I have also seen many PC users dissing the Mac for no reason other than it is not a PC.
      That is not to say that they do have some valid points about the Mac OS. Just as I have valid points about the Windows OS. Since I have used it everyday and have since its inception.
      I have my PC for the few apps that can't be replicated on the Mac....mostly some Audio Apps and of course some games.

  6. Only problems is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    By 2006, we're going to be on 10.5 or 10.6... and 2-3 more times we'll hear Apple is charaging$129 for an upgrade!Now if you want to see advancement in MacOS, just compare 10.0 to 10.3. Huge difference.

    I'm sure Longhorn will be a great upgrade. But until it ships, we should only compare 10.3 vs. XP to be fair.

    MS is just better at showing off vaporware then Apple. Apple has very few official leaks, sure we can predict what 10.4 might include, but so far Apple hasn't said one new feature it WILL include and given the Apple OS shipping schedule its due in Late 2004/Early 2005. A year before Longhorn! And we already know lots of the technology Longhorn WILL include.

    1. Re:Only problems is... by sinistral · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that 10.4 will ship about a year before 10.5. I would even be willing to bet that Apple releases 10.5 before Longhorn is released.

    2. Re:Only problems is... by adamjaskie · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not to mention, where will Linux be by 2006? Kernel 2.6 is nearing completion. KDE is intuitive enough for my forestry major roommate that is not in the least into computers to pick it up with no problem whatsoever. I showed him how to log in, he figgured it out from there in 5 minutes. In 3 more years, 2.6 will be very mature, and 2.7 will be probably well into development. KDE 4 will be out, and Gnome 3. 3 years ago, Linux was beginning to catch up to Windows as far as useability on a workstation. Now, I would say its about equal, definately beyond as far as the power user goes, equal, maybe a little behind to the average user. At this rate, in 3 years, it will surpass Windows.

      Longhorn will have to contend with a very stable and mature Linux 2.6, MacOS 10.6, etc. Don't speculate any more until 2005 at the earliest. Otherwise we will start comparing OS X to Windows ME.

      --
      /usr/games/fortune
    3. Re:Only problems is... by IM6100 · · Score: 0

      Is Apple just going to version everything 10.x from here on out? Everybody keeps talking about 'this big improvement of 10.3 over 10.0' so clearly there's time coming soon for a major version number change.

      Apple, lose the 'X' obsession. Come out with OS XI or whatever you're going to call it. Give 'X' back to the X Window System.

      --
      A Good Intro to NetBS
    4. Re:Only problems is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This isn't Slackware Linux. We don't artificially inflate version numbers for no reason.

    5. Re:Only problems is... by somethinghollow · · Score: 1

      Once they hit 10.9, the naming scheme will be 10.9.x.

      Once they hit 10.9.9, they will move to 10.9.9.x.

      to infinity and beyond.

    6. Re:Only problems is... by Basehart · · Score: 1

      To put an end to rumors, hearsay and bullshit once and for all here's the official OS release schedule (just don't ask how I got a hold of it OK):

      Mac OS X 10.4 - June 2004
      Mac OS X 10.5 - January 2005
      Mac OS X 10.6 - September 2005
      Mac OS X 10.7 - June 2006
      Microsoft OS Z (Longhorn) - September 2006
      Mac OS X 11 - January 2007
      Microsoft OS ZX II - September 2007
      Mac OS LNX - January 2008
      Mac OS LNX II - January 2009
      Microsoft OS ZX II Service Pack 1 - September 2010

    7. Re:Only problems is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is Apple just going to version everything 10.x from here on out?

      Apple has versioned everything 10.x for over two years now. Where you been?

      Everybody keeps talking about 'this big improvement of 10.3 over 10.0' so clearly there's time coming soon for a major version number change.

      Not for about another seven years.

      Come out with OS XI or whatever you're going to call it.

      Yet another moron who can't see the difference between product name and version number.

    8. Re:Only problems is... by Rysc · · Score: 1

      Mac OS X 11

      Oh, like THAT wouldn't be confusing.

      --
      I want my Cowboyneal
    9. Re:Only problems is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The next versions of the Mac OS will be called:

      Mac OS Xi ("Xi," as in the Greek letter, pronounced "key"), or Mac OS San ("San," as in the Chinese word for three--the third major revision of the Mac OS). Oddly enough, the Greek symbol for "Xi" and the Chinese ideogram of "San" look the same.

      Afterwards, comes Mac OS Si ("Si," the Chinese word for four, pronounced "see"). Of course, "Si" is also a Chinese homonym for death. This would of course refer to the effect on Microsoft.

      A very internaional operating system should have a very international naming scheme. This post would have looked a lot cooler if Slashdot had some Unicode compatibility.

    10. Re:Only problems is... by mkldev · · Score: 1
      Needs to be Mac OS L-X 11. This baby will really fly....

      *badabump* Thanks, folks. I'll be here all night.

      --
      120 character sigs suck. Make it 250.
    11. Re:Only problems is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      This would of course refer to the effect on Microsoft.
      AHAHAHAHAHAHAH
    12. Re:Only problems is... by MoneyT · · Score: 1

      I call bullshit. Your numbers are too close together. OS X is on a roughly 13 month upgrade pattern. Therefore, we wont see 10.4 untill late, most likely Nov of 04 (if that soon, as eventualy it will slow down). Which means at best we'll see 10.5 at the end of 2005. You're welcome to prove me wrong, but I call bullshit.

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
  7. Sniff, sniff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ah, yes. "Task-based" user interface. What a brilliant innovation that is. I'll be able to sit down at my desk in the morning, bring up the "Do you want to..." screen, and click "Publish a metropolitan daily newspaper."

    What? What do you mean, that's not in the "tasks" list? That's my task. That's what I do every day. Why isn't it in the list?

    Oh, well, fine. I'll just click "Compose the front page" instead.

    Not there? What the hell?

    "Copyfit an article."

    Not there.

    "Write a headline."

    Strangely absent.

    "Open a new InDesign document."

    Aha. Now we're getting somewhere.

    Wait a minute. Wait just a damn minute. This isn't any different! In fact, it's worse, because I was planning to copy yesterday's front page and replace the content. This just brought up a blank page!

    "Task-based" my ass. If you want the computer to have a "task-based" interface, you'd damn well better make sure the computer has at least some basic knowledge of what my tasks are. If it doesn't, then the "task-based" interface can get the hell out of my way and let me do my job.

    1. Re:Sniff, sniff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just back up a minute. Look at what you're asking...

      How many users do you think "Publish a metropolitan daily newspaper" ?. I'd wager on 0.001% or less. Look at common sense.

    2. Re:Sniff, sniff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many users do you think "Publish a metropolitan daily newspaper" ?. I'd wager on 0.001% or less.

      Before I respond to your point, let's get this out of the way: don't use fucking percentages when you aren't speaking precisely. Makes you look like a twit.

      The point is not that that guy is typical because he works at a newspaper. The point is that everybody does his own thing with his computer, and Windows can't know about that, so the whole task interface thing is just useless overall.

    3. Re:Sniff, sniff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod this guy up.
      Tasks are really composed of a SET of Applications to get the Job Done.

      What will Windows Longhorn do when I want to write a Java Application? Increase Idle Processing time to 99.999% cpu?

    4. Re:Sniff, sniff by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but how many users have at least a few non-mainstream needs? I'd wager on 50.000000% or more. :)

      MS can play to the masses that just want an email/web applicance, but for people who do real work with the computer as a tool (not an applicance), we'll just continue to use non-MS OS's.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    5. Re:Sniff, sniff by Brandybuck · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Task-based" user interface. What a brilliant innovation that is

      I absolutely agree. The task based interface of WinXP sucks. It's almost like Microsoft changed its motto from "where do you want to go today", to "what do we want you to do today." If you're the average Windows user (with 2.4 children and 1.3 cars) then it may work for you. Otherwise it just gets in the way.

      In the meantime, decades old usability problems in Windows remain unaddressed. Many of these descend from the days when Windows was a single-tasking single-user system. When will we get a UI that does not assume I'm going to be running one single program at a time? When will I get a file manager that allows me to manipulate multiple files simultaneously? When will I get a MS window manager with more functionality than twm?

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    6. Re:Sniff, sniff by Zork+the+Almighty · · Score: 1

      I agree, task based interfaces are the biggest dead end for general computing. If you're running a specialized program that only does three or four things, it makes sense. Select a task, and the program is tailored around your work. But for an operating system ?! Someone at Microsoft is smoking crack. I predict that the only thing this will be good for is getting in the way. Maybe it will even innundate you with idiotic, irrelevant "suggestions" for what to do while you're trying to do work.

      And on another note : "Palladium will stop spam" ? Please, tell me how that will work ? Will you recieve email only from Windows users ? Or only from Exchange servers ? I'd like to know. The stop viruses idea is equally suspect, since most "viruses" these days seem to spread because of bugs or stupid features in Microsoft's programs. I haven't even seen a "real" virus in years.

      --

      In Soviet America the banks rob you!
    7. Re:Sniff, sniff by darkpurpleblob · · Score: 1
      The task based interface of WinXP sucks. It's almost like Microsoft changed its motto from "where do you want to go today", to "what do we want you to do today." If you're the average Windows user (with 2.4 children and 1.3 cars) then it may work for you. Otherwise it just gets in the way.

      Well if the task based interface gets in the way, just turn it off! You can get rid of most of the task based interface by changing a few Folder Options in Explorer. Surely it makes sense to default customize the default configuration of Windows towards your average users rather than a smaller group of more technical users?

      In the meantime, decades old usability problems in Windows remain unaddressed. Many of these descend from the days when Windows was a single-tasking single-user system. When will we get a UI that does not assume I'm going to be running one single program at a time?

      Huh? What makes you think Windows assumes you are running a single program at a time? I can (and do) run many programs simulataneously on Windows.

      When will I get a file manager that allows me to manipulate multiple files simultaneously?

      You can move/copy/delete multiple files simultaneously with Explorer. I find that more than adequate. I guess you may be thinking about renaming multiple files at once? I rarely need to do that myself, and I suspect average users rarely would need to as well. If find you need to rename files in bulk, get a third party utility.

      When will I get a MS window manager with more functionality than twm?

      I know nothing about twm, and quite honestly I don't really want to. However, what functionality do you believe is lacking with the MS window manager? I use it every day and have no issues with it.

    8. Re:Sniff, sniff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Before I respond to your point, let's get this out of the
      >way: don't use fucking percentages when you aren't
      >speaking precisely. Makes you look like a twit.

      He could have treated it like a fermi question.

    9. Re:Sniff, sniff by drsmithy · · Score: 1
      When will we get a UI that does not assume I'm going to be running one single program at a time?

      Windows 2.0. (Or Windows 95, depending on your perspective).

      When will I get a file manager that allows me to manipulate multiple files simultaneously?

      Which version of Windows *doesn't* ?

      When will I get a MS window manager with more functionality than twm?

      Probably when the functionality in twm that isn't in Windows (whatever it might be) is of interest to a significant number of people.

    10. Re:Sniff, sniff by jtev · · Score: 1

      Difference, he had one sig fig, a fairly low degree of confidence in his measurement, you claim to have a high degree of confidence in yours.

      --
      That which is done from love exists beyond good and evil
    11. Re:Sniff, sniff by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      Huh? What makes you think Windows assumes you are running a single program at a time? I can (and do) run many programs simulataneously on Windows.

      Although you can certainly run multiple programs at the same time, there are numerous "quirks" in the UI that constantly intrude to remind you that Windows was once a single-tasking system. These things are generally all trivial, but added together, they suggest that deep inside the bowels of WinXP, program.exe still exists.

      I'll give just one example. Remember, this is trivial, so you'll need to add it to all the other trivial examples to get at my true annoyance. The example is "snap-to". Under most X11 window managers, I can easily snap windows to the edge of the screen or other windows. When you use multiple programs at the same time, this is very useful. It's a pain having to slightly nudge windows into place next to each other so they don't overlap and you can easily copy from one to the other. Tiling solves this issue, of course, but tiling takes the control of the window size out of the hands of the user. It's a minor issue, to be sure, and mostly aesthetic in nature. But it's still an annoyance. It makes me think that Windows was not designed to have two or more application windows up on the screen at the same time.

      You can move/copy/delete multiple files simultaneously with Explorer.

      Well, of course you can. If you couldn't, Windows would be in the dust heap of history. I will admit that I was not clear on my assertion about the Windows file manager. Sometimes it's hard being precise when you're talking about the GUI. And I will admit that my experience with the Windows file manager is lacking, so it may be able to do stuff I don't think it can. Here's one example out of many that I don't think it can do (though it might): with one mouse click, sort the files in a directory by last modification date, then with another sweep of the mouse, select all files modified in the last week. I do actions like this all the time at work when writing my weekly status reports. I have no idea how to do in Windows, but several X11 file managers can handle it easily.

      I know nothing about twm, and quite honestly I don't really want to. However, what functionality do you believe is lacking with the MS window manager?

      First, I'm talking about the window manager, not the desktop. The window manager is what actually displays windows on the screen. Here's what I can do in most modern X11 window managers: shade windows; maximize horizontally or vertically; send a window to the back with a mouse click (or otherwise control the z-order); snap-to; separate virtual desktops; window groups; and change the focus model. All of these things facilitate using multiple GUI applications at the same time. And they're all lacking in Windows.

      But I wasn't fair. twm can't do everything in my list above. I only used it as a absurd example, since it's so ancient and crusty. A better example would have been Blackbox, which is about as bare-bones as you can get a modern window manager. It's not large. The source code is readable and straight forward. That fact that the Windows "window manager" doesn't have some basic things in it that Blackbox does simply boggles my mind. It also frustrates me to no end when I have to use it. Even the simple addition of "snap-to" would make a huge difference in usability.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    12. Re:Sniff, sniff by darkpurpleblob · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Thanks for the detailed response.

      I can understand what you are getting at with your snap-to point. Typically in Windows I always have one app full-screened, so I haven't really experienced the problem you have described. I have indeed found tiling rather awkward on the rare occasion I have attempted to use it. Snap-to indeed would be a nice feature in Windows.

      It is indeed possible to select files modified in the last week as you descibed just as easily with Explorer. (Click on Date Modified column heading, and select the last week of files. Windows XP allows supports grouping of files in folders.)

      Back to your original comment:

      In the meantime, decades old usability problems in Windows remain unaddressed. Many of these descend from the days when Windows was a single-tasking single-user system. When will we get a UI that does not assume I'm going to be running one single program at a time?
      I doubt Microsoft will ever address the problems you have outlined (I'm somewhat disappointed myself, as I can see how some of that stuff would be useful). Adding more window management features comes with the expense of more complexity in the interface. And if you hide this functionality deep in interface, it's as good as it not being there for the majority of users.
    13. Re:Sniff, sniff by rixstep · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Yeah, sniff, sniff... It sounds like you're running Windows...

      Why? Have you spoken to your doctor about this?

    14. Re:Sniff, sniff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Surely it makes sense to default customize the default configuration of Windows towards your average users rather than a smaller group of more technical users?

      Look at the numbers. There are far, far, far more business users of Windows than home users.

      And don't call me Shirley.

      What makes you think Windows assumes you are running a single program at a time?

      A little abomination called MDI.

  8. Task/Desktop interface? by adamjaskie · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Longhorn will feature a task-based (or "iterative") interface that goes far beyond the task-based interface found today in Windows XP. Microsoft has been working to move beyond the dated desktop metaphor still used by Mac OS X and Linux;

    I assume this means an interface that can be set up for different tasks, such as programming, gaming, communication and web surfing. Doesnt the multiple desktop feature of MOST linux window managers/desktop environments do this already? Its hard to say "Linux has ... interface" because there are so many DIFFERENT interfaces. Sure, you could say "KDE has a ... interface" but not Linux. With FVWM2, I can set up groups of windows that open when I startx and have a desktop for programming (a couple of xterms and an editor, perhaps) communitaction (xchat and gaim) etc. How is this a "dated desktop metaphor?"

    Desktop interface I assume means an interface like in earlier windows versions (or XP with certain non-default setups), OS X, and SOME interfaces for Linux, where you have a "My Computer" like icon on the desktop, and can browse through your files. While some may call this "dated," people seem to LIKE to work this way, so why change it for them? Give the user OPTIONS. Don't just go with whatever is the style now. On first boot: "Do you want a task based (defn.) or Desktop based (defn.) interface? This selection may be changed later at Start>Settings>Interfce>Whatever."

    --
    /usr/games/fortune
    1. Re:Task/Desktop interface? by sinistral · · Score: 1

      You should try out Expose (Panther's most-likely-to-be-ripped-off-by-Microsoft feature) and see how much it improves productivity. I'd estimate that when I'm heavily multitasking, it makes me at least 10-20% more efficient.

      "Desktop interface"? Perhaps.

    2. Re:Task/Desktop interface? by adamjaskie · · Score: 1

      Well, I can't try it out extensively, I run only Linux. But I could try it out on one of my friend's laptops or one of the display computers at the computer closet. (campus run place in the first floor of our dorm, sells mac and pc parts. They have a couple display systems.) What does it do?

      --
      /usr/games/fortune
    3. Re:Task/Desktop interface? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
    4. Re:Task/Desktop interface? by scrytch · · Score: 1

      Longhorn will feature a task-based (or "iterative") interface that goes far beyond the task-based interface found today in Windows XP

      Gee I should freakin HOPE it's better than the so-called "task based" interface in XP. Putting the right-click actions into a sidebar does not a new workflow make. Where are the "add new task" buttons? Where's the systemwide macro editor that can record actions into VB code? Hey, it was good enough for Office (oh wait, it can't produce VB code either).

      Longhorn will of course promise nothing at all specific, just a "richer user experience". Ballocks I say. Not that I expect to see anything like this in any *nix gui either...

      --
      I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
    5. Re:Task/Desktop interface? by adamjaskie · · Score: 1
      Apple's explination
      A good description from Ars Technica

      Thanks! That looks awesome. The only thing I think would still be nice in OSX is multiple desktops, like most Linux wms have. It might be confusing to new users, though, so it would be something you have to enable manually, rather than a default-on setting. Multiple desktops is a really useful feature.

      --
      /usr/games/fortune
    6. Re:Task/Desktop interface? by Pfhor · · Score: 1

      Actually there is shareware that will provide multiple desktops for you. I don't know how well it works with expose, since I have found expose to be just what I need (and I still need to retrain myself to start using that).

    7. Re:Task/Desktop interface? by squiggleslash · · Score: 1
      The only thing I think would still be nice in OSX is multiple desktops, like most Linux wms have.
      I've been using Desktop Manager over the last few weeks and despite being at a beta stage it seems rock solid and it has the raw functionality needed. The switcher is very nicely located on the menu bar rather than in the dock.

