Mac OS X Versus Windows Vista, The Rematch 709
An anonymous reader writes "InformationWeek follows up its widely read review where Mac OS X beat out Windows Vista in a head-to-head comparison, with a reader debate on which is really the superior operating system. From the article: 'Mac users love venting about Windows... Any company that calls their techs "geniuses" thrive in forums like this. They think they are "cool" and "hip," they don't care about the fact that they have to reset the permissions and turn on Appletalk every five minutes. Windows Vista all the way. If Windows sucks soooo much, how come more people are familiar with it than Mac OS X? Last time I checked, Windows wasn't just a business operating system. Tons upon tons of people use it and like it.'"
All in one page (Score:5, Informative)
well, (Score:5, Informative)
If I remember correctly, that "comparison" was mostly based on the author's personal preferences. That's more of an editorial.
Re:New results: Windows Wins! (Score:1, Informative)
Market Share != Quality (Score:4, Informative)
Because when they get a computer it has windows on it. There first computer is usually really cheap so it has windows on it. When they need more all their software is for windows so they get a windows PC. Windows will always have more market share then OS X Because OS X Requires you to get a Mac. Even if 20 years ago Macs are like Macs now and PCs were like PCs then, and prices were the same. DOS Will still win because people felt more comfortable with choices.
Re:New results: Windows Wins! (Score:4, Informative)
-User interface: Windows
Cost: Windows (MacOS has to be updated every year"
What? Come on now I know you need to lie to make Windows look better, but come on you have more blatant lies then Tony Snow. Mac OS has much better reliability then Windows everybody knows that. Windows Vista is just as bad as XP I have been using Vista at work for a month now and it crashes all the time. Also, that last part. What the Hell are you talking about? Mac Os $129 Windows "199 to $399. Its every two years by the way. I wish you people would get you facts straight before you come out on forums.
Re:Appletalk? (Score:5, Informative)
I'm using 10.3.something on a dual G5 and I had a problem (forget what it even was now) that was fixed by using the disk repair tool to "repair permissions" on the volume. I suspect that is what he is talking about. Apple claims that problems like that come up only seldom but anecdotal evidence out there suggests that is bullshit if you are a power user. Why perms get mangled is beyond me, I don't seem to have that problem on my Linux systems...
Re:Appletalk? (Score:1, Informative)
Everyone picks on things that may have, at one time or another, been a hair on the system but has since been cleaned up since they don't know enough about the other system to have an educated debate.
That said, who really cares? If Windows floats your boat, use Windows. If Mac floats your boat, use Mac. The people responding to these articles get their boat floated by spouting off online; it has nothing to do with the OS.
(Ah, irony...captcha: idealism)
Re:Appletalk? (Score:5, Informative)
It doesn't (it's up to 15 now I hear. Relax keyboard commandos - I'm joking 8-)
Re:New results: Windows Wins! (Score:1, Informative)
-User interface: Mac OS/Linux
-Cost: Linux - free
Linux wins.
Re:They submitter sould have saved themselves (Score:5, Informative)
Judging by the summary (which did nothing to encourage me to RTFA), this article is not for people who want to talk about the product, it's for people who are buying Vista because everyone else is (it must be true; the sales rep told them) and need to justify this choice.
I've only been using Macs for about three years and there are lots of things you could complain about with OS X, Apple hardware, and Apple's corporate policies. Having to enable AppleTalk or restore permissions are silly things to complain about. You only have to do the first if you want your computer to share files to other Macs, and it's one click; I'd prefer that to it running a load of services I may or may not use. Similarly, the second is just not something Mac users need to bother with. There's a button to do it in Disk Utility, but I've never needed to. As far as I can tell, it's just there in case you go a bit chmod-happy in the system folders.
If you want to bitch about OS X, try talking about the VM subsystem for a bit.
Re:Appletalk? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:my experience (Score:3, Informative)
Right click on the app's icon in the dock. Viola.
