Slashdot Mirror
OS X Vs. Vista — In Spandex
An anonymous reader writes "CNET UK compares Vista Vs. Apple OS X in a Romeo and Juliet, spandex-wearing, Shakespearean English style. Two guys dress up as their favorite operating system and fight with swords, guns, and fists, while a third guy, dressed as a woman, awaits the winner. 'Usability - Act 3, Scene 2: Swords clash, sparks fly and men grunt, but the showdown ends in stalemate ... [Vista] has a far better user interface than XP -- the file and application search facility is vastly improved and the cascading Start menu has been banished, but it only takes a few moments of use to discover pointless idiosyncrasies. Microsoft constantly reminds us of how great Flip 3D is, but this feature doesn't help us find the right application window much faster than Alt-Tab did. It's very time consuming when you have many application windows to flip through, and it's in no way as efficient as OS X's Exposé feature ... We're calling this one a draw. They're just as good as each other, and in some cases just as bad -- a pox upon both your houses! Score: Mac OS X - 2, Windows Vista - 2'"
[Vista] has a far better user interface than XP -- the file and application search facility is vastly improved and the cascading Start menu has been banished, but it only takes a few moments of use to discover pointless idiosyncrasies.
XP's searching capabilities are shite compared to Windows 2000. What the hell is up with that stupid dog image when using the XP search? So it's better to compare Vista's searching with that of Windows 2000. At least then you're comparing Vista's capabilities against something that's usable.
Same with the Start menu. It's really simple and sensible under Windows 2000. But then XP came along and made it really awkward to use. So again, don't compare against XP, since it was a step backwards. Compare against Windows 2000!
I don't see Vista as having a "far better" user interface. In fact, compared to Windows XP and the basic configuration things, Vista requires traveling through a lot more menus and clicks to get where you want to get.
Apart from Vista's new eyecandy UI, it's pretty much the same deal. Sure, there's a neat thing here and there - like the disk space bars and renaming files when you have viewing extensions on. Other then that, I don't see all that much of a difference.
It's not a terrible thing, I mean - Windows XP has a very decent UI.
- It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
Everyone knows OS X is derived from Mach and BSD and has nothing to do with Linux. But then anyone who would consider Vista equal to it probably spent more time dressing up and playing with swords than reviewing the products anyways.
I believe you are hitting a sore point for many. The tireless ability of people to call MS products the 'standard' that all other products should emulate is, in a word, tiring.
Even if you invent something better than Windows it will still be compared to Windows and declared lame because it isn't Windows. This is what Apple and the Linux distributions are up against. As pointed out, it's arguably fair to say that Vista isn't the best product that MS has ever rolled out, yet it's the new 'standard' that people will use.
Reviewers shouldn't be comparing OSs head to head. They should be comparing them to a neutral set of standards that judge ease of use, performance, stability etc. If the top score possible on such a test is 10, and Vista only gets an 8 it is no longer 'the' standard, at which point people can make the decision for themselves. If both Apple and Microsoft only get an 8, then the choice between them is one of taste, not perceived performance.
In that vein, if a Linux distro only got a 6, well, it lets the community in general know what to fix next.
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
Yeah, that makes sense. The PC people should pick up on these little usability things and put the eject button directly next to the power button, which doesn't require holding the command key to turn the machine off. Or they could have you eject by deleting the drive. That makes perfect sense. Or, even better, don't put an eject button anywhere and only have an eject button on the keyboard. That's exactly where I'd expect to find it. Opening the drive when it doesn't have media in it should be a scavenger hunt!
Just because you happen to be used to the stupid idiosyncracies in the Mac interface doesn't mean that the Mac method is in any way better.
I don't follow you at all. XP/Vista's design are bad because hitting a key called delete prompts for you to answer did you mean to delete the item(S) and if you click yes it does?
But to delete under OS X i hold command and delete and that makes more sense?
A user sees a delete key, they assume when they press it the computer will confirm they want to delete the item. THey accept/dent and the action occurs.
Again I am not 100% sure what your point is.
The real issue is user complaints not head on comparisons. Most people aren't objective in head on comparisons so they tend to be more about reviewers preference than which is a superior OS. There have been significant customer complaints about Vista where as few if any about Leopard. It's impossible to tell until the final release but all looks good for OSX Leopard. In comparison people are more and more comparing Vista to ME. What other standard is there than customer satisfaction? Comparing the OSs is completely pointless. It'd make more sense comparing OSX and Linux. Vista isn't all bad I'm sure but it's hardly all good. The very fact large numbers of users especially businesses are resisting the shift to Vista and plan to use XP as long as possible is a bad sign. I think you'll find no resistence to Leopard. Which is better will be argued until the next Microsoft OS is released when the arguments will begin anew. The real decider is who is happiest. The vast majority of Mac users are happy where as Vista users seem on the whole very unhappy. You decide.
So you mean precisely in the same way that Windows does it.
I, on the other hand, just prefer to right click.
And for those of you who think that right mouse buttons are not confusing, you need to watch normal people use computers. I work in a school and my job is to train teachers how to use computers. Most teachers can't follow simple instructions like "right-click on the desktop". Also, left-handed teachers have to share computers with right-handed teachers (and students too). Don't tell me that telling a left-handed user to "right-click" on something isn't confusing. Come work with me for a day.