      One other thing to bear in mind is that OS X's window management is application driven, not window driven. Bringing all windows belonging to an app to the surface is just a matter of clicking on the app's dock icon. Hold down Option and Command and click on the dock icon and all the other windows disappear leaving you with just that app. (This is in addition to more usual stuff - you can still bring an individual window to the fore by clicking on it for instance.)

      Ultimately the enhanced management means multiple desktops isn't as important, but it's still there as an option. Ironically, I think multiple desktops fits in with the original Mac's "spacial" metafore much better than application-centric management, but I guess it's a matter of what's simpler for the LCD user.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    8. Re:Task/Desktop interface? by squiggleslash · · Score: 1
      metafore
      Wirst. Splling. Ivrr.

      I apologize to Slashdot. That's embarassing...

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    9. Re:Task/Desktop interface? by Froomb · · Score: 1

      Check out CodeTek Virtual Desktop. I find it very useful, and usually run 12 desktops (each with separate wallpaper) for separating my different applications. Works well with expose, although I hope it the future there will be an option to combine the two, so that mini-views of all desktops can be displayed.

    10. Re:Task/Desktop interface? by caleugene · · Score: 1

      I assume it means the death of the spatial GUI. Instead of visual means of organization, you are instead forced by Microsoft to use their own notion of task management. The Microsoft user experience has become increasingly drab to me as their apps all start resembling web-pages. When I use Movie Maker 2 it feels like I'm editing video in a web-based application. Everything feels flatter in Windows...

    11. Re:Task/Desktop interface? by tuxedobob · · Score: 1

      It's an excellent time waster. Rather than being productive, I find myself opening a QuickTime movie and compiling PHP over and over and auto-reloading web pages while hitting F9 over and over because it's just so freaking cool! :-)

    12. Re:Task/Desktop interface? by zhenlin · · Score: 0
      "KDE has a ... interface" but not Linux.

      That's not true! It has an "Application Programming" Interface, or API for short! It allows users like me to write little programs to simplify chores, like putting pretty pictures onto the screen!

      ---END IDIOT ZEALOT MODE---
    13. Re:Task/Desktop interface? by drsmithy · · Score: 1
      You should try out Expose (Panther's most-likely-to-be-ripped-off-by-Microsoft feature) and see how much it improves productivity.

      Expose is going to be "ripped off" by everyone - it's such a good idea that they'd be stupid not too.

    14. Re:Task/Desktop interface? by Demolition · · Score: 1

      There are rumours that a future version of Mac OS X will have virtual desktops. For example, see this AppleInsider article.

      As mentioned in the article, Panther already has an early iteration of this functionality, but it's currently very buggy and only spawns one extra desktop. The article describes how to activate this feature, right now, for those that can't wait for Apple to officially implement it in a future OS revision. We probably won't have to wait very long for that, though, because Apple is probably aware of the popularity of CodeTek's VirtualDesktop and they'll want to jump on that bandwagon as soon as possible.

      D.

    15. Re:Task/Desktop interface? by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      You got 'spatial' wrong, too!

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    16. Re:Task/Desktop interface? by kommakazi · · Score: 1

      "Longhorn will feature a task-based (or "iterative") interface that goes far beyond the task-based interface found today in Windows XP. Microsoft has been working to move beyond the dated desktop metaphor still used by Mac OS X and Linux;" Translation: multiple desktops/workspaces/whatever the fuck you call it, implemented in the most annoying way possibly, all curtesy of your 'friends' at MS. In other words: something that's been around 'forever' (approximately) at least in X windows that MS is finally getting around to ripping off and mutating into something that's not half as useful as the original. Somthing they're very good at (just look at Windows as a whole)

    17. Re:Task/Desktop interface? by Gorbag · · Score: 1

      Actually, I suspect the M$ innovation in task based interface will be very similar to something I used to see a lot of. But we called it "batch processing." No wonder M$ promises that DOS will still work. And after Longhorn? Why TimeSharing (TM) of course ;-)

      --
      -- I speak only for myself
  9. But will Longhorn solve... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    this beeping problem I have. When ever I'm writing a paper on my PC, all of a sudden it goes BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP, and like half of my paper is GONE!! So I have to write it again, and I have to do it fast, so it's not as good.

    E.F.

    1. Re:But will Longhorn solve... by quantaman · · Score: 1

      I just was to iterate that I love Macs, expecially OS X, and to restrain your disbelief in that the events I'm about to relate are entirely factual! Just yestday day I was sitting around with a bunch of fellow compsci geeks in our undergrad lounge. Three of them were sitting in a row with their powerbooks and iBooks open and going away. Either way one of the guys isn't doing anything too intensive, just apparently writing a paper and playing some MP3s when suddenly his computer freezes and the speakers keep on playing about a half second snippet of the song so it was seriously going (don't know how else to write the sound) TCH TCH TCH TCH for about a minute until we finally recovered from our shock and realized that the mac had crashed(and this was OS X)! Now I can see your disbelief but this is a true story! Well either way having never encountered this scenerio before we finally decided to do a hard reboot but when it tried to start up it just beeped 3 times and the LED flashed four times, turns out this is a code for bad RAM (OS X is forgiven!) lukily the powerbook is still on warrenty but apparently he figgured he lost a good chunk of the paper he was writing!

      --
      I stole this Sig
    2. Re:But will Longhorn solve... by sinistral · · Score: 1

      Save early, save often. Journaled HFS will save your ass if you do.

    3. Re:But will Longhorn solve... by quantaman · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, we blamed OS X for the loss of the "save every 5 words" reflex!

      --
      I stole this Sig
    4. Re:But will Longhorn solve... by rixstep · · Score: 1

      Ellen, you should register here at Slash Dot instead of posting as AC.

      We've missed you.

    5. Re:But will Longhorn solve... by Jon+Abbott · · Score: 1
      this beeping problem I have. When ever I'm writing a paper on my PC, all of a sudden it goes BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP, and like half of my paper is GONE!! So I have to write it again, and I have to do it fast, so it's not as good.
      I'm sure that tens of thousands of Slashdot readers would be happy to disconnect your PC speaker for you...
  10. Why post a troll? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It looks like this 'story' is just a troll. Aren't we supposed to wait till after the story is posted for the trolls?

    1. Re:Why post a troll? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was a posting on macslash.org mentioning how much higher quality the postings were over here.
      They shouldn'ta told the kiddie trolls about the real /

    2. Re:Why post a troll? by henryhbk · · Score: 1

      The advantage of a task based interface, is you can generate trolls directly from the interface... "Copy This file... Generate a Troll to Slashdot... Open the Troll Wizard..."

    3. Re:Why post a troll? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must be new here. (TM)

      (Hint: for the ad views.)

  11. Why Are We All Preaching To The Choir? by TheWanderingHermit · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It seems to me that all the comments here are generally the same -- you can't compare something that isn't out yet (and not due for 3 years) with something that is. There's also the fact that M$ is very good at promising the world and delivering Outer Mongolia. And, as we've seen, frequently when M$ adds something new or does a drastic redesign, it takes years (1995 for Win95 to 2002 for WinXP) to get most of the bugs out and make it stable.

    So this guy thinks Longhorn and XP are fantastic and Linux and OSX are crap...

    Why is everyone here preaching to the choir and patting each other on the back for OSes that many of us use regularly instead of educating the person who runs the "Win Super Site" on what is going on?

    Perhaps if he gets a few e-mails from /.'ers calmly explaining the fallacy of his arguments and why his technical arguments are weak, he may not be as likely to spread such FUD in the future.

    1. Re:Why Are We All Preaching To The Choir? by Phleg · · Score: 4, Funny

      Asking Slashdotters to calmly explain the fallacy of a Windows zealot's argument is like asking Steve Ballmer to shut up and just breathe for a second.

      --
      No comment.
    2. Re:Why Are We All Preaching To The Choir? by fname · · Score: 1

      Y'know, the guy is obviously enthused about MS products, and likes spreading the word. He has 1 paragraph in a long article discussing OS X, and people jump down his throat. Here's an idea: let it go! Some people really do like Windows. Big deal. Neither Linux or Mac OS X is inherently superior than Windows-- they're different tools designed for many of the same project.

      Why Slashdot chose to publish this troll of an article is beyond me. How so many Slashdot users are convinced that he's "wrong" and just needs to be "educated" is depressing. It's no wonder that people refer to Mac users as zealots and Linux as a religion. They're both unfair charges, but it's easy to see where people get the idea from.

      Mod me down if you must, -1, He Hurt my Feelings.

    3. Re:Why Are We All Preaching To The Choir? by rixstep · · Score: 1

      Why is everyone here preaching to the choir [...] instead of educating the person who runs the "Win Super Site" on what is going on?

      Thurrott is not some poor deluded individual. He's in a lucrative symbiotic relationship with Microsoft. Thousands of screen dumps are his message: he fires up the masses, Microsoft make more money, and so does he.

      The guy was probably not even honest when he got married.

    4. Re:Why Are We All Preaching To The Choir? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize the hypocrisy here?
      Some people really do like Windows. But are not called zealots, even though they clearly act as such?
      I couldn't care less what this guy thinks, but I would like for there to be a proper naming of his role. This misconception of non-Windows users and being fanatics is ridiculous and stereotyped.
      Clearly, we're seeing this mindset in Windows camps.

    5. Re:Why Are We All Preaching To The Choir? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey! Don't insult Outer Mongolia!

  12. Unfortunately... by th77 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Unfortunately there's some definite potential in some of the technical underpinnings of Longhorn...

    First off I'd better be sure to say that I'm a longtime fairly ardent Mac user, and while I'm quite familiar with Windows (perhaps and intermediate-level user with bits of poweruser knowledge) I'll never spend my own money on Windows again (hopefully). And I'm running Panther and enjoying the smooth interface, the usability improvements, etc.

    However, it seems like one of the big things in Longhorn will be the WinFS--which I understand to the the database-as-a-filesystem. Yes, I think I've read that Be did something like this, but I'm betting M$ will take it further. The propoganda/article by Thurrott indicates that:
    ""I should not care about location when I save," says Microsoft VP Chris Jones. "Why can't I just click on my computer and it shows me my documents? It is a computer. It should know what a document is, what I have edited and annotated, what I have searched for before, and what other places I have looked for documents. It is not just documents on my computer I am looking for. It is documents I care about."

    That's a great idea: why should I care where I save things? Why can't I have a NASA movie clip from the Galileo mission appear when I'm looking thru my movies (next to whatever Simpsons clips or whatever else) and when I'm looking thru my space files (next to images or articles)? Currently, the only way I can do this is by making aliases and making sure everything is in discrete folders (e.g. movies/space/galileo vs. movies/space/cassini, each of which can be aliased into their corresponding pictures/space/ folders).

    I truly hope that Apple is looking into developing a database-like-extension to their HFS (hierarchal file system). I want to keep using my Mac for years and years to come, and very likely will, but I think a database-filesystem is essential to the platform.

    Of course, if Longhorn just confuses users too much and M$ has to remove the functionality, or provide a layer over it to simulate hierarchal folders all over again, then... maybe a database-filesystem is not something users will crave. But I think there's a place for it...

    --
    Your favorite sig sucks
    1. Re:Unfortunately... by 0x0d0a · · Score: 4, Insightful

      However, it seems like one of the big things in Longhorn will be the WinFS--which I understand to the the database-as-a-filesystem.

      (a) Not a new idea. MS will be the first to try to put it into a popular OS, though.

      (b) Apple has done similar before, though you'd be unlikely to guess it from the interface -- they had the desktop file, a constantly OS-maintained index of the filesystem.

      (c) There are a number of technical and user interface issues with this approach -- there's a reason folks standardized on a hierarchical system. We'll see what happens, though.

      Incidently, Windows is the only popular OS that still only supports a tree-style filesystem. Classic Mac OS, modern Mac OS, BSD and Linux all support any fully connected graph you might desire, thanks to symlinks (and on classic Mac OS, aliases).

      d) This isn't actually all that new even from a UI perspective -- think of using Apple's Find File. Perhaps you toss in a few more search parameters to get at more metadata and data. The real difference is that traditionally, you must *also* assign a file a position in a hierarchical filesystem (though your hierarchical filesystem could potentially consist of just a single directory node with lots of files in it, a la the My Documents MS approach).

      e) I'm remembering the last time the database research people at Microsoft convinced everyone that going all database would be a great idea. MS SQL, for a period of time, used tables internally for *everything*. Performance sucked, but they did it anyway. It's sexy from a theory point of view, because it simplifies things. Unfortunately, it throws out a lot of area-specific design knowledge that's been built up over the years. We know a lot about how to do a good filesystem, and there are features that apply nicely to filesystems that are less convenient with a traditional database. It's going to be tough to make a better system by throwing everything out.

      f) I've heard ominous rumblings about WinFS being removed from Longhorn. It may or may not be living up to internal expectations.

      g) Anytime something like this is announced *this* far in advance and isn't getting shown off in final form, it means that the promises frequently come from the research people. Research people have all sorts of rosy views about their own work, plenty of pet ideas, and may not have spent a long time doing usability tests. (This comes from one of those research people.) I wouldn't get excited about this any more than I would the frequent announcements on Slashdot about nonexistent new storage technologies ("in four years, we're all going to be using five terabyte 1 cubic centimeter Jell-O blobs to store our data!"). Yeah...come back when you have something shipping instead of a bunch of theoretical maximum numbers coming from a research team.

    2. Re:Unfortunately... by Steve+Cowan · · Score: 1
      However, it seems like one of the big things in Longhorn will be the WinFS--which I understand to the the database-as-a-filesystem. Yes, I think I've read that Be did something like this, but I'm betting M$ will take it further... That's a great idea: why should I care where I save things? Why can't I have a NASA movie clip from the Galileo mission appear when I'm looking thru my movies (next to whatever Simpsons clips or whatever else) and when I'm looking thru my space files (next to images or articles)?


      For the record: this was Apple's vaporware long before it was Microsoft's vaporware. You see, the successor to classic Mac OS was to be Copland, which (among many other things) promised saved searches.

      Naturally the OS would come bundled with certain saved searches, which would essentially open up from your desktop just like folders.

      One such example might be "open a window with a list of files I can open using QuickTime player which contain video and are greater than 10 megs in size".

      Alas, Copland never came to be, but we still haven't seen Longhorn yet either! Longhorn already borrows from Mac OS X concepts, and we have seen Mac OS X borrow stuff from Windows too. It ain't over, not by a longshot.
    3. Re:Unfortunately... by prockcore · · Score: 1


      (a) Not a new idea. MS will be the first to try to put it into a popular OS, though.


      I'm prettty sure that PalmOS qualifies as a popular OS. It uses a database as a file system, and in my opinion it works amazingly well.

    4. Re:Unfortunately... by CableModemSniper · · Score: 1

      One such example might be "open a window with a list of files I can open using QuickTime player which contain video and are greater than 10 megs in size". So copland was BeOS?

      --
      Why not fork?
    5. Re:Unfortunately... by Trillan · · Score: 1

      ""I should not care about location when I save," says Microsoft VP Chris Jones.

      Didn't we have that once? I'm sure we did. It was called MFS.

    6. Re:Unfortunately... by elakazal · · Score: 1

      I guess I don't see why people get so hyped up about the whole database-as-file-system concept. They got excited about it in BeOS, they were excited about it when the word was it was going to be in Copland, they're excited about it in Longhorn. Nobody ever adequately explained to me just why it's so darn exciting. I just don't see what it would get me that a somewhat enhanced search function wouldn't. I even used BeOS, and I didn't see it as particularly exciting, although the OS was decent enough.

      There are a lot of good reasons behind a hierarchical system, too. For one thing, the whole metaphor of the icon-based operating system is objects. Objects have locations. And that effects the way we think about documents on our computer, even if their physical locations all basically boil down to "somewhere on the inner surfaces of a hard drive somewhere inside my computer", we think of them in terms of "where".

      I've never written a file system or anything that much like it before, but a hierarchical system would seem to have certain performance advantages, too.

      Besides, there are so many other things much more wrong with the current selection of operating systems, why bother fixing something that isn't that broken to begin with?

    7. Re:Unfortunately... by MooseGuy529 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      However, it seems like one of the big things in Longhorn will be the WinFS--which I understand to the the database-as-a-filesystem.
      Not a new idea. MS will be the first to try to put it into a popular OS, though.
      I'm prettty sure that PalmOS qualifies as a popular OS. It uses a database as a file system, and in my opinion it works amazingly well.

      Sorta. It keeps a normal file system, but until recently the "files" were databases. Given the power of the original Palms, it was a necessity for applications to be able to efficiently access data, and, given the applications the Palm ran, databases were a good match. (One notable exception is the Memo Pad, which is stuck with a 4K limit due to this format, which can be frustrating [but can be fixed with a Doc editor].) Recently they have introduced a File Stream API, which allows software to create "regular" files.

      Personally, I think the solution to all of this is for someone to write a shell application that doesn't replace the normal OS shell, but just runs as an application. The ability to assign keywords and other metadata to files, or have it detected automatically, would be the main source of data. Customization to allow it to create, open, print, and understand any format of file (by launching the program in some cases) would allow it to at least understand the "tasks" you might want to perform; the way it presents them could be user-customizable. An included set of file type descriptions would allow it to find all your files and allow you to work with them without having to put in the locations of all your programs.

      An application called Chandler implements an organization system similar to Lotus Agenda, which was a free-form database which allowed (among gazillions of other features) the storage of snippets of text in any number of locations on a hierarchical tree. It also allowed you to create categories as if they were fields: in a view of contacts, you could add a column named Company, and when you enter a value, it would create a category for that, which could also be used for other information about the company. It also had a text-matching system that allowed it to pick out keywords in a piece of text and use the context around that word as a category or something else.

      Side note: I actually once wrote a program for my TI-89 that was basically a small memo pad with a list of categories. When a second program was run and the calculator was given a couple minutes, it would update a word frequency list with any newly-categorized memos, and that information would be available to the memo pad. Once enough information had accumulated, it would select a few consistently representative words and put them in a separate list, so the memo pad program itself would categorize a memo when you close it if you hadn't yet.

      I could really use something like this, since making deep directory structures and navigating them like a maze is not my idea of fun.

      --

      Tired of free iPod sigs? Subscribe to my blacklist

    8. Re:Unfortunately... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember kids, your nifty task-based database FS only has to helpfully offer your (frequently/recently used) secret porn stash as an option to your wife before you start regretting how "helpful" your OS is. Assuming you get to keep the computer when they split up the possessions, that is.

    9. Re:Unfortunately... by Steve+Cowan · · Score: 1

      Yep. Forgive me for not hunting for backup documentation, but I'm lazy.

      This stuff was all described as part of the upcoming "Copland" at right around the same time Be came to, uh, be. It's worth noting that Be was the brainchild of a former top-level Apple development guy (Jean-Louis Gasse).

