Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
It's funny. Laugh. Businesses Microsoft OS X Operating Systems Apple

Nonexistent Windows OS Superior to Panther 408

Posted by pudge 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.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Nonexistent Windows OS Superior to Panther More

Nonexistent Windows OS Superior to Panther

Comments Filter:

  • Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 15, 2003 @01:03PM (#7481823)
    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.

    • Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 (Score:5, Funny)

      by dbirchall ( 191839 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @01:34PM (#7482004) Journal
      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 [internet-nexus.com], 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...

      • Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 15, 2003 @05:13PM (#7483059)
        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.

      • Paul is such a fucking tool. (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Ayanami Rei ( 621112 ) * <rayanami@gSLACKWAREmail.com minus distro> on Sunday November 16, 2003 @01:52AM (#7485696) Journal
        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.

    • Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 (Score:5, Interesting)

      by ShadowBottle ( 663193 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @02:14PM (#7482202)
      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

    • Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 (Score:5, Insightful)

      by dbrutus ( 71639 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @11:49PM (#7485000) Homepage
      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.

    • Re:Reminds me of NT versus OS/2 (Score:4, Insightful)

      by TedNugentRules! ( 724730 ) on Sunday November 16, 2003 @10:59PM (#7491025)
      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.

  • I'll believe it when I see it (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Paladeen ( 8688 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @01:08PM (#7481850)
    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!

    • Re:I'll believe it when I see it (Score:5, Insightful)

      by dbirchall ( 191839 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @01:13PM (#7481881) Journal
      Late 2004? Hmm, Microsoft bigwigs have been saying [theregister.co.uk] it's 3 years away...

    • Maybe he likes bright colours...

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

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

      • Re:I'll believe it when I see it (Score:5, Insightful)

        by ColMustard ( 698424 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @05:47PM (#7483228)
        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.

    • Re:I'll believe it when I see it (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      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! :-)

    • 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.

    • Re:I'll believe it when I see it (Score:5, Informative)

      by afantee ( 562443 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @06:45PM (#7483501)
      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
    • 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.

  • Only problems is... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 15, 2003 @01:12PM (#7481873)
    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.

    • Re:Only problems is... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by adamjaskie ( 310474 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @01:30PM (#7481981) Homepage

      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.

  • Sniff, sniff (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 15, 2003 @01:18PM (#7481903)
    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 [amjournalexpress.com]."

    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.

    • Re:Sniff, sniff (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Brandybuck ( 704397 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @05:22PM (#7483113) Homepage Journal
      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?

  • Task/Desktop interface? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by adamjaskie ( 310474 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @01:18PM (#7481904) Homepage
    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."

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

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

      Longhorn will of c

  • But will Longhorn solve... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 15, 2003 @01:20PM (#7481915)
    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.
    • I just was to iterate that I love Macs, expecially OS X, and to restrain your disbelief in that the events I'm about to relate are entirely factual! Just yestday day I was sitting around with a bunch of fellow compsci geeks in our undergrad lounge. Three of them were sitting in a row with their powerbooks and iBooks open and going away. Either way one of the guys isn't doing anything too intensive, just apparently writing a paper and playing some MP3s when suddenly his computer freezes and the speakers k

  • Why post a troll? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 15, 2003 @01:26PM (#7481954)
    It looks like this 'story' is just a troll. Aren't we supposed to wait till after the story is posted for the trolls?

  • Why Are We All Preaching To The Choir? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TheWanderingHermit ( 513872 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @01:26PM (#7481956)
    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.

    • Re:Why Are We All Preaching To The Choir? (Score:5, Funny)

      by Phleg ( 523632 ) <stephen.touset@org> on Saturday November 15, 2003 @02:35PM (#7482306)
      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.
    • Y'know, the guy is obviously enthused about MS products, and likes spreading the word. He has 1 paragraph in a long article discussing OS X, and people jump down his throat. Here's an idea: let it go! Some people really do like Windows. Big deal. Neither Linux or Mac OS X is inherently superior than Windows-- they're different tools designed for many of the same project.

      Why Slashdot chose to publish this troll of an article is beyond me. How so many Slashdot users are convinced that he's "wrong" and just n

  • Unfortunately... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by th77 ( 515478 )
    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 b

    • Re:Unfortunately... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by 0x0d0a ( 568518 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @02:14PM (#7482203) Journal
      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.

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

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

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

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

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

  • "task-based interface" far superior... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dbirchall ( 191839 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @01:30PM (#7481978) Journal
    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 [winsupersite.com]," 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 [guardian.co.uk] any day now...

    • Not to mention, what if users today are HAPPY with the way Windows is? What if they don't WANT a new interface, and arent knowledgeable enough to search though 50 different options to put Windows back to what they are used to? Interfaces should be clear and easy to understand for new users, and EXTREMELY customizable for users that know what they want and know how they use a computer. The interface depends on the USER'S PREFRENCES, not on the programmer's "Great New Ideas" of how a user SHOULD use a compute

    • Re:"task-based interface" far superior... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by 0x0d0a ( 568518 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @02:17PM (#7482221) Journal
      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.