I would just ask if you are going to criticize something, please get the easy facts straight first.
"What happens if the user isn't paying attention and they[sic] . . ."
.hits the gas on his car instead of the brake and drives through a building? .sets the toaster to dark and burns his toast? .holds his knife by the wrong end and cuts his hand off? .hits the hang up button on his phone instead of the answer button, and hangs up on his mother? .sets the pressure on his compressor to 120psi and breaks his 90psi impact wrench?
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
When you use your things wrong, things break. That is what happens.
O.T.P.S: When did people start replacing "his" with "their" and proceed to screw up all the verb conjugation? Is it an attempt at political correctness?
The masses are the crack whores of religion.
That it would take XP and Vista for people to understand that Windows 2000 was "simple and sensible."
It's political.
... We're calling this one a draw."
Just like, "McCain voted for torture and lives in a self-manufactured reality, but Edwards got a haircut
Probably, I have no idea how Windows does it since I don't use Windows. The fact that GNOME does it well does not preclude other systems doing it well also.
Craft Beer Programming T-shirts
I find the XP level of eye candy pointless and destracting. More sugar coated pixels in Vista are unlikely to be a Good Thing.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Certainly this was silly fun and all, and for many people Vista may be the logical winner for their needs and circumstances. But some of the things said by the referee in this contest, CNET, were outright ignorant. The ref needs glasses. Throw the bum out!
A list of CNET stupidity:
- Why wasn't Linux in this competition? Didn't fit the cute Elizabethan dual metaphor?
- Mac OS X 'forged from the fires of Linux.' Linus Torvalds just had an aneurism over that one. It is blatantly and unforgivably WRONG. The kernel for each of these operating systems have NOTHING to do with each other, never have. The only similarity is their use of the UNIX model for the rest of the operating system. Mac OS X literally IS UNIX because it incorporates BSD Unix. It is forged from the fires of OpenBSD and FreeBSD. Linux is NOT. The only real commonality is the ability of both OSes to use a vast number of the same applications, recompiled for each platform, or in the case of Mac OS X run in X11. Shame shame shame on CNET.
- Mac OS X performance used to be held back by Apple's use of the PowerPC chip? For a period of many years this statement was quite incorrect. The PPC chips were verifiably 2x faster and cooler running in their heyday. Sadly this lead was lost at the time when Motorola stagnated at 500MHz with the G4 chip for years. IBM managed to come out with the G5 to keep speed between PCs and Macs on a par as long as you were using a desktop box. But if you were using a PowerBook you were held back by IBM's laziness or inability to make a cool running G5 chip that was compatible. During this period of time up until the Intel Dual Core MacBooks were released the PC laptops had a distinct speed advantage. Them's the facts that CNET conveniently glossed over. Tsk tsk.
- Mac OS X's 'performance' is currently held back by having fewer games? That is a 100% illogical non sequitur. A better criticism would be that there are many applications for Windows that do not have equivalents on the Macintosh. At least let Mac OS X lose on its real deficits, not nonsense. Regarding the similar criticism of Macs not getting the latest bleeding edge gaming cards, this is only a matter of when drivers are written for compatibility, as long as you are using a Mac Pro desktop box or an XServe, which I assume is what any serious graphics of gaming geek would prefer over an iMac or a MacBook. Make sense CNET!
- Usability complaints. There are a bunch of these that are quite dopey. (1) CNET want to be able to resize windows with ANY corner? Why? On Mac OS X it is simple. Use the bottom right corner. (2) The 'mystery meat' school of navigation regarding the three control buttons in the top left corner of every window. Huh? Funny how I have never ever been confused. CNET even pointed out that hovering over the buttons provides symbols to indicate the button purposes. The only complaint I can see anyone realistically making would be the use of colors for the three buttons. If you are color blind then you may have some minor difficulty. But if you know the Rule Of Fives you know that we humans are capable of remembering between three to seven, an average of 5, things at any one moment. Remembering the purposes of left, center and right buttons on a window are not a challenge. (3) CNET want to delete files by only hitting the Delete key? Why? On the Mac there is a safety measure added: You have to hold down the command key first. This prevents unwanted blunders. I have never found it a burdon compared to the Windows method. Then again I have two hands. If someone only had one hand I could see their point, and I would direct them to Mac OS X's kewl Universal Access features for help. (4) Again with the games criticism. Hey CNET: Go get a PlayStation! You clearly are too immature for a computer.
- The final battle is won over propaganda and myths? Come on! (1) Mac OS X is perturbed by his ISP's lack of support for Macs? In what decade? This is the 21st century. That old myth is dead and buried. (2) Greenpeace are holding a
Why does the author complain about OSX's positioning of menu bars? They are at the top of the screen in OSX because a window is NOT the application: something not made clear with Windows. This makes more sense when you consider apps, like IM clients, that may have very small windows. How are you going to fit 10 drop downs on top of Adium's contacts or chat window? Look at Trillium if you need an example of what devs have to go through in that situation on Windows.