      Personally I've never used BeOS, but also don't forget that it came out first for PowerPC hardware - gee I wonder why.

    10. Re:Unfortunately... by Trillan · · Score: 1

      It's an interesting thought, except that iTunes already does that with music.

      I don't think it's a concept that goes well with other types of documents, unless you're willing to manually enter enough metadata (keywords, etc.) that you'd probably be better off just setting up a decent organization and using aliases.

      I mean, Word already has files of metadata for documents. How many of us do anything with it, other than maybe clearing it out over concern with privacy issues? :)

    11. Re:Unfortunately... by wezelboy · · Score: 1

      Actually, my understanding is the guy who designed the database as a filesystem for Be is working for Apple now. It wouldn't suprise me if Apple had something similar planned for a future release of OS X

    12. Re:Unfortunately... by aftk2 · · Score: 1
      And I imagine this is going to come to the Mac OS (perhaps even sooner than it comes to Longhorn.) For example,
      • iTunes gets "smart playlists" in iTunes 3, allowing live display of mp3s by various criteria
      • Finder gets a brushed metal interface, purportedly because it deals with categories and lists (like iTunes)
      • New brushed metal finder has a special area on the lefthand side where you can drag various folders, and display their items in the righthand side (like bookmarks, basically.)
      It's not too hard to see where this will go. Now granted, there's a long way from this functionality to BeOS style functionality (viewing ID3 tag information and mail headers as sortable items in the Finder, for example), but its coming, hopefully when real metadata comes back to OS X (Although I don't really miss file type and creater codes, I felt it was a step back to go to file extensions.) I mean, the live searching in Panther is supposed to be pretty fast and fairly slick already...it wouldn't be too hard to add some criteria to it.
      --
      concrete5: a cms made for marketing, but strong enough for geeks.
    13. Re:Unfortunately... by micaelus · · Score: 1

      Isn't that the same idea as "piles"? Rumor had it that the piles feature would show up in Panther, so maybe by the time 10.4 rolls around...

    14. Re:Unfortunately... by tuxedobob · · Score: 1

      Macintosh File System? LOL! What was the file limit on that thing, 256 files or something? Some small number like that.

    15. Re:Unfortunately... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> Isn't that the same idea as "piles"? Rumor had it that the piles feature would show up in Panther

      Panther is easier and more pleasant to use, so you'll want to use it more. If you sit at your computer for a long enough period, you will almost certainly get piles. ;)

    16. Re:Unfortunately... by vonFinkelstien · · Score: 1
      I would enter in keywords for all of documents if I had a program like iTunes for Docs that would browse my docs for me.

      Trying to find something that I wrote 4-years ago on another computer (transfered when I changed jobs or new computer was bought, etc.) that would be good for tomorrow's lesson is a pain the in rump.

      Navigating folders is not easy. Navigating iTunes is. Every file (well maybe not system and lib files) should be organized this way.

    17. Re:Unfortunately... by drsmithy · · Score: 1
      Incidently, Windows is the only popular OS that still only supports a tree-style filesystem. Classic Mac OS, modern Mac OS, BSD and Linux all support any fully connected graph you might desire, thanks to symlinks (and on classic Mac OS, aliases)

      If you're going to equate aliases to symlinks, then you have to equate shortcuts to symlinks as well.

      IIRC, NTFS (and by extension, Windows) supports symlinks, it's just there's no tool to create them by default.

      Interestingly, while I use symlinks on unix often, I can't ever recall a time when I've been using Windows and thought "damn, I wish I could make a symlink".

    18. Re:Unfortunately... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it is called itunes smart playlist. hopefully it appears in panther finder version2

    19. Re:Unfortunately... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1
      However, it seems like one of the big things in Longhorn will be the WinFS--which I understand to the the database-as-a-filesystem. Yes, I think I've read that Be did something like this, but I'm betting M$ will take it further.

      In theory, using a DB to store files is great way to overcome the current problems like losing files. In practice, there are some problems. Performance will be one problem. Record locking is another.

      The main problem I would worry about is the method by which MS will employ for WinFS. If they use a lot of encryption or DRM, then it might horribly difficult for a user to access their own files should something go wrong. Occasionally users today lose files due to hardware or software glitches. Putting them in a DB adds another layer of complexity and there may not be a clear way for users to recover.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    20. Re:Unfortunately... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're called hardlinks in NTFS. At an XP cmd prompt, "fsutil hardlink create".

    21. Re:Unfortunately... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, to follow up to myself, NTFS's hardlinks more closely match POSIX hardlinks than symlinks. They also refer only to files, not directories.

      For directories, NTFS supports a generic reparse point mechanism, that allows developers to add this sort of functionality. One out-of-the-box supported reparse point is a Junction. No out-of-the-box tool to create them, unfortunately.

    22. Re:Unfortunately... by rixstep · · Score: 1

      I truly hope that Apple is looking into developing a database-like-extension to their HFS (hierarchal file system).

      I think if it ever goes that far, you'll be in trouble. HFS+ is far too convoluted as is, and the NS forces in Cupertino do not want it to continue.

      And they have my vote on it.

    23. Re:Unfortunately... by rixstep · · Score: 1

      Incidently, Windows is the only popular OS that still only supports a tree-style filesystem. Classic Mac OS, modern Mac OS, BSD and Linux all support any fully connected graph you might desire, thanks to symlinks (and on classic Mac OS, aliases).

      WHAT??!??

      I've never seen so much gobbledegook.

    24. Re:Unfortunately... by danielsfca2 · · Score: 1

      > The ability to assign keywords and other metadata to files, or have it detected automatically, would be the main source of data.

      Maybe this is why Microsoft wants to buy Google. Click "My Documents" and a search field appears on the folder into which you type "Budget spreadsheet June" and three or four candidates pop up. Most likely your doc is there otherwise you could click to display the other, less likely, candidates.

      Sounds like a neat system to me. Although to be fair I'm pretty sure I can do approximately that with the search field in the toolbar of every Finder window (which Windows XP lacks).

    25. Re:Unfortunately... by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      "Click "My Documents" and a search field appears on the folder into which you type "Budget spreadsheet June" and three or four candidates pop up. Most likely your doc is there otherwise you could click to display the other, less likely, candidates."

      I cannot imagine how this would be faster than current methods - in MacOS9 I'd just have pop-up folders for my working documents and Apple menu aliases for my drives and apps. Even MacOSX and Windows let you alias files in several different ways that obviate the need to search for meta data that PROBABLY ISN'T THERE.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    26. Re:Unfortunately... by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      MacOS9's "Find by Content' feature would be right up your street.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    27. Re:Unfortunately... by danielsfca2 · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying I especially want this behavior. I'm just saying (a) sometimes (not always) I find that search field in Finder windows really useful, and (b) Microsoft, in their silliness, might be thinking about something like that as being the "next big thing" and therefore looking for non-sucky search technology with which to make it happen.

    28. Re:Unfortunately... by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      No. NTFS supports hardlinks. I haven't heard of it supporting symlinks.

      Shortcuts are not symlinks. They cannot be used by file-level access calls -- open() cannot contain a shortcut in a path. The only thing in Windows that groks shortcuts is Explorer (and Explorer-provided widgets, like the open and save dialogs). I can't just replace my id1/foobar directory with a symlink.

      If you run around replacing directories with shortcuts, almost all Windows programs will just break. On the other hand, doing so is feasible with both aliases and symlinks on classic Mac OS and UNIX.

      The only time Windows programs can use symlinks that I'm aware of is when they're running in WINE.

      Microsoft is extremely twitchy about touching their kernel. All sorts of functionality that should have been put in the kernel has had halfassed or no equivalents in Explorer. Really awful file locking workarounds and a lack of symlinks are my two should-be-done-properly pet peeves.

    29. Re:Unfortunately... by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      Windows paths must describe a path through a filesystem that is a tree -- i.e. you can reach all points, but only by traveling through a single path.

      On a *IX or Mac OS system, this is not the case.

      I'm using the terms "graph" and "tree" from a CS point of view (though I should have said "connected", not "fully connected". :-) )

    30. Re:Unfortunately... by drsmithy · · Score: 1
      No. NTFS supports hardlinks. I haven't heard of it supporting symlinks.

      Ah, ok, my memory was a bit hazy.

      Shortcuts are not symlinks. They cannot be used by file-level access calls -- open() cannot contain a shortcut in a path. The only thing in Windows that groks shortcuts is Explorer (and Explorer-provided widgets, like the open and save dialogs). I can't just replace my id1/foobar directory with a symlink.

      I never said symlinks and shortcuts were the same. I said MacOS *Aliases* and Shortcuts were equivalent.

      If you run around replacing directories with shortcuts, almost all Windows programs will just break. On the other hand, doing so is feasible with both aliases and symlinks on classic Mac OS and UNIX.

      I'd suggest this is an application issue. I've no doubt applications could be written to follow shortcuts if necessary.

      Microsoft is extremely twitchy about touching their kernel. All sorts of functionality that should have been put in the kernel has had halfassed or no equivalents in Explorer.

      Like what ? Symlinks shouldn't require much (if any) modifications to the kernel - they're a filesystem feature.

      Really awful file locking workarounds and a lack of symlinks are my two should-be-done-properly pet peeves.

      Like I said, I've never found the lack of symlinks in Windows a problem. Probably because I don't try and use it like I do unix :).

    31. Re:Unfortunately... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Really awful file locking workarounds and a lack of symlinks are my two should-be-done-properly pet peeves.

      What kind of file locking workarounds, exactly? I've found Windows' file sharing semantics to be impressive compared to typical unix conventions.

      As far as symlinks go, see my post above regarding NTFS reparse points. This functionality is in the kernel, in the filesystem, and is very easy to extend. Not having user tools available by default is a bit of a downer, though.

    32. Re:Unfortunately... by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      I never said symlinks and shortcuts were the same. I said MacOS *Aliases* and Shortcuts were equivalent.

      Hmm. I think you may have mistyped. Here's your earlier post:

      If you're going to equate aliases to symlinks, then you have to equate shortcuts to symlinks as well.

      In either case, I think you're going to have a tough time arguing the point -- I can open() through a path containing a symlink or alias, but not a shortcut. Shortcuts operate as merely an Explorer convenience.

      I'd suggest this is an application issue. I've no doubt applications could be written to follow shortcuts if necessary.

      Sure, but they aren't and never will be -- *all* the file code would have to be changed in every application. You'd always have code that failed or didn't work properly, even in the unthinkable case of the industry running out and trying to fix this as a whole. The entire point of symlinks and aliases is that they don't have to have application level support.

      Like what ? Symlinks shouldn't require much (if any) modifications to the kernel - they're a filesystem feature.

      Ummm...huh? This doesn't make any sense -- this is like saying "adding UDP support shouldn't require much (if any) modification to the kernel -- they're a network feature".

    33. Re:Unfortunately... by steeviant · · Score: 1

      The "filesystem is a database" concept was actually proposed years ago by Microsoft (I made a stab at finding a link, but couldn't recall enough information to find it), I believe the feature was intended for Windows NT 4. It seems that implementing such a system is far harder than envisioning and marketing it, so I'll take Microsoft's promises about it appearing in 2005 with more than just a grain of salt.

      Apple on the other hand, have one of the few people to have created a successful and proven database-backed filesystem in Dominic Giampolo (the creator of BeFS). His influence at Apple can already be seen in the form of the journaling HFS+ filesystem in Jaguar and Panther. It's unlikely that he's spent all his time making background defragmentation and journaling hacks to the old filesystem, so I think there's reasonable grounds to suspect that by the time [and if] WinFS becomes available to the wider public, Apple will have something to match it, and most likely Linux will too -by the looks of the plugin architecture for ReiserFS.

      Here's hoping that this is the beginning of a long overdue softening of the whole files-and-folders metaphor that likens our harddrives and data to a filing cabinet, and imposes a bunch of real-world limitations on something that's really quite abstract. Go the database-backed filesystem! :)

    34. Re:Unfortunately... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Like what ? Symlinks shouldn't require much (if any) modifications to the kernel - they're a filesystem feature.
      Ummm...huh? This doesn't make any sense -- this is like saying "adding UDP support shouldn't require much (if any) modification to the kernel -- they're a network feature".

      But under Windows, neither require kernel mods. It's pretty obvious you know unix well, but you need to poke around Windows NT more.

      Windows 2000 and XP in particular have a very modular architecture. While both filesystem and network protocol code run in kernel space, they're more like modular drivers (think LKM), not kernel code. The hooks necessary to support them are already there.

  13. "task-based interface" far superior... by dbirchall · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Paul is a big fan of what he calls an "iterative," "task-based" operating system. This sort of an OS has a lot of functionality built into it, rather than in applications. For example, you wouldn't open a discrete app to print a document. You wouldn't open a discrete app to pull images off a digital camera. And so on.

    The "iterative" and "task-based" nature of things gets to be kind of interesting. Rather than opening an app, you might pick (from a "start" menu that takes up a third of the screen), for example, a "photo" section (or "activity center," as Microsoft was calling them back in the late '90s). What's that get you? A UI (quite possibly full-screen) that looks a little like a website, with a list of places you might Want To Go Today[tm]. Maybe you want to import photos, maybe you want to print photos, maybe you want to organize photos, etc. Thus the "task-based" part. You click on what you want, and it gives you step-by-step "iterative" stuff, like a "wizard." Or... well... DOS. :)

    So... basically, Microsoft is working on making the system extremely easy to use for people who have absolutely no clue what they're doing. They're aiming at folks who are going to do one thing at a time, more or less. Perhaps they'll still have a "classic" interface available for people who've actually used a computer for more than a week, since a "task-based" "iterative" interface would be absolutely maddening for many of us. :)

    Historically, there's been this zeitgeist of "Windows is somewhat hard to use, but it's cheap, and you can do so much with it!" First UNIX-like OSes became cheaper than Windows, then Macs became price-competitive, and now Microsoft wants Longhorn to be the OS of choice for clueless newbies. Earth's magnetic poles should be flipping any day now...

    1. Re:"task-based interface" far superior... by adamjaskie · · Score: 1

      Not to mention, what if users today are HAPPY with the way Windows is? What if they don't WANT a new interface, and arent knowledgeable enough to search though 50 different options to put Windows back to what they are used to? Interfaces should be clear and easy to understand for new users, and EXTREMELY customizable for users that know what they want and know how they use a computer. The interface depends on the USER'S PREFRENCES, not on the programmer's "Great New Ideas" of how a user SHOULD use a computer. I for one do not enjoy being forced into using a computer in a certain way. Im sure most of the Mac people LIKE the "Classic Desktop interface" that this guy says OS X has. They have been using Macs for years, and are familiar with the interface. If Apple suddenly up and changed the interface to somehting totally different, the users would riot.

      --
      /usr/games/fortune
    2. Re:"task-based interface" far superior... by 0x0d0a · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The whole task-based business is coming back to life *again*?

      Sigh.

      It was supposed to be big with Apple's OpenDoc. Neat research idea that didn't map very well to the actual metaphors in use in their UI. Microsoft tried doing it with OLE. The idea is that you have one big monolithic application tied into the OS that can do everything you'd possibly want using components.

      And now, some guy is still harping on the "task-based approach". Urgh.

    3. Re:"task-based interface" far superior... by daviddennis · · Score: 1

      Well, I was really curious about what would be so superior to Apple's stuff, so I wandered around his various web sites and found that the "revolutionary" task-based user interface is simply making everything you can do with your computer require a wizard dressed up with HTML.

      Wizards have been around since Windows 95. Making a wizard with a colourful background and a few more options instead of Windows Depresso Gray is hardly a revolution. After all, we have a few of those in Windows XP right now, and I don't see people begging for more. I'm certainly not, and I administrate a mixed network consisting of many Windows systems of various flavours. What's in XP isn't making my job any easier. In fact, I'd say it's a little harder than before.

      But at least they dropped Windows Depresso Gray in XP, so I no longer feel like I'm attending someone's funeral when I check out the interface. (Instead, I feel like I'm attending some kind of obnoxious kids' party, which is an improvement, I guess).

      If the new Longhorn UI is what passes for innovation in Microsoft land, I think Apple will stay on top for a while.

      D

    4. Re:"task-based interface" far superior... by Bazouel · · Score: 1

      I don't think making it an UI easier to use for novice is a bad goal per se. In fact, that's what Mac is advertising for its OS since the beginning.

      The problem is that it's very difficult to design an UI that is both appealing to novice and expert. The compromise so far is that you can disable most of the "helping" stuff. That is true in Windows XP, but last I checked, it's next to impossible to do with OSX.

      --
      Intelligence shared is intelligence squared.
    5. Re:"task-based interface" far superior... by edalytical · · Score: 1
      I wandered around his various web sites and found that the "revolutionary" task-based user interface is simply making everything you can do with your computer require a wizard dressed up with HTML.

      This is exactly what I thought. So Microsoft's big innovation is to make controlling a computer just like surfing the web. Big deal. Instead of options buried in tabs and menus they'll be buried in layers of web page like interfaces navigated by clicking hyper links.

      In a abstract way this reminds me of goto statement in code. Longhorn, I dub the spaghetti OS.

      --
      Win a signed Stephen Carpenter ESP Guitar from the Deftones: http://def-tag.com/?r=0008781
    6. Re:"task-based interface" far superior... by Hackie_Chan · · Score: 1

      If their Task-based Interace resembles anything remotely to their Help agent in Microsoft XP I'll go nuts. I've never found any use for it and it never gives me the right answers and explanations I want (even though I absolutely make sure I've tried every possible combination of answers).

      --

      What's so bad about being lazy? What if there was a war and nobody showed up?
    7. Re:"task-based interface" far superior... by tentoesofterror · · Score: 1

      What "helping stuff" in OS X?

    8. Re:"task-based interface" far superior... by tuxedobob · · Score: 1

      If Apple suddenly up and changed the interface to somehting totally different, the users would riot.

      They did. We did. 10.1 helped. By 10.2, we were over it, because it rocked.

    9. Re:"task-based interface" far superior... by the+argonaut · · Score: 1

      And riot they did, if you recall the backlash to the very early demos of OS X (then Rhapsody). That was where all the NEXT people came in and said "desktops are not for files" (which generally I would agree with, but that's just me) and "column view is the only way to view". It wasn't long before the Finder returned to much of its previous form with a bunch of NEXT features thrown into it. This I think is probably the biggest problem with the Finder as it is now is that it doesn't know what it is anymore - it lacks vision, and it really isn't making anybody happy, at least amongst those who talk about these sorts of things. Very little of Panther's changes are revolutionary and much of it strikes one as "change for the sake of change" (two words - brushed metal). This time next year, "fixing" the Finder should be Apple's priority number 1 for 10.4.

      But that's just my opinion.

