Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Ten Reasons to Buy Windows Vista 851

pennconservative writes "Michael Desmond, writing for PCWorld.com, gives us ten reasons to buy the next version of Microsoft Windows. Some of his reasons sound compelling, and it definitely sounds like Microsoft has found yet another way to ensure market dominance for a few more years. Desmond also gives a few reasons not to buy Vista, but the most compelling of those is the hardware required to run it. Since Vista will likely ship on every new computer anyone buys, I don't see that being a major roadblock."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ten Reasons to Buy Windows Vista

Comments Filter:
  • by mrchaotica ( 681592 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @01:24PM (#14749973)
    DRM. Why would you pay for your own shackles?
  • So... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by TERdON ( 862570 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @01:24PM (#14749974) Homepage
    what feature will I get that I don't already have in Mac OS X 10.4?

    I skimmed the list rapidly and I'm already using the equivalents to at least half of them, probably more (I wrote "skimmed"). Some of the features I have even used for several years...
  • by marcello_dl ( 667940 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @01:25PM (#14749981) Homepage Journal
    Those are 10 reasons to buy vista IF you are currently running XP. As a Linux user who has always the option to open a maconlinux OSX window, the only reason would be the collaborative environment. All the other reasons were available to me on linux osx or both, since at least two years ago. Heh, the two way firewall :)
  • by Kasracer ( 865931 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @01:26PM (#14749986) Homepage
    According to Microsoft, the requirements for Vista are almost as low of Windows XP, you just can't have all the pretty effects and such.

    I was reading about Vista last night and it's including features like a revamped sleep mode which is a cross between standby and hibernation. They have have SmartFetch or whatever it's called so it knows what applications you typically use and at what times so it'll preload them into memory making it seem snappier.

    All in all, it sounds like Vista will be a pretty good release (at least, in my opinion).
  • New computer? Why? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JonTurner ( 178845 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @01:27PM (#14749995) Journal
    Good luck MSFT - you've got a hell of a challenge ahead of you.

    The age of the compelling application is mostly over because existing hardware (even systems several years old, and thus dirt cheap) fulfill almost all of the average person's computing needs. I'd wager that 90% (or more) of average household computer usage is spent in two applications: email and internet browser. (the other 10% is word processing, accounting/taxes, etc.)

    And no, gamers aren't "average" computer users. They're always looking for state-of-the-art.

    Seriously -- other than as a new game platform, why would the average person buy a new computer? Mom & Pop don't understand/care about new video production, DVD ripping, file sharing, etc. They just want to occasionally look something up on the net, buy something off eBay, or get a photo of the grandkids. If they already have a system (and market saturation ##'s suggest that they do) convincing them to shell out a grand for a new box that doesn't offer them anything more than the old one is going to be a tough sell.
  • Not really. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Alcimedes ( 398213 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @01:32PM (#14750028)
    I actually read though the list, and other than the last three options. (backups, install times, live shared docs) the other 7 were options I've been using for years on Macs.

    Granted, not that I'm not happy that Windows is catching up, but I thought it was funny that to me at least, the only new features were the last three listed. All of which sounded very interesting.

    Cupertino, start your copiers!
  • by Doc Ruby ( 173196 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @01:32PM (#14750029) Homepage Journal
    So the top reason to buy Vista is "you have to".
  • by waveclaw ( 43274 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @01:35PM (#14750049) Homepage Journal
    DRM. Why would you pay for your own shackles?

    Avereage Joe: But they were sooooo shiny! And look at all the pretty 'features.' And everyone's getting or got a pair! Besides, they go so well with my gamer clothes...I mean work suit.

    The number one and number two reason people will buy Vista: it will come on their new PC and it will play all the video games sold for PC (that Average Joe cares about.) You can talk about 'compatibility' with work, but Windows 98 with Office 97 is all that takes for most cases. As soon as Duke Nukem comes out, you can be sure it will have a 'Made for Microsoft Windows Vista' sticker on it.
  • Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tpgp ( 48001 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @01:35PM (#14750055) Homepage
    what feature will I get that I don't already have in Mac OS X 10.4?