The OS X kernel is open-sourced, and it is the Darwin kernel. The rest of Darwin is the rest of the low layer levels of OS X. The proprietary stuff is exactly what you want it to be, the higher level layer like the GUI libraries, the windowing system, quicktime, et al.
None of which helps the kernel bug, because the NVidia driver isn't open source.
Re:Appletalk? (Score:5, Informative)
The fixing permissions is something that you can do in Disk Utility. If you mess up the permissions of system files, it will fix them. Generally, you only have to do this if you do something really stupid involving chmod or chown.
Save yourself some time in the future (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Um, no? (Score:3, Informative)
From time to time, when you install new programs (often done as updates)- the group permissions on some directories will be changed. when you run the disk tools, one of them (I don't remember off hand) check the permissions on directories and files to be sure that the group/user permissions are what it expects. I have almost never seen this actually affect operations. (I did see it once.)
and for fair handedness: My personal windows box has been running XP for about three years since I installed it. (Athlon XP(?) 1700, 1GB, smallish HD) I have some personal clients with kids of an age where "their friends" visit porn sites & wreck their computers with Viruii & the like. I have never seen this happen to a Mac. (Since OS4...)
Re:Appletalk? (Score:5, Informative)
Nope. It's a separate protocol which historically used AppleTalk (ATP) as its transmission protocol. Now it uses TCP.
Back in the day, an AppleTalk installation was a whole software stack which included AppleTalk and all sorts of other things. For instasnce, following the example of AFP circa 1990, we see the following stack, each item using the services published by the item directly below:
- AppleTalk Filing Protocol (AFP)
- AppleTalk Session Protocol (ASP)
- AppleTalk Transaction Protocol (ATP)
- Datagram Delivery Protocol (DDP)
Off to the side of this (above DDP) is Name Binding Protocol (NBP) which is used to look up services by name (this is what ZeroConf/Bonjour is implementing over IP).Since sometime in System 7 or Mac OS 8 (a good ten years, IIRC), AFP has also had another optional equivalent stack available to it:
- Apple Filing Protocol (AFP)
- Data Stream Interface (DSI)
- Transmission Control Protocol (TCP)
- Internet Protocol (IP)
The TCP & IP items there you'll recognise, but DSI is a new one -- it essentially implements a 16-byte header similar to the one used by ASP back in the day, which AFP then uses to indicate whether it's asking for a new connection, closing a connection, whether a packet is a request or a reply, which packet ID it has (or is replying to), the length of thje AFP command following, and any error code returned from the server. The AFP packet format itself is unchanged, except that TCP/IP allows larger packet/datagram sizes than AppleTalk, so the WriteContinue ASP command has been done away with, since the whole lot can be sent via TCP/IP in a single (potentially massive) DSI/AFP packet.In Mac OS X, AppleTalk is there, but usually not enabled by default (go to System Preferences->Network->[Device]->AppleTalk -- you'll see the checkbox is likely unchecked, at least if this is a recent installation rather than an upgrade from c. OS X 10.2). AFP will work over AppleTalk if it has to (talking to old machines that don't do AFP over TCP), although it will always prefer TCP/IP. In point of fact, on Mac OS X it'll likely be using IPv6 for local-area networking, since all OS X machines sort out link-local IPv6 addresses for themselves, and all OS X AFP server process advertise those addresses too.
Also:
Yes you can. I've spoken to people at large institutions who have their Macs mounting network home folders. Frequently when those home folders are mounted using SMB, they find that applications such as Microsoft Office can have trouble auto-saving (in some cases, any sort of saving) to those volumes. There are incompatibilities, because Mac apps tend to assume that all the Mac filesystem metadata exists, and is atomically writable along with the file itself (not stored in a separate hidden file elsewhere). Some of these apps then try to be too clever when locking/updating/unlocking files, and run into trouble.