      --
      fuck you.
    10. Re:"task-based interface" far superior... by darkpurpleblob · · Score: 1
      Interfaces should be clear and easy to understand for new users, and EXTREMELY customizable for users that know what they want and know how they use a computer.
      Dude. You've hit it bang on. The whole problem with this is finding a balance between making an interface intuitive for new users, yet flexible and customizable for advanced users. This is exactly what Microsoft is attempting to address in Longhorn (IIRC!).
    11. Re:"task-based interface" far superior... by rixstep · · Score: 1

      you wouldn't open a discrete app to print a document. You wouldn't open a discrete app to pull images off a digital camera

      Sounds like poor Paul is a fan of the wrong things. This is exactly what Unix is built on, why it's so stable.

      The kind of 'head up the butt' thinking Thurrott hypes is typical Microsoft - and we all know where that gets them.

      basically, Microsoft is working on making the system extremely easy to use for people who have absolutely no clue what they're doing

      They've always done this. That's their only achievement: dumbing it all down (and increasing their control).

    12. Re:"task-based interface" far superior... by mbourgon · · Score: 1

      Paul is a big fan of what he calls an "iterative," "task-based" operating system.
      Oh. He's an OpenDoc fan, I take it?

      --
      "Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
    13. Re:"task-based interface" far superior... by kommakazi · · Score: 1

      "Mac" isn't advertising anything, "Apple" is. Sorry this may seem picky but it annoys me to no end when people refer to the company Apple as "Mac"

    14. Re:"task-based interface" far superior... by dbirchall · · Score: 1
      basically, Microsoft is working on making the system extremely easy to use for people who have absolutely no clue what they're doing

      They've always done this. That's their only achievement: dumbing it all down (and increasing their control).

      I have just two words for you. Two words that strike fear and confusion into the hearts of people who use Microsoft products every day -- let alone people who have no clue what they're doing.

      Pivot Table.

      I rest my case. (And if you're so fortunate as to not know what Pivot Table is... try to stay that way.)

    15. Re:"task-based interface" far superior... by tf23 · · Score: 1

      Isn't that the idea though? To add new newer features, yet leave the older behavior in there to keep the legions of older MacOS users happy?

    16. Re:"task-based interface" far superior... by gobbo · · Score: 1

      Hey, OpenDoc never really had a chance to develop a tie-in with existing Mac gui metaphors. But it had lots of promise.

      The idea wasn't so much 'task-centred' as it was 'document-centred' -- which could involve a number of disparate tasks coming together in an end product. The document stayed, the applications to work on it came and went as needed.

      Frankly, I'm sad things didn't go that way. Sometimes I want an application for just two of its eight hundred and eighty eight feaures, and I wish I just had a module-like app that did only that, and worked seamlessly with others. Sometimes I'm importing, converting, and exporting documents promiscuously. Sometimes I find myself opening five or six REALLY big -- no, bloated -- apps to work on getting a simple pdf or webpage or video clip out the door, and hooray for that gig of RAM.

      Then I realize that I'm using a suite (adoobie or necromedia etc.) by these big monolithic corps and that they have me buying the monster swiss-army apps in an opendoc like configuration, and the only way to get that document-centred approach is to buy ONLY their suite. Sweet for their investors, havoc for me.

    17. Re:"task-based interface" far superior... by iroger · · Score: 1

      Kinda sounds like Apples "at ease" from back in the early 90's

    18. Re:"task-based interface" far superior... by dbirchall · · Score: 1

      What? Are you implying that Microsoft would exhume and copy a years-old Apple technology?! Shocking, simply shocking! :)

  14. Slow News Day? by mental_telepathy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    All over the world, people are writing uninformed opinions designed to get a reaction rather than educate. Apparently, Some of them make Slashdot.

    1. Re:Slow News Day? by Bluesman · · Score: 1

      >Apparently, Some of them make Slashdot.

      uhhh, what do you think Slashdot IS?

      --
      If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
    2. Re:Slow News Day? by gumbi+west · · Score: 1
      All over the world, people are writing uninformed opinions designed to get a reaction rather than educate.
      Yes but most of them work for FOX News by now...
  15. oh my god by 7-Vodka · · Score: 0, Redundant
    scroll down on the page linked from the article and read what it says about palladium.

    my jaw dropped

    --

    Liberty.

    1. Re:oh my god by weave · · Score: 4, Insightful
      you could create Word documents that could be read only in the next week. In all cases, it would be the user, not Microsoft, who sets these policies.

      Outlook 2003 already does this, as long as you have an RMS (Rights Management Server) running, it can be contacted when receipient wants to view the message, and you are using only Outlook or some Microsoft reader program.

      ... and then....

      People fear what they don't understand, but Palladium is about securing the PC and protecting your privacy, plain and simple. Microsoft isn't trying to usurp your PC.

      Ah, yeah, right, as long as you're running all Microsoft software on your desktop and Microsoft software on your servers...

    2. Re:oh my god by HiredMan · · Score: 0

      my jaw dropped

      That was because of the very first required palladium instruction:

      Open wide and prepare to take it like Bill's bitch that you are about to become.

      He's clearly ready to comply. I, however, am not.

      =tkk

    3. Re:oh my god by 1010011010 · · Score: 1


      Running only Microsoft software isn't usurpation! it's CHOICE! Didn't you get the memo?

      --
      Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
    4. Re:oh my god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      as long as you have an RMS (Rights Management Server) running

      Oh, is that what RMS stands for? I had this picture of Richard Stallman running ... and it was not pretty.

    5. Re:oh my god by drix · · Score: 1

      There's some comment here about shoring up that metaphor and concerning the anal sphincter, but I'm not gonna make it...

      --

      I think there is a world market for maybe five personal web logs.
  16. *sigh* by eyeball · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Display compositing isn't rocket science. It's feasible now that video hardware with a lot of memory is common.

    What is almost rocket science is fine-tuning an OS's user experience. I use Windows, OSX, and X11 (xfce currently, but I switch every few weeks), and OSX has some of the most consistent user designs ever. Preferences each application is in the same place (both file-wise and in the menu).

    All I see in windows is an onion-skin of new UI elements being added onto old ones. Someone at work has Longhorn (he's an official MS tester), and the "My Computer" now has everything all lumped into it -- devices, addresses, etc. It's just plain confusing.

    So my point is, while OS X is getting simpler to use, Windows, and I fear even some X11 desktops/window managers are getting more complicated. I feel bad for the windows users I know that can't even tell that IE is a browser!

    --

    _______
    2B1ASK1
    1. Re:*sigh* by theflea · · Score: 1

      I feel bad for the folks who design UIs.

      Why? One example: Personally, I like MS's take on the "My Computer" having links to other common places. It seems to work for me. But it confuses the bejesus out of some people. Of course, you can change the way your UI behaves in XP. The problem is, the people who get confused by the new UI are just the people who would have no idea how to switch back to the 'classic' UI.

      So the people who design UI's are damned either way. I don't design UI's, but how can you unleash new features and improvements when the average computer user hasn't learned the fundementals of 'cut & paste'?

      I like panther's UI best of all, but I also like some elements of XP's style of doing things.

    2. Re:*sigh* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use Firebird as my web browser at work but through the course of the day I end up in IE. Not because of a need but the simple fact that every Finder window (I'm a Mac user at heart and at home) is just IE in sheep's clothing. I mistakenly type in a URL and then later feel like it highjacked my web browser.

  17. Retarded Comparison by Blob+Pet · · Score: 1

    I don't use XP or Panther and I don't intend on using Longhorn or OS X anytime in the near future. Be that as it may, it's obvious to me that even if you can argue that Longhorn is going to be better than Panther, WTF is the point? You know Apple is working on improvements to their OS anyway, so the only logical comparison is going to be Longhorn versus the future Apple OS.

    --
    "...today consumers have been conditioned to think of beer when they see a bullfrog..."
  18. that's hilarious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    best comment for this article, bar none.

    I GO ON FIRST, AND CLEEEAN THE HAIR!

    anyways... how does this Paul guy get posted to /.? he basically reprints PR drivel. but i guess it's fun for some to tear this apart instead of participating in innovate or thoughtful criticism.

    1. Re:that's hilarious by Pengo · · Score: 1

      "I GO ON FIRST, AND CLEEEAN THE HAIR!"

      but noo noo

      But I make deh hair SOFT and SILKYY!!

    2. Re:that's hilarious by ZackSchil · · Score: 0, Troll

      OH really FOOL? Really!

    3. Re:that's hilarious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stop looking at me swan!

  19. Heh heh Ha Ha ROFL... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Big deal, they slammed OS X in one FAQ entry... I don't see the preview edition of Longhorn to be all that stimulating. I don't see a heck of a lot of improvements and I've reviewed it. I actually loaded it and played with it. It's got a long way to go and the report of 2005 is being very optimistic.

    MS is obviously worried about Linux and Mac OS X stealing market share and this preview is intended to whip up the MS developers into a frenzy.

    Longhorn is about as funny as those MS advertisements for Microsoft Enterprise Solutions! I fell out of my chair when I saw those on TV one day! Enterprise my ass!

    Unix running on old hardware still blows the doors off anything Microsoft has produced and can do it with greater up-time and reliability. Sure, you need to pay for good Unix admins but you will need fewer of them then Windows server solutions as well as less hardware if you go with Sun servers. If you go with Linux servers you need more boxes but it's still easier to setup and maintain if you have the talented people.

    Apple Server solutions are stagnant because people are waiting for G5 XServes. Panther OS X Server is quite nice. But you could still use Linux/FreeBSD on existing server hardware and it would be fine for Windows and Mac clients.

    Going with an MS Server solution will end up costing a hell of a lot more in hardware, software, training, and staff! Anyone who knows what they are doing will agree. The problem is the MS world is full of people who don't know what they are doing. Just look at all the crap VB applications out there!

    WinXP is not that innovative, in fact it kills productivity when users who are familiar with the earlier GUI have to adapt to the new GUI. If it wasn't for the ability to turn off all the stupid LUNA-tic GUI it would drive people nutz!

    We are currently rolling out thousands of XP systems and the users are freaking out! This is because we have no budget for training. The developers use the Search contents of files feature and I've had about 10 calls where I had to setup the Indexing service and let it catalog everything. The developers were pissed that they had to wait for the index to build and that it didn't support unknown file types. I put together a grep solution with a GUI and the necessary commandline tools. This I give to those developers who hate the new way of searching the contents of files and they are generally happy...

    Of course it doesn't help that the company is outsourcing all of it's Infrastructure support (help desk, desktop support, engineering, and LAN center). Plus currently using HP staff to build and rollout the HP hardware and only supporting the first 24 hours after the PC is rolled out. This means it falls back on the desktop folks who are disgruntled at the fact they are going to be outsourced. I see a disaster forming, they are only about 3% rolled out and it's only going to get worse. I suspect when they start on field offices there will be a big backlash. They screw up the NYC field office and there will be hell to pay... Guess I'll be traveling in a few months to the field to fix all the problems... Sigh just in time for the peak of Winter!

  20. What the hell? by Tom7 · · Score: 1

    Why is this news? A windows fan claims Longhorn is/will be better than Panther. Will we run a follow-up story when Apple fans claim in this slashdot story that Panther is in fact better than Longhorn?

    By the way, Longhorn does exist, inasmuch as leaked builds can be found on the Internet.

    1. Re:What the hell? by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      A windows fan claims Longhorn is/will be better than Panther. Will we run a follow-up story when Apple fans claim in this slashdot story that Panther is in fact better than Longhorn?

      To Slashdot's credit and my surprise, people actually aren't biting the troll. There are a lot of related comments, but very few comments along the lines of "MS sucks and the stuff from other people is better."

      By the way, Longhorn does exist, inasmuch as leaked builds can be found on the Internet.

      I agree that there will probably be a Windows OS (or suite of Windows OSes released within two years of Longhorn's projected ship date).

      I'm somewhat dubious that the content of those OSes is going to be necessarily all that similar to what's being distributed today as Longhorn.

      Remember what Windows XP looked like (okay, I admit that this is a UI issue) in the Whistler betas. Nothing at all like what shipping Windows XP looks like.

    2. Re:What the hell? by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      By the way, Longhorn does exist, inasmuch as leaked builds can be found on the Internet.

      Remember what the early Detroit and Memphis betas looked like? Whatever is out there now won't look much like what will be released in 3 years.

  21. biggest troll ever by gl4ss · · Score: 1, Insightful

    that's what the article is.

    just skip it, it's so stupid anyways. it's comparing a fantasy system to something that exists, and doing a piss poor comparision at that too.

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  22. He is absolutely right. by cyfer2000 · · Score: 0, Troll

    And I will claim that longhorn is better than MSDOS6.0. Can you beat me? BTW, I bet there will be a computer cluster running longhorn and AMD/intel 64bit CPU quicker and cheaper than the VT G5 cluster. I predict Longhorn will give /.er more entertainment than SCO stuff.

    --
    There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
  23. well heck by thunderbird46 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm not sure whether to laugh or what on that "usability enhancements" part. I used Windows for many years, switched to Linux for a while, then picked up an OS X machine to use along side my Linux box. While I was away from the Windows world XP came out. I find XP nearly unusable in the default state -- no I DON'T want the little dog from MS Bob helping me, thankyouverymuch. I'm not interested in the "do you want to..." sidebar. The new start menu drives me nuts. I end up switching XP boxes to the "Windows Classic" interface -- it's better for my blood pressure. So from my point of view, Windows needs all the usability enhancements it can get -- not necessarily the way MS defines them though :)

  24. Apples & Bananas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yeah, well... my monkey-powered flying car is better than your mercedes-benz.

    YOU'LL SEE, once I get around to releasing it to the public.

    1. Re:Apples & Bananas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahah, I like your subject line, AC, Microsoft is the bananas I see.

      I'm also 60 minutes later figuring that out than everyone else, right!! Welcome to last week, me!

    2. Re:Apples & Bananas by Jon+Abbott · · Score: 1
      Yeah, well... my monkey-powered flying car is better than your mercedes-benz.
      YOU'LL SEE, once I get around to releasing it to the public.
      Moller, is that you? :^)
  25. Compare future Longhorn predictions with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    predictions of what:

    XP was supposed to be...
    2000 was supposed to be...
    ME was supposed to be...
    98 Second Edition was supposed to be...

    Yeah yeah yeah, the only thing that hasn't changed
    is the ability of M$ marketdroids to out feature their
    programmers.

    1. Re:Compare future Longhorn predictions with by homesteader · · Score: 1
      XP was supposed to be... Really, what WAS it supposed to be? Win2k Afterbirth?
      2000 was supposed to be... Apparently MS' best work
      ME was supposed to be... Non-Existent*
      98 SE was supposed to be... Win98 Gold Master

      *Windows 2000 was supposed to be the convergence of the Pro and Home codebase. They didn't make it.

  26. geez... by microcars · · Score: 5, Funny

    I thought Mac users were the ones that belonged to a "cult"

    --
    I like microcars
  27. Congratulations, Pudge. by thatguywhoiam · · Score: 1
    You've posted One Gigantic Flamebait.

    Some Windows fanboy is feeling threatened by OS X and this is news? Cripes.

    Anyone else get the feeling the editors are trying to 'correct' a little for the strong pro-Apple articles lately? Like that 'Apple broke my old iPod then told me to fuck off and die' article? Very FUDdy around here today.

    --
    If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
    1. Re:Congratulations, Pudge. by Llywelyn · · Score: 1

      You have to admit it is at least better than Cliff's "some random mac user somewhere had this problem, didn't bother to check support.apple.com and now hates all things apple."

      --
      Integrate Keynote and LaTeX
  28. The New Features List... by andcarne · · Score: 5, Insightful
    He keeps saying Mac OS X is outdated, and Longhorn will be much more superior. He even goes on to list all these 'exciting' new features found in conjunction with Palladium.
    Palladium stops viruses and worms. The system won't run unauthorized programs, preventing viruses from trashing your system.
    Funny, my Mac never gets any worms or viruses. Hmm, maybe its because the OS is better designed, contrary to what he says above. Hardware is not the correct approach to stopping these things. The operating system has to be designed in a security concious way. This includes not enabling programs to have full access to OS resources. Microsofts largest problem is the interconnnectivity between every piece of MS software, including the OS.
    Palladium stops spam. Spam will be stopped before it even hits your email inbox. Unsolicited mail that you might actually want to receive will be allowed through if it has credentials that meet your user-defined standards.
    Hmm, strange, I can do this perfectly well on my 'badly designed' OS. In fact its not the OS's responsability, its the responsobility of the e-mail client. Also, hardware is not giong to help solve this, its a software issue.
    Palladium safeguards privacy. In addition to the system's ability to seal data on your PC, Palladium can also seal data sent across the Internet using software agents that ensure the data reaches only the proper people. Newsweek reports that the agent has been nicknamed "My Man," a goof on ".NET My Services," "My Documents," and other similar names at Microsoft.
    I believe this is commonly called encryption. Something thats been available for quite some time.
    Palladium controls information after it's sent from your PC. Using Digital Rights Management (DRM) technology, Palladium can be used to securely distribute music, movies, and other intellectual property securely over the Internet. Movie studios and the recording industry could use this technology to let their customers exercise their fair use rights to copy audio CDs and movies, for example. "It's a funny thing," says Bill Gates. "We came at this thinking about music, but then we realized that e-mail and documents were far more interesting domains." Gates says that Palladium could ensure that email designated as private could not be forwarded or copied to other people, for example. Or, the Newsweek reports reads, "you could create Word documents that could be read only in the next week. In all cases, it would be the user, not Microsoft, who sets these policies."
    This is just going to give you headaches. They intend for it to be used in offices and large businesses. Of course, you have to set up a dedicated DRM server and authorize every person's machine to have access. When employees come and go, you have to worry about making sure they are given access, and that access is revoked when they leave. This is also going to be disasterous for cross-platform applications. The DRM files will simply not work on anything but Windows Longhorn and newer. Also, you would have to have NEW HARDWARE to use it. If a business decides to implement this, they must upgrade EVERY SINGLE machine! Not the most economically sound business decision, in my opinion.
    1. Re:The New Features List... by curious.corn · · Score: 1

      Funny, my Mac never gets any worms or viruses. Hmm, maybe its because the OS is better designed, contrary to what he says above. Hardware is not the correct approach to stopping these things. The operating system has to be designed in a security concious way. This includes not enabling programs to have full access to OS resources. Microsofts largest problem is the interconnnectivity between every piece of MS software, including the OS.
      Crippling progam interoperation isn't Apple's way of building security. It's superiority is vastly built upon turning the brain on when designing an application. As far as I know there's a neat little scripting language called unsurprisingly "Applescript" that can instruct an application to execute just about anything it can. So why don't we see Mail.app applescript malwares raping Mac users? Is it just because Apple has so little marketshare (we would at least see some proof of concept) or is it because software designers weren't such fools to automatically run code embedded in an incoming Mail? Or perhaps because AS was designed a long long time ago, thought out and not rushed to feed fools like the one cited in the main story.

