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.'"

79 of 408 comments (clear)

  1. 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 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.

    4. 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.

    5. 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.

  2. 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 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! :-)

    3. 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.

    4. 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.
    5. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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.

  5. 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 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
  6. 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 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!
    2. 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.
  7. 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 Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
  8. 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: 2, Funny

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

      --
      I stole this Sig
  9. 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?

  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?

  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.
  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 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

  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 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.

  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.

  15. *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
  16. 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.
  17. 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...

  18. 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"

  19. 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 :)

  20. 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.

  21. 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.
  22. 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
  23. geez... by microcars · · Score: 5, Funny

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

    --
    I like microcars
  24. 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...

  25. 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
  26. 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.
  27. 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!"

  28. 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?

  29. 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.

  30. 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.

  31. 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
  32. 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?

  33. 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.

  34. 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
  35. 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.
  36. 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 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...

  37. 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
  38. 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."

  39. oh and this just in.... by microcars · · Score: 2, Funny

    The "new" Longhorn Startup Sound!

    --
    I like microcars
  40. 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.
  41. 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

  42. 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!

  43. 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.

  44. 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).

  45. 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)

  46. 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.

  47. 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'.

  48. 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
  49. Re:Speaking of which, by sapporoitchy · · Score: 2, Informative

    Launchbar

  50. 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.

  51. 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.

  52. 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.

  53. 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.
  54. 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.
  55. 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."
  56. 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.
  57. 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.

  58. 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.