    The ability to run specific win32 apps.

    That is the only difference.

    As you've noted that most of the features in Vista (Music management / photo management / drm / desktop search / etc are already present (or have equivilants) in OS X.
  • by mrchaotica ( 681592 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @01:37PM (#14750061)
    1. Security, security, security: Windows XP Service Pack 2 patched a lot of holes, but Vista takes security to the next level.
    That's not an argument for Vista, that's an argument for a secure OS (such as every other OS except Windows!).
    2. Internet Explorer 7: IE gets a much-needed, Firefox-inspired makeover, complete with tabbed pages and better privacy management
    If it's "Firefox inspired," why not just use Firefox in the first place?
    3. Righteous eye candy: For the first time, Microsoft is building high-end graphics effects into Windows
    Wow, what an innovation! Wait a second, that reminds me of something. Oh yeah: Mac OS.
    4. Desktop search: Microsoft has been getting its lunch handed to it by Google and Yahoo on the desktop, but Vista could change all that.
    See above statement.
    5. Better updates: Vista does away with using Internet Explorer to access Windows Update, instead utilizing a new application to handle the chore of keeping your system patched and up-to-date.
    And Linux, BSD, and even Mac OS have had package management systems since when, forever?
    6. More media: Over the years, one of the key reasons to upgrade versions of Windows has been the free stuff Gates and Company toss into the new OS, and Vista is no exception.
    This must be some kind of joke. Windows bundles the fewest apps of any operating system. Have you seen what comes by default with Mac OS or -- better yet -- a typical Linux distribution?!
    7. Parental controls: Families, schools, and libraries will appreciate the tuned-up parental controls, which let you limit access in a variety of ways.
    Oh boy! New and improved restrictions!
    8. Better backups
    Thank god! Now I no longer have to back up my system on 376 thousand floppy disks!
    9. Peer-to-peer collaboration
    Quick, somebody sic the RIAA on them!
    10. Quick setup: Beta code alert: There are some Vista features I hope dearly for even though they haven't been built yet. This is one of them.
    And reason number ten? There is no reason number ten!
  • by Yahweh Doesn't Exist ( 906833 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @01:41PM (#14750091)
    1. new firewall almost as good as ZoneAlarm
    2. new IE almost as good as Firefox
    3. new eye-candy almost as good as OS X
    4. new desktop search almost as good as Google Desktop
    5. new update program almost as good as Mac Software Update
    6. new media programs almost as good as iLife
    7. new parental controls almost as good as proper parenting
    8. new backups almost as good as things not breaking in the first place
    9. new P2P almost as good as turning off your firewall
    10. new quick install almost as good as all the other planned features that don't actually exist yet
  • by Beuno ( 740018 ) <argentina&gmail,com> on Saturday February 18, 2006 @01:42PM (#14750105) Homepage
    Since Vista will likely ship on every new computer anyone buys, I don't see that being a major roadblock.


    Well, considering there are more and more new computers being shipped with Linux, and how far away Vista's release is, maybe this isn't 100% accurate.
  • by ozmanjusri ( 601766 ) <aussie_bob@hoMOSCOWtmail.com minus city> on Saturday February 18, 2006 @01:48PM (#14750140) Journal
    that's an improvement, how?

    Compared to the XP fisher-price look?
    Just be grateful, OK.

  • Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mrchaotica ( 681592 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @01:50PM (#14750150)
    The ability to run specific win32 apps.
    Go, go, gadget Darwine! [opendarwin.org]
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18, 2006 @01:53PM (#14750173)
    First of all new computers will come with it. And then it is quite likely that some applications will require Vista. Hasn't Halo 2 been anounced to be Vista only (even though I can't think of any feature Vista might have that would make it a better target than XP)? That will pull some of the gamers over. And the next version of Office?

  • Really Worthwhile? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by slashbob22 ( 918040 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @01:54PM (#14750185)
    1. Security, security, security: Good! Something we can all agree on. This is a great reason to upgrade!