      --
      Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
    2. Re:The New Features List... by andcarne · · Score: 1

      What I meant was that the biggest problem Windows has is how all the Microsoft applications are integrated together, to some element at least. I did not say that there is no interconnectivity on Mac OS.

    3. Re:The New Features List... by Knackered · · Score: 1

      Also, hardware is not giong to help solve this, its a software issue.


      Hardware won't stop social engineering attacks, but having an execute protection bit in the CPU/MMU would do a great deal to prevent the spread of worms through stack-smashing attacks. It's not exactly new technology, either, it's just that the most popular architecture in the last 20 years omitted it. Other architectures do the job much better.
      --
      a.
    4. Re:The New Features List... by curious.corn · · Score: 1

      Don't worry pal, I understand your point. Actually I think Microsoft's designers had daydreams of small usecases of their application integration and rushed to have a working hack for it (say some kind of business system a la SAP living within Outlook). The fools never thought the security fallout and packed it up for some marketplace conference/fair. So in a sense their integration is sparse and limp and also suffers from security black holes (at the very least because of the integrated software).

      --
      Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
    5. Re:The New Features List... by switcha · · Score: 1
      If a business decides to implement this, they must upgrade EVERY SINGLE machine! Not the most economically sound business decision, in my opinion.

      Not economically sound?! Are you nuts! This is a perfect model of sound money-making economics!...
      Oh...You didn't mean for Microsoft...

      --
      You know what? ... A little club soda *did* get that out!
  29. bleh by mutagenman · · Score: 1

    I tried a copy of the Longhorn PDC build. It was quite hidious. The new finder/IE have this ugly grey look that they like to call "steel." I'm sure there is no relation to the brushed metal look of panther though...

    seriously longhorn actually made the brushed metal look decent, which IMHO is an accomplishment all in it self.

  30. digital video recording? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does anyone know why apple doesn't include dvr capabilities built-in to the iMac? It would seem like an obvious thing for them, and is one area in which they have fallen behind windows-based machines.

    1. Re:digital video recording? by kommakazi · · Score: 1

      what are you talking about? you can record digital video quite easily with an iMac...perhaps you just don't know how to do it and obviously havn't bothered doing an inkling of googling to find out how and instead decided to troll on shalsdot. what a waste of time.

  31. Microsoft "Ease of Use" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft has in the past, and will presumably retain in the future, a vision of "ease of use" that is premised on making pre-existing, complex, multi-step tasks "easy" by implementing a condescending "wizard"* to walk the user through the task. Then, as soon as you step out of the wizard framework, or try to do anything that wizards haven't been pre-written to help you accomplish, there is a strong possibility that whatever you're trying to do might not make sense. And it seems that MS doesn't see anything wrong with glossing over an fundamentally hard-to-use system in this manner.

    Apple takes a very different approach to usability, and is (strikingly) often regarded as more successful at creating a usable system. You are very unlikely to find any obnoxious animated creatures or magical wizards to guide you through complex tasks, because Apple spends a great deal of time trying to make sure that few tasks ever become complex.

    Apple's approach makes things easier for everyone, from beginners to very experienced users. Microsoft's approach makes certain things easy for some novice users, but can infuriate experienced users, or at a minimum force experienced users to deal directly with a kludgy interface (either the wizard, or the system directly).

    Stepping back, the long view is one that reveals two very different philosophies: Apple empowers the user. Microsoft empowers itself.

    --

    * On "Wizards":
    I guess people are supposed to think, "Wow, computers are so complicated, they're like magic! I could never use a computer if Microsoft didn't come up with all these wizards to make it easier!"

    1. Re:Microsoft "Ease of Use" by line.at.infinity · · Score: 1

      i guess it depends on what the alternative to wizard is. for example, the "classical interface" of winzip is quite simple to use. simply select the files, then press the extract button. In the wizard interface I would have to press the next button several times and read boring dialogs (i can't believe they added the wizard interface). They also have a favorites button on the toolbar as default, which is utterly useless. The only buttons I have selected to be on the toolbar are "extract," "delete," and "exit."

      With Nero Burning ROM, however, what I want is simply to burn a cd when I use it. The wizard interface works quite well to get things started on. However, the wizard interface is good in this case only because the alternatives are not as well developed.

      I agree that wizards are a problem (too restricted on what you can do) but sometimes it can be better than the alternative.

  32. Hard to compare... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think its amazing that we are even able to compare Linux and OSX to Windows. I really like linux and OSX better but when you think about it its amazing that a company like apple can make something that is even comparable to what a company with as much money as Micro$oft has. Especially when you look at GNU/linux. Its made by a bunch of random programers most of whom are not paid any thing for all of their work. I love all *NIXs (except SCO). Even still i think linux and OSX are better for what i do then windows is or will be.

  33. Obviously by MrWa · · Score: 5, Funny
    Nonexistent Windows OS Superior to Panther

    Not having Windows is better than having it; so it is only a slight jump of logic to conclude that NOT having Windows OS is superior to having Panther.

    More importantly, if something coming out 2-3 years from now is not technologically superior to Panther (including any Apple OSes that come out in the next couple of years) I would be very disappointed and suprised.

    How is this suprising or news?

  34. Release the Hounds! by jwold · · Score: 1

    Release the Hounds!

  35. Simple test by Nexum · · Score: 1

    Well, here's a simple test...

    I'm going to go and sit at my Mac running Panther, and do all of my work for a whole week on this machine.

    This Paul Thurrot guy is gonna go and sit at his Windows Longhorn computer and do all of his work on the copy of Longhorn he bought the other day.

    --

    This sig has been deprecated.
    1. Re:Simple test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His work will be done faster than yours. In fact, with Longhorn, you don't have to do any work at all.

  36. Jaw-Dropping Amount of Brown-Tonguing by White+Roses · · Score: 1
    Man, I thought the Mac users were biased, but this guy has got his tongue so far up Microsoft's collective ass, you can barely see the swoosh on his Nikes. His site even . . . Jebus.

    He even thinks Palladium will be a good thing, and not at all a tool to control users, or spy on their computers, or enforce a Microsoft vision on computing on the world.

    But never mind all that. The fact that Apple puts out a major evolution to Mac OS X every year or so (thus far), means that Apple only has, what, three more revisions before we really see Longhorn hit the streets? [sarcasm] Gee, Apple will never be able to keep up. [/sarcasm] And by then, Linux will probably be on even more desktop systems than it is today. Longhorn is a ghost, a phantom to frighten little children.

    --
    Do not touch -Willie
  37. Major problem with "task-based interface" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My main problem with the "activity center" and other so-called task-based interface schemes is that beyond a very low learned behavior threshhold, they really don't imitate what people do in their daily lives.

    Think about it: when you wake up and want to know the weather today, you know quite well that you have many choices--radio, TV, internet, looking out the window or whatever. You make your choice and go straight to the info.

    In the task-based scheme you would be forced to think about what *category* the weather forecast would be in, or what meta-activity you wish to perform. You want the weather but you have to stop and think about it and figure out that what you're really doing is "Get Information" or something.

    Same with finding out if your coworker Bob wants to play racquetball this afternoon. Do you really first realize that you are now operating in the "Communicate" realm or do you just call or email him or ask him when you see him at the office?

    It takes a little bit of time for new users to recognize the icons (and their locations) for the things that allow them to do what they want with their computers but that learning curve is nothing compared to forcing every function into either implied/obvious or brain-wrackingly arbitrary category levels that must be waded through.

  38. Longhorn IS more impressive than Panther by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    because of Developers, developers, developers!

    1. Re:Longhorn IS more impressive than Panther by kommakazi · · Score: 1

      yes so you can have 3 separate programs that all do the exact same thing and among the 3 only a total combined quality of the 1 existing mac program that exists for the same task.

  39. Analyze it by mrpuffypants · · Score: 0, Troll

    Let's look at what Paul said:

    Apple has implemented some basic desktop composition features in Mac OS X "Panther."

    Apparently he's never seen Expose...

    But the basic problem with Mac OS X isn't going away: It's a classic desktop operating system that doesn't offer anything in the way of usability advancements over previous desktop operating systems. Today, Windows XP and its task-based interface are far superior to anything in Mac OS X.

    Statement without proof. Opinion. Move along.

    In the future, Longhorn will further distance Windows from OS X.

    True, it will be much more bloated, include DRM, have graphical overhead not designed for computers it will run on, use up more of the screen real-estate with 'sidebars,' dumb things down so that grandma can do it but i have to step through 10 steps to fucking print, and overall make the task of using your computer all the more unrefined.

    From a graphical standpoint, there won't be any comparison.

    Apparently Paul's never even fucking SEEN Mac OS X and all of its iterations. Literally the most beautiful OS evar!

    As Microsoft revealed at the PDC 2003 conference, Longhorn is far more impressive technically than Panther.

    True, it is amazing how so many monkeys can make Windows occasionally work through their collaborative C# coding ...ok, so I took the bait!

    1. Re:Analyze it by Trillan · · Score: 1

      ...it will be much more bloated, include DRM, have graphical overhead not designed for computers it will run on, use up more of the screen real-estate with 'sidebars,' dumb things down so that grandma can do it but i have to step through 10 steps to fucking print, and overall make the task of using your computer all the more unrefined.

      Most of the ease of use enhancements in Windows have been for people trying to break in to your system anyway.

  40. gee, look at the droves of Mac user switching by cenonce · · Score: 1

    Somehow I don't see droves of Mac users running to buy a copy of Longhorn (er, XP) because of the ridiculous ranting of an idiot.

    Though I must admit it, I have seen more rabid Mac sites bashing Windows than I have ever seen the other way.

    Why exactly did somebody bother to post this? It seems like an awful waste of bandwith. Of course, I guess the new wonder of "free speech" is you can waste as much net bandwith as you want whether you have something intelligent to say or not.

    -A

  41. Correct me if I am wrong but by shadow_x99 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A Look on the Microsoft Windows Longhorn.

    - Windows Longhorn is only 32-Bit OS For Now and will perhaps possibly have a 64-bit support in the future.

    - Windows Longhorn will need a DX9 Compliant Video Card to run.

    - Windows Longhorn doesn't come with any advanced development tools but Notepad ( Ultimate for HTML )

    - Windows Longhorn will have the Paladium Stuff in order to be secure. ( Probably won't be anyway but... )

    - Windows Longhorn will be easy to install / upgrade

    - Windows Longhorn come only in a 1-Language Deal

    - Windows Longhorn cannot support a Heavy Server Load.

    - Windows Longhorn will cost about 500$ US to Buy one license, and you haven't got any software on it.

    - Windows Longhorn will cost 130$ to Upgrade.

    - Windows Longhorn is completly closed-source and you can't contribute to it, because Microsoft doesn't want people like you and me to look at the code and correct problems that can possibly arise.

    - Windows Longhorn doesn't have any advanced multimedia editing software except for the Popular Sound Recorder.

    A Look on the Apple Mac OS X

    - Mac OS X is a 64 bit OS Partially and probably next Version a Full 64 Bit OS.

    - Mac OS X need a OpenGL Compliant Card ( About every card sold by Apple since their G3 are OpenGL Complliant )

    - Mac OS X come with Project Builder for Free, allowing me to Program and all my stuff without buying many costly licenses from Microsoft.

    - Mac OS X doesn't need Paladium, because it is based on UNIX, which is already something I thrust much more than Windows.

    - Mac OS X is easy to install.

    - Mac OS X can change language at will.

    - Mac OS X can be a Server OS natively supported by Apple ( Appache Web Server, MySQL Database Server, File Server, Mail Server, etc... )

    - Mac OS X cost 279$ US to get a 5-License Bundle

    - Mac OS X always come with the Mac you just bought and will only cost 129$ to Upgrade.

    - Mac OS X is Part Open-Source under GPL, so you can participate in the Development by contributing to the Darwin Projects

    - You got many Software to do Multimedia Work ( Edit, Create QuickTime, DVD, Images, etc... all due to Apple Software Engineers or Open-Source ) that are optinal in the OS X Install.

    - Everything displayed in a Windows in Mac OS X can be saved as a PDF.

    1. Re:Correct me if I am wrong but by edalytical · · Score: 1
      Correct me if I am wrong

      Ok.

      Mac OS X come with Project Builder

      It comes with XCode now.

      --
      Win a signed Stephen Carpenter ESP Guitar from the Deftones: http://def-tag.com/?r=0008781
    2. Re:Correct me if I am wrong but by coolmacdude · · Score: 1

      It is $199 for a 5 license, not $279.

      --

      -You may license this sig for only $6.99.
    3. Re:Correct me if I am wrong but by sinistral · · Score: 1

      APSL, not GPL.

    4. Re:Correct me if I am wrong but by zhenlin · · Score: 1
      - Mac OS X come with Project Builder for Free, allowing me to Program and all my stuff without buying many costly licenses from Microsoft.

      Not anymore - now it's Xcode. Didn't your Mac-fan friends tell you? In any case - the point is still valid. OS X has good, free developer tools from Apple. Windows... Well, the official developer tools cost a lot more than the OS itself.

      - Mac OS X is Part Open-Source under GPL, so you can participate in the Development by contributing to the Darwin Projects

      Common myth. Darwin is not licensed under the GPL, and not compatible with GPL either. The various Darwin forks of other projects are licensed like the originals.

      - Everything displayed in a Windows in Mac OS X can be saved as a PDF.

      While the display language may be PDF - only printable documents can be saved as PDFs for the time being.

      The parent is probably overrated - I can't tell. But it is full of little mistakes.
    5. Re:Correct me if I am wrong but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if you take a screenshot, you suddently have a printable document that you can save as a PDF.

  42. 2010 Mac OS better than 2006 Longhorn SP1! by kolombangara · · Score: 0

    Well? Won't it be?

    --
    Finally! Real Rock & Rollers: The Dixie Chicks.

  43. iTunes as Filesystem browser by homesteader · · Score: 1

    Why couldn't you have an iTunes-like filesystem interface. You've got a flat landscape until you populate your files with metadata. You've got saved searches(smart playlists), static lists(standard playlists). You could even let the OS keep an HFS representation of this(Keep iTunes music folder organized). So why not?

    1. Re:iTunes as Filesystem browser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I could be wrong, but I thought what you describe is EXACTLY what the new finder in MacOS X 10.3 does.

    2. Re:iTunes as Filesystem browser by homesteader · · Score: 1

      They are starting to bare some resemblence, with the brushed metal UI and sidebar/tray look. The main difference:

      In iTunes I can create a smart playlist that queries my mp3's and returns all music that's never been played, or all Jazz, or all songs who's artist's name contains my dog's name or whatever. It also has the browse feature which, for me, is perfectly suited to quickly finding music. Or if I just want to text query, I quickly type in a song or artist name into the search bar and boom it found.

      So for a file browser, it could be a folder(playlist) that executes a search returning all Movies, instead of or in addition to my static movies folder. Maybe this can be accomplished through folder actions?

      I guess the searching is already there, pretty quick as well.

    3. Re:iTunes as Filesystem browser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You prefer ONE CHEESE? And ONE HAMBURGER to put it on?
      -- Luc Teyssier

    4. Re:iTunes as Filesystem browser by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1
      The main problem with this idea is that people are lazy. This works fine for music, since people generally get the meta-data from cddb, or have it included when they download the files (or, on rare occasions actually enter it themselves). Would you enter meta-data for all of your files though? I probalby would for about a week, then I'd start forgetting, and within a few months I would find it impossible to find anything.

      One solution to this is to have the OS or applications automatically extract meta-data from documents. This is currently a very active research area.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  44. URL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I clicked the link, I thought it first said www.winsupersite.com/fag/longhorn.asp
    instead of /faq/. Considering some of the other trolls' posts that I've stumbled across, that would make sense.

    Feel free to mod me down

    1. Re:URL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> Feel free to mod me down

      Why-- because you're dyslexic, or because you're a homophobe?

    2. Re:URL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where the hell did you get the idea that I'm dyslexic? Secondly, what if I'm British? Then a fag is a cigarette, you fuckwit

    3. Re:URL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fag.

  45. WinFS. by skahshah · · Score: 2, Funny

    So, WinFS means Windows Future Storage? Does that mean that when Longhorn is released, the name will change to WinPS, as in Windows Present Storage?

    1. Re:WinFS. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WinNT: New Technology.

  46. Wow.... by dacarr · · Score: 1

    This looks like something you might expect on comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy or something.

    --
    This sig no verb.
  47. Mont Alto? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let me guess...

    Computer geek with a fiorestry major for a roomate.

    Where do you think they go to school?

    1. Re:Mont Alto? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My Guess? UC Santa Cruz

    2. Re:Mont Alto? by adamjaskie · · Score: 1
      Let me guess...

      Computer geek with a fiorestry major for a roomate.

      Where do you think they go to school?
      Actually, Michigan Tech.
      --
      /usr/games/fortune
  48. It's all about MARKETSHARE by macslut · · Score: 5, Funny
    Longhorn may be a better OS. To be honest I've never used it before. But I don't need to use it to determine that OSX is better because the marketshare is so much greater. There are tens of thousands of apps available for OSX today. How many apps can you run on Longhorn today...ZERO!

    I can go to an Apple store and find several models of computers coming with OSX pre-installed. How many computers are shipping with Longhorn? Nobody is using it..it must suck.

    And compatibility is an absolute nightmare. I've been to every computer store in the country and not a single printer, camera, scanner, card or anything is listed as being compatible with Longhorn. Simply put Longhorn has a tiny niche market for time travelers and can not survive as such.

  49. Use iTunes by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 1

    iTunes (4Mac or 4PC) already implements the database as a filesystem concept. The iTunes program will be your browser/interface, and the songs will be your files.

    You search, sort, live, in the metadata, and not in the file hierarchy.

    See how you like it, and imagine if the entire OS could be like that.

    1. Re:Use iTunes by tuxedobob · · Score: 1

      Which is funny, because most of the PC users I talk to don't like iTunes, and most of the Mac users love it.

    2. Re:Use iTunes by vonFinkelstien · · Score: 1
      As a teacher, I have a gazillion document files haphazardly saved all over my Documents folder.

      The day that the light bulb went on while using iTunes ("Hey, this [FS as Database] is really, really powerful, yet simple.") is the day that I started dreaming about a way to get my all my documents into an iTunes-eque program/OS.

    3. Re:Use iTunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a teacher, I have a gazillion document files haphazardly saved all over my Documents folder.

      Oh - so this is something endemic to teachers? That they're so dim-witted and unorganised?

    4. Re:Use iTunes by heinousjay · · Score: 1

      As a programmer, I despise Pepsi. Then one day I realized that I never had to drink it.

      Good story...