Long story short: If you're using Macs, share using AFP wherever possible. AFP supports everything HFS supports. SMB doesn't. SMB support on the Mac is mostly there to facilititate moving files between Macs & Windows machines. You can use NFS for Linux/Unix if you want, and you can (and should) use AFP for Mac-to-Mac networking. Things will go more smoothly if you do.
-Q
Re:Appletalk? (Score:3, Informative)
I haven't used Vista yet, but you can easily ignore IE and WMP, even though XP does have an odd habit of pointing new files to them from time to time, for seemingly arbitrary reasons. I haven't used IE of WMP on my XP box in years.
In XP (and perhaps Vista) BSODs are happily rare. I generally get a month of uptime, much more than I get from OSX (so many reboot patches for it), and rarely got a BSOD. Yes, 95-98 were bad, ME was just a crap-fest, but XP is actually a decent OS at core.
On Apple...
Finder DOES suck, I pray that 10.5 fixes it, but waiting for 5 revision to fix something that people have been bitching about is bad.
With software such as Onyx, you can speed up all the animations and such. Granted it is 3rd party software, but the ability is still there, with hidden files, ditto, there are third party solutions. OS X is terrible though in burying power-user preferences in terminal, or relying on 3rd party apps, this is both a bad thing, and a good thing though. I think their should just be a locked "advanced" preference pane though that would let people do things that power-users generally need or want.
Yes, the typical Apple fan is bad. ESPECIALLY the ones who have grown up on Macs, and never really used another OS. It means when something does break (which it inevitably does) they are completely clueless, I've seen people buy new Macs because they couldn't quite grasp the fact that they ruined the permissions on several core folders somehow, and the very term "CHMOD" sent them running, or reinstalling would kill them.
To be fair though, the "average" Windows user (meaning the one not on
Another Mac problem, right now, is a complete lock in. Their in house software, like Pages, is completely incompatible with anything else.
My universal OS Troll comment is "Use what works", I think every OS has some serious problems, and an array of benefits, and each user should select a feature profile that works for them and their tasks, and one where the problems are least likely to interfere with these tasks. People who have to troll something as idiotic as OS preference are obviously trying to justify their own investment in a computer, OS, either that or are somewhat unbalanced, thinking that something as insignificant as as OS choice really makes any difference in the grand scheme of things.
My 2c.
Re:They submitter sould have saved themselves (Score:5, Informative)
Re:They submitter sould have saved themselves (Score:5, Informative)
The VM subsystem is even becoming a hard thing to point a finger at. Prior to 10.3 it sucked incredibly harshly. A denial of service attack was only one stray write away. I don't really have any complaints about 10.4's VM subsystem. I haven't noticed it taking down my Mac yet.
Re:the underlying argument (between the enemy line (Score:4, Informative)
To be honest, I don't care very much about the operating system. Ultimately, I can switch between OSX and Windows without any problems or confusion, and pretty much everything I need to do, I can do on either. Whether it's the same for you, of course, depends on what you're using the computer for.
However, from an IT standpoint, I would much rather support OSX. I know, this runs contrary to what most of you might think, but there are a couple simple things that make me favor it so much.
Really, I've been administering Windows networks for years, and after administering a Mac network for a year and a half, I find it ridiculous how many headaches Windows still presents. After all these years, and with Vista requiring activation even in the corporate licensing, it's only gotten harder. Maybe there are issues across extremely large domains that are easier to manage with Windows, but I haven't run into those yet. But for a small/medium network, given the choice, OSX is much easier to admin.
Re:Appletalk? (Score:2, Informative)
Sam
Re:They submitter sould have saved themselves (Score:4, Informative)
When he says "service" I assumed he was comparing service processes on Windows to similar processes on OS X. Having to administer both systems, I can assure you that OS X doesn't come pre-configured with a bunch of extraneous background processes, such as MS has done with XP. That being said, there are definitely a few processes that could do with some refinement. For me, the Dashboard implementation falls into this category. However, I doubt he would consider the WM for either Windows or OS X to be a service he may not use. Things like RealPlayer, iPod service, Windows Messenger (not MSN Messenger), miscellaneous svchost processes, etc. are what he's talking about. By default, the only one of those OS X has on by default is an equivalent to the iPod service (Apple, are you listening? this is ONLY needed if the USB or Firewire drivers have detected an iPod! Create a SHARED LIBRARY, not a background process!).