    2. Internet Explorer 7: IE gets a much-needed, Firefox-inspired makeover .. This isn't a great reason. I can run IE7 on XP, or I can run Firefox - which is what IE is to be modeled after. Not a reason to upgrade.

    3. Righteous eye candy: This could be a good improvement for those who want a showpiece. Your eye candy is hidden when running applications, and I don't see this as a sole reason in and of itself to upgrade.

    4. Desktop search: Yeah, this is a very handy feature. See Google Desktop, Beagle etc. This is not a reason to upgrade.

    5. Better updates: WinXP home's update service will be provided for 2 years after Vista has been released. WinXP Pro has approximately 5 years. This is a good reason to upgrade when your existing OS isn't supported.

    6. More media: .. gets a welcome update that turns the once-bloated player into an effective MP3 library I think it's spelled 'WMA DRM' not MP3. None the less, media is readily available for XP, OSX, and Linux. This is not a valid reason to upgrade.

    7. Parental controls: From a technical standpoint, allowing you to block games by their rating could be good. The caveat to this is that parental controls should be done at a parental level NOT through technology. Good reason for certain parents to upgrade. Not a parent? Move along, nothing to see here.

    8. Better backups: Working as a tech I found system restore to be only somewhat useful and really hidden. Average Joe user will still not know how to use it or be afraid to use it. Savvy users may employ other technologies to backup information such as Ghost. Products exist so you can store your backups in another location, if your HDD dies, this feature won't help. Not a reason to upgrade

    9. Peer-to-peer collaboration: Sounds like P2P, I have it and don't use it. Either way, this technology already exists on WinXP. No upgrade required.

    10. Quick setup: Beta code alert: Quick setup vaporware. Not a reason unless it is actually released.

    In conclusion, Vista will be a great security update. Most other features are already available for XP and are just now being integrated into the OS - could this lead to more anti-trust lawsuits? (IE and MediaPlayer are historical examples)
  • Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JonTurner ( 178845 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @01:54PM (#14750187) Journal
    >>As you've noted that most of the features in Vista (Music management / photo management / drm / desktop search / etc are already present (or have equivilants) in OS X.

    Not to put too fine a point on it, but i would say, not only are they available, on Mac OS X, they are superior. iTunes, GarageBand, Final Cut, iDVD. Etc. Apple's been shipping this stuff for years. MSFT's just talking about what they hope to release, and talk is cheap.

    Given Microsoft's tendancy to cut features like a boot camp barber cuts hair, I'm not too hopeful everything's going to make it to the final release.
  • by LiquidCoooled ( 634315 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @01:57PM (#14750206) Homepage Journal
    Average joe won't even purchase Windows XP at retail.

    The greatest majority will obtain it via a new computer.
    I'm not going to knock MS on this one.
    If they get it right, then its a great deal better for US.
    We get to spend more time relaxing because joe won't be calling us every five minutes.

  • by Dominic_Mazzoni ( 125164 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @02:02PM (#14750233) Homepage
    • what feature will I get that I don't already have in Mac OS X 10.4?


    Compatibility with more games. Other than WoW, what popular MMORPG runs on Mac OS X?

    Compatibility with more vertical-market apps such as the one used by your employer.

    Compatibility with more peripherals sold at retail stores.

    Compatibility with web sites that are made exclusively for Microsoft Internet Explorer technology and for which there are no close substitutes.


    But for the next 3-4 years, you'll get all of those things with Windows XP. So what motivation is there to "upgrade" to Windows Vista? If you wanted the 10 features listed in the article, you could get Mac OS X now. If you want the things you mentioned above, stick with the Windows box you have now and don't waste money on the upgrade.
  • by DingerX ( 847589 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @02:06PM (#14750261) Journal
    maybe for the same reason we vote for those who would enslave us?
  • by Tom ( 822 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @02:06PM (#14750262) Homepage Journal
    5. Better updates:

    And Linux, BSD, and even Mac OS have had package management systems since when, forever?


    And this isn't even a package manager! Can you install OpenOffice on Windos Update? Or even M$ Office? No, this isn't the equivalent to synaptic, adept or any other package manager, it's just a GUI for "apt-get update && apt-get upgrade".