    • Microsoft "Ease of Use" (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 15, 2003 @02:49PM (#7482367)
      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!"
    • Well, I was really curious about what would be so superior to Apple's stuff, so I wandered around his various web sites and found that the "revolutionary" task-based user interface is simply making everything you can do with your computer require a wizard dressed up with HTML.

      Wizards have been around since Windows 95. Making a wizard with a colourful background and a few more options instead of Windows Depresso Gray is hardly a revolution. After all, we have a few of those in Windows XP right now, and I
    • I don't think making it an UI easier to use for novice is a bad goal per se. In fact, that's what Mac is advertising for its OS since the beginning.

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

  • Slow News Day? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mental_telepathy ( 564156 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @01:30PM (#7481984)
    All over the world, people are writing uninformed opinions designed to get a reaction rather than educate. Apparently, Some of them make Slashdot.

  • *sigh* (Score:5, Insightful)

    by eyeball ( 17206 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @01:36PM (#7482008) Journal
    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!
  • I don't use XP or Panther and I don't intend on using Longhorn or OS X anytime in the near future. Be that as it may, it's obvious to me that even if you can argue that Longhorn is going to be better than Panther, WTF is the point? You know Apple is working on improvements to their OS anyway, so the only logical comparison is going to be Longhorn versus the future Apple OS.
  • Why is this news? A windows fan claims Longhorn is/will be better than Panther. Will we run a follow-up story when Apple fans claim in this slashdot story that Panther is in fact better than Longhorn?

    By the way, Longhorn does exist, inasmuch as leaked builds can be found on the Internet.
    • A windows fan claims Longhorn is/will be better than Panther. Will we run a follow-up story when Apple fans claim in this slashdot story that Panther is in fact better than Longhorn?

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

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

      I agree that there will p

  • biggest troll ever (Score:2, Insightful)

    by gl4ss ( 559668 )
    that's what the article is.

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

  • well heck (Score:5, Interesting)

    by thunderbird46 ( 315436 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @01:59PM (#7482110) Homepage Journal
    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 :)

  • Apples & Bananas (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 15, 2003 @02:04PM (#7482139)
    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.

  • geez... (Score:5, Funny)

    by microcars ( 708223 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @02:14PM (#7482204) Homepage
    I thought Mac users were the ones that belonged to a "cult"
  • You've posted One Gigantic Flamebait.

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

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

  • The New Features List... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by andcarne ( 657052 ) <andcarne@mac.com> on Saturday November 15, 2003 @02:38PM (#7482317)
    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.
    • Funny, my Mac never gets any worms or viruses. Hmm, maybe its because the OS is better designed, contrary to what he says above. Hardware is not the correct approach to stopping these things. The operating system has to be designed in a security concious way. This includes not enabling programs to have full access to OS resources. Microsofts largest problem is the interconnnectivity between every piece of MS software, including the OS.
      Crippling progam interoperation isn't Apple's way of building secur

  • Obviously (Score:5, Funny)

    by MrWa ( 144753 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @02:54PM (#7482391) Homepage
    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?

  • Well, here's a simple test...

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

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

  • Man, I thought the Mac users were biased, but this guy has got his tongue so far up Microsoft's collective ass, you can barely see the swoosh on his Nikes. His site even . . . Jebus.

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

    But never mind all that. The fact that Apple puts out a major evolution to Mac OS X every year or so (thus far), means that Apple only has, what, three mo

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

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

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

    -A

  • Correct me if I am wrong but (Score:3, Insightful)

    by shadow_x99 ( 724165 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @03:31PM (#7482586)
    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.

  • WinFS. (Score:2, Funny)

    by skahshah ( 603640 )
    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?

  • It's all about MARKETSHARE (Score:5, Funny)

    by macslut ( 724441 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @05:12PM (#7483054)
    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.

  • As I see it. (Score:3)

    by jellomizer ( 103300 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @06:40PM (#7483481)
    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.

  • WinSuperSite.com is notorious for this (Score:3, Insightful)

    by AvantLegion ( 595806 ) on Sunday November 16, 2003 @05:38AM (#7486366) Journal
    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.

  • The Good, the Bad and the Ugly ...with music (Score:5, Insightful)

    by theolein ( 316044 ) on Sunday November 16, 2003 @09:54AM (#7487040) Journal
    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.

  • Microsoft continues to suck (Score:5, Insightful)

    by line.at.infinity ( 707997 ) on Sunday November 16, 2003 @11:06AM (#7487385) Homepage Journal
    From the site's activity center page [winsupersite.com]:
    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.

  • En vogue (Score:4, Insightful)

    by zpok ( 604055 ) on Sunday November 16, 2003 @09:05PM (#7490482) Homepage
    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!"

  • In summary (Score:5, Insightful)

    by inkswamp ( 233692 ) on Monday November 17, 2003 @02:28AM (#7491694)
    I recently read a good article [timesonline.co.uk] 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.

  • About Paul Thurrot's points. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by theolein ( 316044 ) on Monday November 17, 2003 @12:10PM (#7493795) Journal
    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.

Slashdot Top Deals

When the weight of the paperwork equals the weight of the plane, the plane will fly. -- Donald Douglas

Close