Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Nonexistent Windows OS Superior to Panther

Posted by pudge on from the i-like-pie dept.

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.'"

21 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.

  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 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.
    2. 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. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. 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.

  7. 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?

  8. 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?

  9. 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.

  10. 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
  11. geez... by microcars · · Score: 5, Funny

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

    --
    I like microcars
  12. 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.
  13. 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!"

  14. 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?

  15. 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.

  16. 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.