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
  50. here is his address: write him by slashnot007 · · Score: 1
    thurrott@winnetmag.com why not write him and tell him how full of crap he is?

    by the way he gave the aero presentation at the longhorn dev conference. looking at his slides you can see what he thinks "task" context dependent interfact is. .eg. push in a CD or plun in a spart card and it asks you if you want to open in in iTunes, open in in the finder, or initialize it for HFS+. Oh wait that's panther. IN Longhorn when you insert a CD you have to wait three years for Microsoft to create the task context dependent interface.

    what a rube.

    1. Re:here is his address: write him by capmilk · · Score: 1

      Why should anyone bother? Why should we insult the poor guy?
      I prefer to put a smile on my face and think to myself how fortunate I am for not being involved in OS wars anymore.

  51. Well, isn't that special... by Saiai+Hakutyoutani · · Score: 1

    You know, I remember when Mac OS 8 included new features that were so much better than all other desktop OSes. Let's look at this from a realistic viewpoint. The only feature outlined on this page that wasn't implemented in other OSes ages ago is the database-backed filesystem.

    That raises an interesting question. Will this new file system offer any improvement over other file systems, and will it or won't it be excruciatingly slow?

    I give whoever wrote that site 10 points for loyalty though. In the manner of your average Windows installer, he's taken old software features and presented them as if they were something new. "Wow! A sidebar!"

    1. Re:Well, isn't that special... by berniecase · · Score: 1

      That raises an interesting question. Will this new file system offer any improvement over other file systems, and will it or won't it be excruciatingly slow?

      It'll be fast enough. That's simply because by the time it makes it to market, machines will be much faster than they are now. This is why it's 4 years away (or so we're told).

    2. Re:Well, isn't that special... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't BeOS have a database-backed filesystem? Is that why it was a flop?

    3. Re:Well, isn't that special... by o_kenway · · Score: 1

      That's copied too.

      BeOS has a databse backed filesystem.

  52. Photorealistic desktop? by neonstz · · Score: 1
    Longhorn will require 3D video hardware to render special effects that will make the screen more photorealistic and deep.

    Photorealistic desktop? What's the point of that? My desktop is cluttered with computer parts, cds, books, papers, and I don't want the same on the screen.

    1. Re:Photorealistic desktop? by Zork+the+Almighty · · Score: 1

      But does your real desktop have an animated paperclip which irritates you ? "You really need to pick up around here, this place is a dump!"

      --

      In Soviet America the banks rob you!
    2. Re:Photorealistic desktop? by rossz · · Score: 1

      Yes. That would be my wife.

      --
      -- Will program for bandwidth
  53. Ah, you'll be wanting Konqueror! by leonbrooks · · Score: 3, Informative
    I find the Windows 2000 Explorer, with the folder tree and folder contents in separate windows, more useful.

    You're going to just adore Konqueror in file-manager mode, then!

    The OS X Save As feature is horrible!

    OS X doesn't have one, it's implemented by each app. Perhaps OS X should develop a set of convenience libraries which provide this and a few other things in a wrapper library to help in making them more consistent across the board? File functions like import, export and quit ("quit?" think: "what needs saving or save-as-ing before I do this?") could be wrapped too.

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
    1. Re:Ah, you'll be wanting Konqueror! by smileyj68 · · Score: 1

      Actually, Cocoa (OS X Objective-C) does provide a number of convenieces like this, up to and including a system-wide spell checker.

  54. As I see it. by jellomizer · · Score: 2

    As I see it Microsoft is getting closer to what the promised for Windows 95. That is what Microsoft does, when they make a significant improvement to their OS they hype it up, make it seem a lot better then the alternatives. People buy it. Then they find out it stinks, but since they bought it they keep it. But because they have it they get use to it, so then when they get proficient with it their afraid to change to an other platform. The only real way to get a good switch is to make an OS that is 100% perfect in all aspects, with feature that will take Microsoft multiple decades to catch up with, and most importantly it will need to run products made for windows.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  55. It was actually 49.7 days (4,294,967,295ms) by leonbrooks · · Score: 4, Informative
    It was only discovered when some important person rebooted his box just before going on holidays, the box had nothing to do while he was away and had frozen when he returned, which got his goat.

    Here's a quote WRT the 32-bit counter (it's basically Unix's "Y2.038k bug" but happens a thousand times faster, one of the few things in Windows which does):

    Why is uptime reset after 49.7 days?

    This happens because a 32-bit variable is being used to store the tick count which is incremented every millisecond. A 32-bit variable can store numbers up to 4,294,967,295 which equals to 49.7 days (4,294,967,295/1000/3600/24). When this variable overflows it will start over from 0 again.


    Here's the 95/98/ME uptime issue straight from the horse's mouth:

    After 49.7 days of continuous operation, your Windows-based computer may stop responding (hang).

    Things to note:

    • That news was posted in late April 1999
    • When they say "may" stop responding, they mean that all unpatched 9X machines lock up repeatably
    • So it took four years before anyone noticed that their machine had a fifty-day curfew (it would take many Unix admins about 100 days: "Two crashes in the same decade? Head for the lists!")
    • That support article was last reviewed on 22 April 2003, but it doesn't say why
    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
    1. Re:It was actually 49.7 days (4,294,967,295ms) by Arctic+Fox · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the info. But the original parent is still incorrect. 95/98/Me's kernel is not an NT kernel and is not in XP or Win2K. The parent would have led some to believe it was also discovered in NT/W2K/XP.... which I have seen survive with longer uptimes.

    2. Re:It was actually 49.7 days (4,294,967,295ms) by __aafkqj3628 · · Score: 1

      That support article was last reviewed on 22 April 2003, but it doesn't say why

      That would probably be when they docked the 'Q' prefix from all of their articles, which was probably one of the most idiotic things they've done as well as introduce about a billion new locale problems and a non-functional search-engine.

      Oh well... At least my windows machine has been classed (by me) as legacy.

    3. Re:It was actually 49.7 days (4,294,967,295ms) by nocturbulous · · Score: 1

      lol, my router always resets just short of 50 days

    4. Re:It was actually 49.7 days (4,294,967,295ms) by DJSpray · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There were worse and stranger problems than this. I had a straight Compaq I bought from Sears, running Compaq's Windows 98. I bought it to run one particular program for beta-testing purposes (Functional Objects' Functional Developer (Dylan) IDE).

      Most of the time, it just merrily ran the screen saver. Until I noticed that I'd be sitting in my apartment reading, or dozing in bed, and at approximately the same time every night, it would reboot... going through the whole disk check, did-not-shut-down-properly, etc.

      In other words, my brand-new out-of-the-box Compaq running Windows 98 wouldn't stay up longer than 24 hours in a row. Astounding.

      I never did determine exactly who to blame: Microsoft's 98 distribution or Compaq's customizations or even the motherboard hardware. I just installed Linux. That was the last time I have owned a machine running Windows...

  56. In all fairness. . . by noewun · · Score: 1

    I expect to see a story tomorrow saying Rabid Mac zealot proclaims 7.6.1 the best OS evuh!

    --
    I am a believer of momentum and curves.
  57. So thats what Task-Based means? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    XP/Longhorn is like a cafe where you dont get a menu, you just get some oaf coming up to you and saying 'do you want chocolate ice cream?' Nope. 'Do you want strawberry ice cream?' Nope. 'Do you want vanilla ice cream?' Nope. 'Do you want me to shit in you shoes?' Ah! Now you're talking!

    Whereas OSX and pretty much everything else is like a cafe where you get to just sit down and read the fucking menu.

    I like most of XP, but the way it splurts hundreds of inane fuckwitted questions all over the screen in some kind of attempt at being helpful is the most annoying thing ever.

    1. Re:So thats what Task-Based means? by Zork+the+Almighty · · Score: 1

      I like most of XP, but the way it splurts hundreds of inane fuckwitted questions all over the screen in some kind of attempt at being helpful is the most annoying thing ever.

      You can't complain when Microsoft caters to their primary userbase.

      --

      In Soviet America the banks rob you!
    2. Re:So thats what Task-Based means? by darkpurpleblob · · Score: 1
      I like most of XP, but the way it splurts hundreds of inane fuckwitted questions all over the screen in some kind of attempt at being helpful is the most annoying thing ever.
      Examples please? I can't think of any off the top of my head as you describe.
    3. Re:So thats what Task-Based means? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft's primary user base is composed of business users. Look at the numbers.

      This little disaster-in-the-making has nothing to do with Microsoft's primary user base. It has to do with an attempt on their part to find a new primary user base.

      Just like the stunning success that was Microsoft Bob.

    4. Re:So thats what Task-Based means? by jweatherley · · Score: 1

      I had one last week at work with XP Pro. Some little speech bubble popped out of the task bar telling me that I wasn't using my desktop shortcuts enough and would I like Windows to delete them for me. Fuck no you prying OS - if I want to delete them I'll delete them. Then a few minutes after dismissing the dialog it pooped (heh! made a typo but I prefer it this way) up again asking the same friggin question! Cue a wasted five minutes tracking down the option to turn off this retarded feature...

      Other examples:

      o Do you want to use MSN Messenger? - No! I'm trying to do some work!
      o Your disk looks full, shall Windows fuck around with all your files? - No! I'm doing a build, I am creating temp files, I know I have enough space and I don't need son of clippy telling me what to do!

      Happy at home on OS X where this kind of crap doesn't happen.

      --

      --
      Reverse outsourcing: it's the future
    5. Re:So thats what Task-Based means? by darkpurpleblob · · Score: 1
      Cue a wasted five minutes tracking down the option to turn off this retarded feature...
      Why was it a wasted 5 minutes? Did you not work out how to turn off the feature?
    6. Re:So thats what Task-Based means? by jweatherley · · Score: 1

      Yes I did learn something but it would be even better if the damned 'feature' wasn't there in the first place.

      --

      --
      Reverse outsourcing: it's the future
    7. Re:So thats what Task-Based means? by kommakazi · · Score: 1

      it was wasted because he shouldn't have had to spend five minutes trying to turn the damn thing off.

  58. What did you expect? Paul _always_ pans alternates by leonbrooks · · Score: 4, Funny
    No doubt he'd be among the first to call any alternate OS zealots "religious nutcases", but if you read his articles he's consistently exemplifying exactly that kind of mindless "its-not-one-of-our-teams-so-it-must-be-bad" attitude that he claims for his opponents. No data here folks, move along.

    XP doesn't have a task-based interface, it has a chore-based interface: it makes many otherwise simple things a chore to do. The reason we're seeing Longhorn betas now but no real product for maybe 3 years is because the bits that are important to Microsoft have nothing to do with the shiny new flavour-of-the-year (in particular, last year) blue plastic interface. What Microsoft see as most necessary is the sheaf of bondageware going in behind it. Once the shackles are welded firmly in place, we'll see an official release.

    Three months later, passport.com (and so your Longhorn machine) will be 0wn3d by a Brazilian/Russian/Korean cracker collective who will be running it from their satellite-connected PDA while they blitz around in their shiny new Hummer all funded in part by your credit card - if Microsoft remember to renew the domain registration, that is. By which time all of Asia, Africa, South America and much of Europe will be running Linux anyway, and won't care.

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  59. oh and this just in.... by microcars · · Score: 2, Funny

    The "new" Longhorn Startup Sound!

    --
    I like microcars
    1. Re:oh and this just in.... by tuxedobob · · Score: 1

      Okay, if that (sans gunshot) is really the startup sound for Longhorn, I need to set that one up to play at login.

  60. 'bought it'? HAHAHA!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bill got his last dosh frm me when I updated to Win3.

  61. Its a plug by valstadsve · · Score: 1

    Writing this from my trust(worth)y little Mac. OK, so its a Big Al powerbook, but hey. Anyway:

    Isnt it obvious that this is an astroturfin little fanboy - at best - probably sponsored by the Evil Empire itself? Even if it isnt, doesnt has praise for Longhorn just seem a teensy-weensy bit too similar to marketroid-concocted language devised deep inside the bowels of Mordorsoft itself? Im just sayings all.

    Mac OSX may not be perfect. Longhorn may still be a pipe dream. I may be slobberting drunk. But this is probably a plug, plain and simple. OK?

    Damn and blast. Kjetil

    --
    -- Wake up and XML the Java
  62. Microsoft's previous shot at task-based interface by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

    One word. BOB.

  63. Browser? Bowser! by jefu · · Score: 1
    I get seriously annoyed at windows users who ask me for help when I say "start a browser and we'll search for it in Google" and they say "Whats a browser?"

    Whine.

    Bark!

  64. They won't have a choice with WinFS! by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 1

    Well, depending on how poorly Microsoft implements their database!

    And then there are PC users like this who discover that, perhaps, iTunes might actually be the best Windows app ever. Scroll down to see Gabe's rant about it.

    iTunes, I think, and apps like it, are the future, today. Databases, queries, lookups, distributed, shared, libraries, compact, convenient, and easy to use.

    Yes, not *all* people will be comfortable ceding control of their files and file system to their programs... but it's just one more step in a long line, ever since the invention of inodes, sectors, heads, tracks, and hierarchical file tables.

    1. Re:They won't have a choice with WinFS! by tuxedobob · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I saw the Penny Arcade bit. But I don't actually know him, so I couldn't count him. What I do know, is that my Windows-loving, Apple-hating, Penny Arcade-worshipping ex-friend must have had a fit when he saw that. And the post where Gabe admits he wants Apple stuff (but settles on a monitor.) :)

    2. Re:They won't have a choice with WinFS! by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 1

      Zealotry and dogmatism isn't really of benefit to anyone. It closes doors, options, and real concrete benefits. To be a fan is good, to appreciate something is fine, but hate and worship shouldn't really be attached to inhuman companies, figureheads, PR figures, or products I don't think.

  65. My message to him by afantee · · Score: 2, Funny

    Congratulations, Mr Clueless, you have just made yourself the greatest laughing stock on the Web!

    http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=85904& ci d=0&pid=0&startat=&threshold=0&mode=thread&comment sort=0&op=Change

    How the hell can you say "Longhorn is far more impressive technically than Panther" when Panther is a reality while Longdelayhorn is no more than a blurred vision without even a firm release date and many of its promised features are still in the conceptual stage? In all likelihood, Longdelayhorn may well be Windows 2007, judging by MS track record.

    Even if the slow moving and grass chewing beast exists today, it's still not much more than a also-ran knockoff of Mac OS X in many respects. Let's have a quick look at the 3 pillars of Longdelayhorn:

    (1) Aero / Avalon has nothing new compared to aqua / Quartz: Mac OS X has offered transparency, shadow, animation, 3D effects right from the beginning 3 years ago, and Quartz Extreme in Jaguar only made it faster.

    (2) WinFS: live search that refines as you type is built-in for many OS X apps (Address Book, iTunes, iPhoto, iCal, Mail, Finder, Preview, Xcode), and Finder has its own dynamic database for fast search by name / content / type / size / date / visibility / label.

    (3) Indigo: there are many OS X apps with built-in Web services, Sherlock and Watson have channels for dictionary / translation / eBay / flight / movie / restaurant / etc, and even the humble Calculator can do currency conversion based on live exchange rate on the Web.

    How about other great OS X features like Expose, Finder column view, spring-loaded folder, folder action, system wide spelling check and word completion, speech recognition, and so on?

    Longdelayhorn was initially planned to be Windows 2004, and after so much hype, now MS doesn't even promise a release date, so it could be 2006 or 2007. After that, it will likely take another 2 or 3 years for bug fixing, so your poor Windows victims may have to wait till 2010 for a usable version, what a joke!

  66. Mod Parent Funny, but realize by megabyte405 · · Score: 1

    that it's also insightful...

    --
    I recognize people by their sigs. Is that a bad thing?
  67. Love/Hate... by useosx · · Score: 3, Informative

    ...Would describe my relationship with the Finder.

    But let's not forget ArsTechnica's review of Panther. Nor their thoughts on Panther's Finder.

    Both articles are, of course, written by John Siracusa, but I shouldn't have to mention this because I was in the middle of reading his Panther review last week when I was rudely Slashdotted. Anyway, I tend to agree with his analysis of the situation.

    1. Re:Love/Hate... by useosx · · Score: 1

      Sorry, that second link should read "Jaguar's Finder"

  68. Because somebody had to, by tuxedobob · · Score: 1
    1. Re:Because somebody had to, by tuxedobob · · Score: 1

      Come on! Click on the link before you pass that over!

      Yeah, yeah, yeah. Reply to self and all that jazz.

  69. Sometimes, while saving a document... by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    you see another document with a name that catches your eye, and makes you think that maybe what you're saving this file as is inappropriate (or maybe you're working with and old version of a document by accident), so you want to check out what's in the other file while you've got it RIGHT THERE... so you right click, open in new window, etc.

    Sometimes, when in the act of picking a place to save, I open other files from that directory while I browsing the save dialog. This helps me to file it away appropriately.

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  70. Worst. Article. Ever. by reidconti · · Score: 2, Funny

    Can anybody explain what's with Windows fanboys? I mean, seriously. It's one thing that fans of an "underdog" OS such as OS X or Linux promote their systems.. but who in their right mind thinks a mainstream OS used by 95% of the population needs a cheerleader? Or that Microsoft doesn't do a good enough job promoting their own products? I mean, really. Get a life. Not even the Cult of the Mac spends its time speculating about an OS that's 4+ years out. Hell, the most the Mac crowd does is speculate on the next release, and nobody's even chomping at the bit about 10.4 yet. Who seriously thinks it's important to see Longhorn screenshots in 2002 or 2003? Is there nothing else for these people to get excited about?

    I almost wrote a nasty email to the moron who writes that column, but didn't even know where to start!

    If you're a huge Windows fanatic, OK, maybe you're looking forward to the next release. I can accept that. But honestly, PROMOTING Palladium and other nonsense? This is like music fans helping the RIAA to find people who illegally share music, and then bragging about it!

    This guy is just.. hopelessly pathetic.

    (From a Win95->Linux->OS X convert)

    1. Re:Worst. Article. Ever. by bdhein · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the Cult of the Dead Cow is trying to ensure a stable userbase for their next version of Back Orrifice?

    2. Re:Worst. Article. Ever. by grunherz · · Score: 1

      Is there nothing else for these people to get excited about?

      Um ... no.

      --
      Four weeks, Twenty papers, that's two dollars ... plus tip.
  71. Microsoft Shill by rixstep · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Paul Thurrott is a Microsoft shill. That's right, by some kind of agreement, tacit and silent or outright, he works the market to stay frustations ISVs and techies are having and to promote MS crap at all odds.

    Here's an actual example:

    The general paranoia with Win2K was easy for him to work on. In the weeks immediately prior to release, he came out strongly AGAINST the new OS, knowing that a lot of people had seen the product in beta and were highly suspicious of what was under the bonnet.

    Then the day the monstrosity was released, he came out strongly IN FAVOUR of it.