Science? Surely you can't be serious. (Score:1, Informative)
There are hundreds of other DA products for the Mac. Everythng from industrial process control to electro-physiological interface products.
Re:Appletalk? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:They submitter sould have saved themselves (Score:3, Informative)
Re:They submitter sould have saved themselves (Score:3, Informative)
I'm guessing you dragged the Applications folder from the left side of a finder window. Unfortunately, a drag from there to anywhere outside of it simply causes it to poof away. That left pane on a finder window is very much like the Dock. It doesn't represent a folder or file on disk but instead is a reference for it. Yes, it's an oddity I'm not too happy about but on the other hand if I could think of a better idea I would.
At any rate, to get your applications folder back simply switch to Finder then select Go->Applications (which is Cmd+Shift+A). That will take you to it. Now, you can do one of two things. The cool way (for those in the know) is to click and hold on the proxy icon which is the icon in the titlebar of the window. After about 2 seconds it will shade darker. You are now dragging the folder itself. It's a nifty mac feature I really wish Windows and Linux had. The alternative is to go up a level (Cmd+Up or Go->Enclosing folder) to the parent folder (which in this case is root of the drive) and drag the Applications folder from there. This of course matches the Windows/Linux behavior. Anyway, simply drag it into the left-pane and you'll recreate the reference to it in the left-pane again. Then drag it again onto the right side of the dock and you'll have created a reference to it in the Dock as well.
To bring up a menu showing the contents of a folder in the dock simply bring up the contextual menu for it. You can do this either by using the right mouse button (if you have one) or by holding control and using the left button or in the case of the dock by simply holding down the left button without moving for about 2 seconds. A final alternative is to configure your trackpad to respond to a tap with a single finger as a left click and a tap with two fingers as a right click. You can find this in the Mouse preference pain in the System Preferences application.
Also note that it is my understanding from the documentation that comes with new macs that for the first 90 days of Mac ownership you can actually call apple and get answers to these types of questions. If you buy AppleCare you extend that to 3 years. Of course if you got your Mac from work then the IT department there may or may not know what the hell they are doing with Macs.
One last thing just to add a quick "cool factor" to OS X. Remember that proxy icon in the title bar? Hold down Cmd (i.e. the key with the apple logo and the swedish campground symbol on it known as the "Command" key) and click that proxy icon. Notice that the menu that pops up shows you the file and all of the enclosing folders. This also works for documents you have open in applications like Word or Pages and what not. Good luck with your new Mac!
Re:Appletalk? (Score:2, Informative)
Second, your performance problem is caused by having too many fonts *enabled* at the same time. You can have as many fonts installed as you like with no performance penalty. For example, my girlfriend has over 3 thousand fonts installed (yes, 3,000) with no detectable difference in overall performance. Until the recent purchase of a new iMac, these were installed on an old dual G4 867Mhz PowerMac.
Third, the "garbled text" you see is a symptom of a corrupted font. Like the performance issue, the solution is effective font management. Newly installed fonts should be "quarantined" and disabled until they have been tested.
If your designers have enough fonts to get these kinds of problems, they could probably use something more powerful than Font Book. According to my girlfriend, Extensis Suitcase is the current tool of choice for font management on OS X (it used to be ATM, but that's a dead product on Mac now with no version for OS X).
Last, the performance and corruption issues you are having could/would happen on any OS. The OS can't know which fonts you want enabled, all enabled fonts have to be loaded into memory (which will obviously slow things down if you have thousands of them) and no OS I know of does real-time font validation to detect corrupted or slightly incompatible fonts (I believe Extensis Suitcase includes a font repair and conversion tool to help in this area).
hth