    I have absolutely no respect for this man. His new article is probably just written to piss Apple people off anyway. That's the kind of thing the arrogant MS crowd find 'fun'.

  72. Paul is such a fucking tool. by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 3, Insightful

    He's worse then some of these "video game reviewers" or the journalists on CNet.

    I mean, not only does he repeat what's fed to him by the MS rumor mills, but he expounds upon it.

    And it's all bullshit rhetoric anyway. I've never seen him post a measly graph or table to back up his claims, anywhere.

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  73. Funny you mention "MacOS LNX" by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    I had suggested to someone the other day, half-jokingly, that I was wondering when they would jump from FreeBSD userland to Linux userland (after having made a quantum leap from 4.3 to 4.6 in Panther).
    Why? It'd get all those Linux (or just SysV) zealots to join the OSX bandwagon. They can apt-get, emerge, and rpm to their heart's content.
    Now I'm wondering if anyone else has seriously thought about that.

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
    1. Re:Funny you mention "MacOS LNX" by steeviant · · Score: 1

      OS X users can already apt-get to their heart's content (albeit for lower values of content) here

  74. This would all be so much more interesting... by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    if Windows Longhorn came with software that enabled the user to take components of applications, forms, folders, etc. + a little web knowhow and CREATE her own activity centers.

    If it's this powerful new metaphor; a huge reason why I should plunk all of this money down for this new OS, then it better come with a kit and lots of components designed specifically so I can actually take advantage of it.

    otherwise it's just another bullet point on a sales presentation. yawn

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  75. 3D Graphics? by rixstep · · Score: 2, Interesting

    One thing is certain: if MS are planning 3D graphics, Apple will beat them anyway, and you don't have to be a Mac user to appreciate this.

    Apple are always going to be in front, and they have their own hardware.

    Positing that MS is somehow ahead of somebody else, when it's not a question of bugs or vulnerabilities, is just ridiculous anyway. It's never happened, it doesn't happen, and it never will happen.

    1. Re:3D Graphics? by afantee · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Apple has beaten them since Jaguar over a year ago.

      Every window in Quartz Extreme is a 3D surface rendered by GPU, to which texture mapping or rotation or shadow can be applied. In fact, for most part Aero / Avalon is just catching up with plain old Quartz. The current Windows graphics engine GDI+ has a single frame buffer shared by all windows, which is why Windows doesn't have transparency / animation / shadow available on OS X since 3 years ago. Window tearing still occurs on even fast 2 or 3 GHz Windows machine, but on the slowest 200 MHz Mac. The problem for MS is that they are still clueless about graphic design other than painting in prime colors, which is why the icons and the color schemes in Longhorn are as disgusting as ever. It just proves the old cliche that money can't buy taste.

    2. Re:3D Graphics? by afantee · · Score: 1

      >> Window tearing still occurs on even fast 2 or 3 GHz Windows machine, but on the slowest 200 MHz Mac.

      No, I mean it doesn't occur on any Mac.

  76. balanced reporting? anyone?!?! by deviator · · Score: 0, Redundant

    "some guy" wrote that he thinks Macs suck. Big deal. Why does slashdot continue to post this drivel, other than to rile people up and make them vent their frustrations with one platform or the other? The guy is obviously foaming at the mouth - yeah, he makes for a "good story" (kinda like those LA car chases) but he's so incredibly biased in one direction (and seemingly trying to convince himself that he's completely right) that his drivel doesn't amount to much.

    Each platform has its strengths and weaknesses. Everyone should do as much as possible to educate themselves about EVERYTHING OUT THERE, instead of just trying to align themselves with one and bash the others. It's as if their identity is defined by their platform of choice. Go outside; meet some people; go travel the world; get a life - don't pin your self worth on some piece of crap software someone wrote.

    me? I use an iBook w/ Panther, a newly upgraded WinXP desktop on an Athlon 2500+, a dual-proc 450MHz PII Netware 6 server, a Linux server, etc. Use the tool that's right for the job.

  77. WinSuperSite.com is notorious for this by AvantLegion · · Score: 2, Insightful
    That website is well-known as a very blatent MS shill.

    Shame on the editors for accepting this "story". We don't need obvious MS shills, Apple shills, Linux shills, etc.

    1. Re:WinSuperSite.com is notorious for this by tuxedobob · · Score: 1

      How about this story?

      I will link this until it is read!

  78. Re:What did you expect? Paul _always_ pans alterna by yRabbit · · Score: 1

    Today, Windows XP and its task-based interface are far superior to anything in Mac OS X.
    Yeah, isn't that basically the same interface that's in 2000, that's in 98, that's in NT, that's in 95? Except it has big pretty buttons. Ooo...

    (So he's saying Windows 95's interface is superior to Mac OS X? Or that if 95 had large control buttons that are skinned, it would then be superior?)

  79. The Good, the Bad and the Ugly ...with music by theolein · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've read a number of articles on Winsupersite, and come to the conclusion that Paul Thurrot really likes Windows. I read the bit where he takes four (4) laptops to the Microsoft PDC 2003 and then it hit me: He doesn't get it. He really doesn't get it. He's been to some of the OSX roll out events and claims that they're every bit as geeky as the Microsoft one's, yet I would be buggered to know why anyone takes 4 laptops (one of them an iBook) to a conference. I was under the impression that the purpose behind a laptop was to minimise one's burdens.

    And that attitude strikes me as the main failing behind almost all Microsoft OSes: Add so many features and doodahs that you kill any attempt at good usability. Can someone explain to me what a sidebar that takes up fully one sixth of the screen is doing there? I appreciate the fact that one would have a calendar, IM and mail notifications and all sorts of other stuff readily available, but wouldn't an improved task tray have solved that problem?

    Crazy.

    The task oriented approach as started in XP works with utter newbies. Doing sys admin, I saw anti-tech types and neophytes get on well with the task oriented approach. As we all know, most normal Windows users will get rid of the task stuff as soon as they can as it is damningly slow to do anything but I think many geeks and developers wildly over estimate the clueless newbie (I saw at least three people never use Windows Explorer and do all their searching and document managment from the Windows open/save dialogs-They didn't even know Windows Explorer existed, let alone know what a network drive or other computer arcana are). For home users and newbies, this is a good idea, make no mistake.

    Apple's approach is make the UI consistent and simple, and is a good middle of the road approach and a better longterm idea, but Windows task stuff also works for newbies.

    The Aero GUI running on the Avalon engine will no doubt be very good, but here too, I have the feeling that MS is going to overdo it in terms of mindlessly long paths to do any task, insane effects and crazy animations (what the fuck is a puppy doing there when I want to find something-- and yes I know you can get rid of it, but how easily?)

    The palladium stuff will also find it's market in that some companies will swear by it. There will be just as many others that will swear at it though. It might very well help in terms of Virus and spam stuff though, but it really remains to be seen if that approach works, since there will be a lot of legacy stuff floating around which is usually where the exploits happen. I'm willing to give MS the benefit of the doubt that they can make the OS more secure by rewriting the whole thing in .Net, but I can see the costs invloved due the MS' hunger for money and control alienating many customers (Who the hell is going to trust MS not to lock them in? How many AV vendors are going to go out of business?)

    I dunno. I think Longhorn will probably be ok in terms of previous OSes, but I think the lock-in will be more painful and costly than before.

  80. LiteStep by yRabbit · · Score: 1

    You could try LiteStep, or other open/free programs, for virtual desktops.
    Windows (at least with TweakUI) allows you to focus windows by moving the mouse over them. Of course, I believe, this caused some problem with "What's this?" tooltips not showing up.
    There are other programs obtainable for window shading, probably for snap-to, and probably most everything else.

    Of course, getting Microsoft to incoporate this themselves is another can of worms. (Except XP does have some kind of virtual desktops, with some downloadable addon.)

  81. Panther is SLOW by willigis · · Score: 1

    I have switched fromm PC to MAC 2 years ago and I agree with the criticisms. OS X is terribly slow on a G3 machine with 680 MB of RAm. The Mail application looking for addresses 20 seconds per message was a joke. Now Panther has improved things a bit, but basically Apple has lost the software was when they admitted that Mac OS was obsolete and moved back to Unix. The OS X user interface has been made up from scratch, with some innivations but without the benefit of the long experience in dealing with directories that Windows has. For instance the iTunes "library" is associated in a totally arcane way to where the music files are located. Try to copy or move your Mp3's around outside of iTunes and the whole things gets lost. However you cannot MOVE your files (for instance from a hard disk to another) from within iTunes. You can only change your itunes directory, but there is no option to move all or some of your files there. I do agree that there is too much waporware at Apple.

    1. Re:Panther is SLOW by MoneyT · · Score: 1

      Not to feed trolls but:

      a) Learn how to spell and type

      b) What do you mean looking for addresses for 20 seconds?

      c) Apple did not move BACK to UNIX, because Apple never used UNIX before.

      d) You can very easily move music from one location to another outside of iTunes all the time and it works perfectly.

      e) As for within iTunes, why do you want to move files arround your HDD from withinn a music player?

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    2. Re:Panther is SLOW by willigis · · Score: 1

      Thanks for your comments. Let me deal with Points b) (mail/address) and d) (itunes). mail.app looks to "add contact to address book" every time you send an email. Even if the address has been used 100 times. Under Jaguar this took a Very long time. In my case more than 20 seconds for each email. There is a lot discussed about this in the forums (not just by us trolls) and a program has even been posted to patch it up (it is called Mailtuner). Under Panther it is much better, but my system after only 2 weeks starts slowing down again. I never had such wait times using Outlook. Regarding iTunes, I had to move to an external drive several songs in order to save space on my laptop and very simply iTunes lost track of them after I moved them. If I ask to "consolidate" the Library, they get copied back to my laptop. There is no way to move them from inside iTunes as you know. Perhaps there is a better way to do this and I am grateful in advance for any suggestion. thanks GS

    3. Re:Panther is SLOW by MoneyT · · Score: 1

      it may be possible that something is wrong with your adress book file because I've never seen this problem on either.

      As for iTunes, I beleive that if you move the songs to a seperate disk, it looses track of the song because of the nature of the file system. iTunes itself doesn't have a direct link to where the file is, instead as I understand it (though I may be wrong) the computer has a sort of central map to point to where all the files are, and programs that need to access files access the map for the file location. But you can try this, first make sure that in the iTunes preferences, the option to copy songs into the music folder when adding them to your library is unchecked. Then physicaly drag and drop (or file -> add) the songs on the external disk to yoru library.

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    4. Re:Panther is SLOW by good+soldier+svejk · · Score: 1
      c) Apple did not move BACK to UNIX, because Apple never used UNIX before.

      Apparently you never encountered A/UX, Apple's ass kicking System V implementation (literally UNIX). It sported a System 7-like GUI and ran System 7, A/UX and unix/X11 software.

      Apple also used to be the main sponsor and developer of MkLinux, the PowerPC implementation of GNU/Linux over Mach. Not unix of course, but a unix-like OS for sure.
      --
      It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man

      -James Baldwin
  82. Microsoft continues to suck by line.at.infinity · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From the site's activity center page:
    Other Activity Center considerations
    Microsoft is looking at a variety of other issues with regards to Activity Centers. For example, Web pages are notoriously difficult to navigate with the keyboard, but Activity Centers will need to be accessible to all users. So links in Activity Center won't be underlined, and the ALT+ method of selecting Win32 user interface elements will be supported using proprietary HTML extensions that Microsoft developed for Internet Explorer. Likewise, localization is going to be an issue, as Microsoft derives over half of its income outside of the United States. This also requires a number of proprietary extensions to HTML.

    Microsoft will continue to bastardize the HTML standard.
  83. Default Folder for Mac OS X does all this and more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://stclairsoftware.com/
    Perhaps Apple should have included this is OS X - but I like the idea of letting independent developers make some money in innovative ways.

    About the finder - OS X is incomplete without Default Folder. Period.

  84. GUYS! Just get Default Folder! by ameropean · · Score: 1

    Default folder is the stuff. I've never been keen on Apple's weak Open/Save dialog either. With Default Folder you get five icons down the side of your Open/Save dialog, they do much, Get Info, Rename, Priveleges, Trash, New folder, Rebound to last folder, Favorites, all these folders are hierchical. Also there is click on finder window [to go there]. All these have key commands.

    Check it out:
    http://www.stclairsoft.com/DefaultFolderX/index.ht ml

    =D

    --
    +++++ Never has so much information been so available to so many for so little.
  85. Re:Speaking of which, it IS helpful! by burgess · · Score: 1

    chill out, it's actually helpful, not like it's a BAD thing just because explorer has one good feature ... except maybe to people who are scared of features with function that they don't 0wn!

    just saved a web graphic ... dunno where the foo u just saved it (because u pressed 'ok'). go file->open or file->save to save the next image, and u can also explorer-open the folder the images are in from within the save dialog.

    i would totally love this feature in mosx OR linux, but the absence of it just means i have to find other means to look at the containing folder, not switch back to win95.

    explorer had this feature in win95, eight years ago, via the context menu, and it's still absent on any desktop un*x i've seen. that doesn't make win95 better than your flavourite OS, it just means it can do one thing yours can't ... so drop the flame and get coding i guess ;)

  86. (more importantly, the Linux ABI, dev interfaces) by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    glibc on linux? Who would have thunk it.

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  87. Task Based Blah Blah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Yes, as demonstrated below Micro$oft's "task based" shit is obviously much better at wasting your time and your screens prescious pixels than Apple could ever hope to.

    Here OS News shows how you need a full 1280X1024 window to view a handful of contacts, PLUS another rather large window to actually view one contacts details(note you must actually scroll through this "detail" window to actually see more details than what is shown in the larger, yet still useless window).

    While unfortunately you are forced to use Panthers Address Book which only takes up ~590X400px which gives you all the same information as M$ contacts plus more. Not to mention that to actually do a "task" you just fucking DO it instead of start a lame "wizard".

    As a double bonus OS X users don't have to view pictures of gay playskool dolls as their contacts portraits.

  88. Re:Default Folder for Mac OS X does all this and m by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    It's great that you like independent developers to make some money.

    Too bad that Apple doesn't.

  89. reiserfs 4 by perlchild · · Score: 1

    I doubt reiserfs invented this concept, but reiserfs is a released software that has been designed, among other things, for database-in-the-filesystem-through-plugins.
    It's such a small world

  90. The Onion by Refrag · · Score: 1

    I think you guys are confused. The Onion just publishes deliciously wonderful satire. Everything you quoted is simply their trademark wit. It's easy for someone that's never read The Onion to mistake it for sincere commentary.

    Oh wait, this wasn't in The Onion?

    --
    I have a website. It's about Macs.
    1. Re:The Onion by tuxedobob · · Score: 1

      No, but did you see my previous comment? What I "wrote" could be.

  91. En vogue by zpok · · Score: 3, Insightful

    While I think the author is full of it, comparing non-existing OS's is sort of "in".

    Jobs on OSX whatever going to be superior to Longhorn when it finally hits the real world is king, second everybody talking about the Linux Desktop - ok, that's a joke! - Gates on the superior safety of Longhorn - which could be considered a joke? - and so on ...

    Oh well, each to his own and whatever gets it up...

    But as I an XP user (and one time fan) wrote me this weekend: "Things got a little better with iTunes, makes me wonder why we put up with this. And how on earth could I have ever liked WMP? It's bud-ugly and stupid! This whole OS is ugly and stupid, man, I need a drink!"

    --
    I think, therefore I am...I think.
  92. Re:What did you expect? Paul _always_ pans alterna by Warhaven · · Score: 1
    "...but no real product for maybe 3 years..."


    To compare Longhorn to any current operating system is moot, as three years is indeed a LONG time for development. There will probably be at least two or three more major updates to the general *nix population, and without a dout, at least 1 more major revamp of OS X (a complete 64-bit native version for sure). And saying 1-3 major updates is being conservative.
  93. In summary by inkswamp · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I recently read a good article that alludes to the whole Mac vs. Windows thing and the author had an excellent quote:

    "After a week with a Windows machine I get the feeling that this system is designed by people who know a lot about computers. Macs, on the other hand, seem to be designed by people who know a lot about people."

    That pretty much sums it up right there for me. Apple will continue to appeal to those who like machines designed with a person in mind while Windows users will tend to want something that pushes technology boundaries whether that's useful or not. Any Mac user who gripes about Windows having a lousy interface is missing the point of being a Windows user. Any Windows user who gripes about Apple's technology lagging is missing the point of being a Mac user. I prefer the latter, but that's me. I find the real key to productivity is not cutting-edge technology but logical design.

    --
    --Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
  94. Re:(more importantly, the Linux ABI, dev interface by steeviant · · Score: 1

    Huh?

  95. might be great but won't be used... by diablo943 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Longhorn might turn out to be a great OS, but there is a growing list of governments (like Brazil, Vietnam, and even the EU) that have decided that all the pain and dangers that come with using a Microsoft product aren't worth it and are transitioning to Open Source.

    After everything Microsoft users have been through this year, I am still amazed ANYONE uses anything from Microsoft!

    On the other hand... it has been a great year to be a Mac users!

    --
    The line between terrorist and patriot depends on which side of the molatov cocktail you are on.
  96. Paul Thurrott by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Let me tell you something about Paul Thurott. This man runs not one, but two of the biggest "Windows-enthusiast" sites out there, namely WinSuperSite and WinInformant. Astroturfing at its finest, and yet he seems to have the money to do this.

    He rips so many design concepts on these sites from the Microsoft Web pages that frankly there is only one possible explanation for their not having sued him into oblivion: namely, that he is on their payroll. His claims to be "independent" make this even more likely; Microsoft has done exactly this in the past, after all.

  97. Re:What did you expect? Paul _always_ pans alterna by the+web · · Score: 1

    No doubt he'd be among the first to call any alternate OS zealots "religious nutcases"...

    Speaking from a religious point of view. My extended religious experience has proven time and time again that he who fights with religious slander is in fact the only zealot in the room.

    Think about who will be the first in a room to condemn "all fags to hell" and other associated rhetoric. While the normal people sit back and wonder what is wrong with this guy?

    No offense to the gays out there, I like gays, they're the life of the party, and us strait guys could sure take some hygene tips from them.

    --
    __
    Thou hast besquirted me, O leotarded one.
  98. One would hope... by nocturbulous · · Score: 0, Redundant

    ... that software coming out in 18 months time or so is superior to today's offerings.

  99. About Paul Thurrot's points. by theolein · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No, it's not some MS troll, but some thoughts after reading Paul Thurrot's blog and website, and all the points he makes (I mentioned some of this further down) and want to expand on it.

    I don't think Paul Thurrot is a complete idiot. He really likes Windows, obviously, and seems to feel that MS has more to offer than Linux or Mac OSX. He does use both Linux and OSX and quite rightly points out some of the deficiencies that creep into OSX and Linux, albeit from the point of view of someone who has decided on which side of the fence he's sitting (Microsoft 4 ever).

    He obviously, in light of his Windows bias, likes to point out problems, both existant and non existant in the two other OSes, such as the non-issue that Apple wasn't going to supply security fixes to Jaguar, and the initial problems with Panther Firewire and Filevault (there have been many of us on Mac forums that were really worried about this) and takes issue with Apple releasing a patch so quickly for those issues (would he have preferred waiting for a month?). He also points out general unhappiness with RH's Feodora (which Linux reviewers seem to agree with). He goes on to complain that the smallest iBook doesn't have the fastest processor as compared to the smallest Powerbook (why don't you just buy a 12" Powerbook then Paul?)

    He also seems to see Longhorn as the next big thing in computing, and I for one agree that MS is probably going to have some pretty interesting features in it (the compositing, WinFS and multiple simultaneous users in the GUI for example) and it will probably be quite polished by the time it gets released.

    Yet, he doesn't seem to see any problems with Microsoft's business practices, such as the fact that Longhorn Pro will only allow two simultaneous user sessions at once (Someone should tell him about Xwindows networking) and that the DRM features, while probably providing improved security will almost certainly cause havoc in companies that have a mix of older and newer software and will make lock-in even more odious than it is today as it will lock out any standards based mail or document system.

    And this is what bothers me about so much of Microsoft's business: The OS (in Win2k and XP) has gotten to be reasonably stable and reliable and one cannot really argue the fact that so much software/games/hardware platforms etc are available, but Microsoft's decided lack of interest in real security (software vulnerability versus product activation i.e. Quality vs. Quantity) until the amount of derision in the press became overwhelming is a point in fact. Longhorn will be full of new features and will probably work well on then existing hardware, but one will by then almost certainly be tied into multiple DRM systems and I am willing to bet that MS will try it's subscription idea on home users again at some point.

    It's a question of trust at the end of the day. Do I trust an OS that is completely open (Linux), mostly open (OSX), or mostly closed and locked up (Windows)?

    I made my decision. I'm running OSX on my Powerbook.

  100. What was all that about the desktop metaphor? by Aqua+OS+X · · Score: 1

    This guy does not understand that displaying tasks and process is not the same as the "desktop metaphor." Longhorn STILL uses a desktop metaphor (trust me, I'm an interface designer). It had files, it has folders, and it has a desktop. However, Microsoft has seemingly chosen to rearrange the ways people access frequently used tasks within the desktop metaphor GUI.

    Apple has done similar things within OS X. Apple has also looked for new ways to present tasks and processes to users. However, Apple's approaches are usually significantly different then Microsofts.

    --
    "Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
  101. s/glibc on linux/glibc on Mac OS/ by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    glibc is supposedly portable, but in fact runs ONLY on linux. It would be neat if it ran on MacOS (but only because the Linux ABI came over, so it's sort of like cheating).

    Eh. Not funny anyway. Ah well.

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
    1. Re:s/glibc on linux/glibc on Mac OS/ by steeviant · · Score: 1

      glibc is supposedly portable

      Oh you mean like my PowerBook with a dud battery? :D

  102. Well, I just wanna know if with Longhorn I can... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    - Stil have my pr0n?
    - Make a beowulf cluster?
    - Have a task on the desktop that says "Welcome our new Longhorn Overlords"?

    Thanks.

  103. "This new user interface, or 'user experience'..." by Zhe+Mappel · · Score: 1
    Did the Pod People take over Paul Thurrott's mind?

    Phrases like This new user interface, or 'user experience'... are not...of...this...earth.

  104. Longhorn Cowpies by jo42 · · Score: 1

    "Windows User Flings Longhorn Cowpies at Mac OS X"

    News at 11 - in 2007 when Longhorn is finally available on shiny cowpie shaped discs...

  105. Hygeine tips? by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

    What, like "don't get your dipstick dirty" or "don't bust any blood vessels in your butt"? (-:

    Sounds like going to Bill Gates for advice on security.

    Is it just me, or is it becoming fashionable to bend every thread to make a political correctness point these days?

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
    1. Re:Hygeine tips? by the+web · · Score: 1

      No, I mean like their personal hygene. Their fingernails are sublime! And without becoming to metrosexual here, their sense of style can also be considered "top notch".

      --
      __
      Thou hast besquirted me, O leotarded one.
  106. Still there... by WiseWeasel · · Score: 1

    FBC (Find By Content) is alive and well in MacOS X. Not that I've ever used it, since I keep my docs organized, and can always find the one I'm looking for by name (systematic naming schemes help a lot!), or sorting by date. It's up to the various document editing apps to have database functionality. Adobe is catching onto this with their File Viewer thing in Photoshop, and MS could do worse than to implement this into the various Office apps, possibly as an upgraded Open/Save dialog (or an option therein). How could a filesystem's database possibly be complex enough to handle all different kinds of files in any meaningful manner, and yet be practical to use and context-sensitive enough to be more productive than the status quo? I think Apple was spot-on with iTunes as a 'Music Management Solution'. What is needed are management solutions for other kinds of files. iPhoto is definitely not there for images as it is too hard to add pictures to the iPhoto library, and it seems focused on integrating with digital still cameras instead of all pictures. Movies are going to be tough with all the incompatible and proprietary formats in widespread use. Word processing documents are best handled by the app that created them, since they also commonly use proprietary formats (though this might become easier with XML-based word docs, as long as they aren't encrypted). This database-filesystem vaporware for Longhorn is obviously going to be a poorly-implemented hack that doesn't really solve any problems, as evidenced by Microsoft's track record in marketable features vs. usability enhancements.

    --
    "I like systems, their application excepted", George Sand (French)
  107. Two can play! by catdevnull · · Score: 1

    Heh, looks like Ballmer and Gates have their own "reality distortion field" to compete with Steve's :)

    --

    I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
    1. Re:Two can play! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I've always thought Microsoft employees had much more of a reality distortion field than Apple ever did, though to be fair, I've never really dealt with an Apple person directly. One of the most obvious reality distortions they have is that they still insist that Microsoft is not a monopoly even though the courts have said so, there's a popular consensus that this is the case, and it just seems so obvious to everybody that doesn't work for MS.

      There are legitimate criticisms to make about Macs, which are still too expensive, not fast enough, have an irritating mouse, a vanished Apple menu, a crappy Dock, and a general feeling of being a graphical shell on Unix and not graphical at heart, like the original Mac. Anything from Paul Thurrott just isn't worth paying attention to, as he doesn't write much above the level of braying, juvenile flames.

  108. Re:Speaking of which, it IS helpful! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    just saved a web graphic ... dunno where the foo u just saved it (because u pressed 'ok'). go file->open or file->save to save the next image

    No. Just hold down the "command" key on the title bar of the window. Up pops a menu showing you the path to the file you just saved. Or, if you prefer, click-and-drag the title bar icon.

    You shitwits just don't know how to use a Mac, that's all.

  109. Windows what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok. To the point here.

    OSX gives you a terminal. Windows 0, Apple 1
    OSX gives you control over your computer from the nuts and bolts, yet keeps this JUST out of reach of those who don't know what they are doing (mom and dad at 40+ y/o) to screw up the computer. Windows 0, Apple 2

    OSX makes networking seemless .. almost. I find it rather annoying that Windows makes its almost cryptic in its 'home" wireless network kits. Do this, do that, do this, do that, reboot, do this, do that. Its rather tedious to be honest. Apple puts the wireless ( and the future for that matter) in the status bar. The only Windows distributor that puts this into perspective is possibly Linksys with the nice almost... easy interface in the task-bar for Windows machines. Network is cake in OSX through interface.
    Windows 0, Apple 3.

    Geek features:
    OSX gives you the BEST GUI for a Unix machine than ANY OTHER OS ON EARTH! Being a linux user for some time now ( Redhat 4.2 was my first experience) and a KDE v.1->v.3 on Solaris of all OS's at work ... I have SUCH an appreciation for what Apple has done, its just sick. Try putting Aqua on Solaris. Nuts. The only other thing that MAY make Windows workable is the explorer.exe shell skin system that I've seen a number of third party companies give us. Microsoft does some "ok" user management, but with the base of what Unix has given Apple to work with over 40+ years, almost of the BEST user philisophy on the planet ... works great.
    Windows 0, Apple .. ah fuck it.. you know where I'm going with this.

    Try installing an application in Windows. Unless you've setup user privilages ... its useless. You overwrite files in the c:\windowsxxx\ directories ... I mean, does an Apple application rake over /root ? Don't think so. User management in OSX is very nice. Its built on a foundation of kick ass solid base fundimentals.

    Basically ... if you notice ... more Linux users are switching to OSX than Windows users. That's a fact. Even Tim O'Rielly admits this and NOTICES this.

    Windows lacks the security .. no matter how hard they try an patch stuff or try and "re-engineer" the system to make it work right. They have billion-line code base that just wasn't really meant to scale like this.

    Longhorn may offer a lot of users in the Windows world a more "pleasurable" experience for the eyes, but Microsoft just doesn't know how to paradyme shift to the "ideals" of a true system that Unix brings to the table.

    I would be interested in switching "BACK" to a Windows base computer, but it just provides more headache than I'm willing to "deal" with. At 28, I've given then 5 years of my life and two certifications to prove I "know" how to use Windows. I still fine "Windows" MCSEs to be basically useless in practicle solutions and problem solving on a low level. Microsoft is creating a brain trust that deviates from the ideals of a free society where information about a "system" is closed.

    They just don't get it. Sure, you may give us less icons and a better "experience", but so did Hitler to the German youth. He moves Germany out of a depression and into the one of the most powerful economies of its time and raised the ideals of a people that were in desperately needing of a "new" fresh change.

    Thank you Microsoft for being that change in the 80's and maybe pushing the envelope of the early mid to late 90's.

    However just like Hitler and his twisted time and ideals... its just time for you to step down and realize that people won't deal with you when you start to passify the youth of our colleges and educated society. We are smarter than that.

    Sure, we love what you've done with the place, but the signs on the wall that you've placed and the flags you wave are false hope for an everyly higher reaching "Free" educated society sees what you are doing.

  110. This is posted so we can feel better about us by mpitcavage · · Score: 1

    To email this guy explaining his error is about as worthwhile as talking to the members of Heaven's Gate in April 1997. I think this article was posted so some of us could focus our anger on an obviously deserving target and so the rest of us could just be aware that there are such freakishly twisted views out there.

    -karma neutral- but give it time...

  111. ...or excessively punk... by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

    ...in some cases. (-:

    I strongly suspect that in the case of male homosexuals this is a consequence of constantly wondering (fearing) how people see them, and possibly also a consequence of being forced by their lifestyle to examine a few basic factors in their lives. WRT that last item, they seem to often react to their circumstances by either becoming extremely observant, or by becoming very unwilling to question anything (presumably in case they get embarrassing answers).

    In female homosexuals, trends towards using practical clothing and footwear instead of the hopelessly impractical gear which fashion dictates to femmes might be explicable through similar reasoning.

    I know utterly straight examples of both boot-wearing femmes and appearance-conscious BEMs.

    In consequence, I occasionally wonder what would happen if we were all taught to regularly sit down and take census of our lives.

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
    1. Re:...or excessively punk... by the+web · · Score: 1

      Personally, I think that if people spend more time on introspection we'd have a lot less anti-depressant commercials to sit through. In general most people become short-sighted of what they have attained/accomplished in their lives. It's very difficult to NOT focus on negative things. It's also very easy to fall into the trap of only seeing the bad in everyone. Fear the worst.

      The evening news is a microcosm of this. When was the last time you heard on the news that 120 000 mothers in your local city, still love their children. No, instead we hear about the one who abuses her own on a daily basis.

      Now THAT'S digressing!

      --
      __
      Thou hast besquirted me, O leotarded one.
    2. Re:...or excessively punk... by leonbrooks · · Score: 1
      Now THAT'S digressing!

      Really? You must be new here... <G/D/RVVF>

      --
      Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  112. Perhaps that appeal is changing... by frankmanowar · · Score: 1
    Im not an apple evangelist, I hated all Mac OS thru 9, but once I had a good whiff of 10 I picked up my powerbook... the point (im getting there) is that I use it because the OS is SO inclined to pushing the boundaries of technology - wireless ethernet just works, all the time, i have a UNIX SubSystem! And it's PHAT with and F! Awesome graphics, use of memory, I do a lot of systems development and programming for a win/mac/sun/linux network and I have to tell you my ability to develop rapidly, with ease, pleasure and KY would be greatly hindered by using windows for anything other than verifying that CSS displays properly in win browsers (blargh!)

    i don't need to use cygwin to compile common and standard GNU source code, my system logs can be displayed embedded in my desktop! (lookup GeekTool on version tracker, if you don't know, now you know foo'!) These are not capabilities that will appeal to the traditional mac user! i think with Mac OS X, Apple is making a commitment to have the all-around top desktop OS - perfect for nerdliness if you want it, and beautiful and easy to use for your parents!

    --

    "Other bands play, but Manowar KILLS"
  113. Forgot AIX by good+soldier+svejk · · Score: 1

    Apple also shipped PPC servers running AIX under license from IBM. They have a rich unix history.

    --
    It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man

    -James Baldwin
  114. Paul wrote back to me twice, ahhh by power+panda · · Score: 1

    Yes I now have celebrity email, cool (yes I know, lowest form of wit!) Do you want to read, I guess I just didn't have enough energy to argue with this guy! Dear Paul, > > > > > > > > You are clearly delusional with regards to your opinion of OSX. I > > > > regularly use both XP and osX panther and it seems clear that osx > > > > has ease of use features that are not included with XP, such as > > > > expose and a greater overiding simplicity when compared > > to windows > > > > and classic mac os. Someone who was only familar with > > windows could > > > > make such a bizarre statement. XP is a better OS product than > > > > previous versions of windows primarily due to stability > > > > improvements, however the interface has changed very little since > > > > 1995 and I fail to see any practical improvements. > > > > Everyone is of course entitled to an opinion. > > > > > > > > Best Regards > > > > > > > > Dr Chris Welsby Then He wrote back: Paul Thurrott wrote: > > > > > > Thanks for writing. I agree with your last comment. But > > you'll have to > > > supply better ease of use arguments than Expose, which needs to be > > > first found and then enabled before you can use it (thus, it's not > > > discoverable or, ahem, easy to use); XP offers simpler > > > window-clutter-removal tech (task button grouping) and it's on by > > > default. And saying OS X has "greater overiding [sic] > > simplicity" is > > > sort of baseless, if you'll excuse me. What does that mean? If it > > > means fewer features, OK, there's a case there. It's certainly less > > > busy than XP. But OS X offers users no starting point at > > all, and no help along the way. > > > > > > XP offers an evolutionary interface over previous Windows versions, > > > but offers context-sensitive task panes that change > > depending on which > > > content you're working with. If you view a folder full of > > song files > > > for example, or select a song file, the task pane changes > > to offer you > > > options related to that file type. OS X has nothing like this. > > > > > > I'll be posting an article to the SuperSite later this week that > > > explains this further. But it's a fact that Microsoft has > > evolved--and > > > continues to evolve--the desktop OS paradigm beyond > > anything Apple has > > > done. I know that's not what Apple people are used to > > hearing, but it's true. > > > > > > Don't get me wrong: OS X is a great OS (the claims of me > > "slamming" it > > > are unfounded). But under the glitz, it's just a pretty > > classic desktop OS. > > > There really aren't many "ease of use" improvements per se, > > unless you > > > count the stuff Apple has done over the past few years > > correctly the > > > problems it introduced in the first OS X release, let alone > > new usage > > > models, such as the iterative and task-based work Microsoft > > has done. > > > > > > Paul This did cheese me off a tad so I summond up enough energy for a reply: HI Paul, > > > > Well thanks very much for the quick reply. I hear what you > > are saying and don't get me wrong either, XP is a very > > capable system. > > I am not sure there is any point in countering your responses > > with regards ease of use since your response has hilighted > > what I guess is a sort of philisophical difference between > > our expectations of a system. > > I considered expose as an ease of use feature because it > > makes life easier. I understand your point about it not being

    1. Re:Paul wrote back to me twice, ahhh by power+panda · · Score: 1

      Please accuse the annoying > that have appeared throughout my post and dont ask why. Thanks

    2. Re:Paul wrote back to me twice, ahhh by power+panda · · Score: 1

      It really was a cut and paste disaster. If you can be bother to read all that text, what do you think?

  115. You forgot to ask . . . by bob_calder · · Score: 1

    WHAT RETARD Modded that crap to interesting? He sadi he could have been enjoying Longhorn! Didn't he read the part about non-existant? I have 28 Apple machines running 10.3 from one graphite (400 mhz 256 meg ram) to a bunch of new iMacs and dual processor G4s with a gig of ram each and one lonely G5 and one G4 laptop. Let's not even talk about what I don't like about the weird IP handler that returns the zero config address across the network on port 80. Whining about the lack of a registry or the directory browser is so . . . ugh! What kind of performance do they expect on a system that makes its display out of PDFs? How long does it take to render a complex page to PDF on his WIN machine? at this point it will take about a year and a half on longhorn. :))

    --
    Any preoccupation with ideas of what is right or wrong in conduct shows an arrested intellectual development. (Wilde)
  116. Paul isn't as reasonable as he in this letter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just so you know, Paul isn't as conciliatory on his web sites as he is in this letter... Aside from his hack Windows "journalism" site, he runs another completely gross web site which is an almost pure anti-Mac flame page that would be considered immature by middle school students. Honestly, all his disingenuous protests aside, he just really loathes the Mac for no apparent reason other than it doesn't come from Microsoft and sheer bigotry. So no point in writing him.

    1. Re:Paul isn't as reasonable as he in this letter by power+panda · · Score: 1

      Your're not wrong!
      The internet Nexus site is pretty negative but strangely features mainly articles on macs!?
      The guy has a fixation on them.
      Maybe he is a closet lover!

  117. Two can play this game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Iv decided to write my own article

    The Mac OS of programmers yet unborn is superior to Windows Longhorn

    It is true Microsoft has finally figured out how to get some basic things in Longhorn to work, the soothing music when a virus hits is my favorites feature, for example. But we must realize that Windows is a classic OS that doesn't anything of new usability, well, ya except the soothing music when a virus strikes. So you can see why this upcoming Mac OS is superior, it doesn't exist yet so you cant prove me wrong! Har Har! With this nonexistent Mac OS anything can be possible, so it is more technically impressive than Windows Longhorn.

  118. Re:What did you expect? Paul _always_ pans alterna by sniggly · · Score: 1

    Yes a native 64 bit osx running on a stripped down IBM POWER5. OSX might be not just a better OS by the time longhorn comes out, but also one that runs on much faster hardware. I haven't really seen anything from Intel or AMD that looks as promising as what IBM is doing.

    --
    Of those to whom much is given, much is required.