    6. More media: Over the years, one of the key reasons to upgrade versions of Windows has been the free stuff Gates and Company toss into the new OS, and Vista is no exception.

    This must be some kind of joke.


    I'm certain it is. I know of nobody who ever bought any version of windos because of some bundled stuff. Plus, of course, exactly what is bundled depends a lot more on the OEM than on M$. There's no "standard offer" as there is with OS X.

    But the worst joke is:

    Vista takes security to the next level.

    Oh yeah, I'm sure it will - for the first 5 days or so, until the first remote root is found in the default setup.

    Plus, of course, most of these reasons are just recycled from the XP launch.
  • by penguin-collective ( 932038 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @02:07PM (#14750265)
    So, you are saying that the main reason for buying Vista is compatibility with a proprietary but otherwise outdated standard.

    Well, I'd say those are excellent reasons not to buy Vista, then: while running Windows for compatibility reasons may be be expedient in the short term, we have to pay for it dearly in the long term.

    In fact, people have a simple choice: don't upgrade. Windows XP will keep running for many years to come, and in a few years, hopefully, your "compatibility" reasons will have disappeared, as even more apps are available for other platforms.
  • by mrchaotica ( 681592 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @02:09PM (#14750282)
    But does Windows Vista come with DRM of any sort?
    Well, I'm sure it will at least have "product activation," for starters. And then the "compatibility" with Microsoft's music DRM, yeah. And also the signed drivers and support for Treacherous Computing.
  • Re:So... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Dominic_Mazzoni ( 125164 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @02:11PM (#14750290) Homepage
    Let's compare to Mac OS X, shall we?

    1. Security, security, security: (Mac OS X: check) bidirectional software firewall (check), Windows Services Hardening, which prevents obscure background processes from being hijacked and changing your system (no, but it's not clear that this is needed on Mac OS X now). There's also full-disk encryption (check)...User Account Protection, which invokes administrator privileges as needed(check).

    2. Internet Explorer 7 (check - Safari does all that IE 7 does and more),

    3. Righteous eye candy (check - Mac OS X is way ahead here)

    4. Desktop search (check - Spotlight)

    5. Better updates (check - Software Update)

    6. More media (check - iTunes, iPhoto, etc.)

    7. Parental controls (check - see the System Preferences)

    8. Better backups (OK, Apple doesn't include a backup utility unless you purchase dot-Mac)

    9. Peer-to-peer collaboration (check - Bonjour, aka Rendezvous)

    10. Quick setup (this isn't as much a feature as it is getting rid of bottlenecks in Windows - not needed

    Again, nothing wrong with any of these features - but where is Microsoft innovating?
  • by swilver ( 617741 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @02:14PM (#14750317)
    SmartFetch
    Is that like the MS office preloader?

    Or perhaps like the background indexing service?

    Or maybe the stupid automatic refreshes on search windows?

    Or perhaps the idiotic "Personalized Menu's"?

    It sounds to me that it is yet another feature that will get in the way more than that actually helps you -- I don't like it when my machine starts doing all kinds of stuff (with the harddrive) when I'm not using it for 5 minutes.

    If you want to start your applications fast, here's a tip: get 2 GB of memory, turn off your swapfile and donot ever close your apps.

  • Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ScrewMaster ( 602015 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @02:22PM (#14750365)
    Innovation has nothing to do with it. This is merely a response to market pressure. That's the only pressure to which Microsoft ever responds. They don't need to be a technological leader ... they only have to be the market leader, which means they can just satisfy the current top "n" complaints about Windows to keep selling millions of copies. Windows users look at features and capabilities this way: if it wasn't in Windows before, and it is now, then it's an innovative, new feature. Doesn't matter if every other major OS has had said feature for years ... it's still innovative.
  • by danielk1982 ( 868580 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @02:25PM (#14750400)
    Also the same reason not to get a Mac.
  • by NutscrapeSucks ( 446616 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @02:26PM (#14750407)
    Yes, in order to view "secure" windows media content, you have to have a special monitor which can decode the encrypted content in the first place

    Yes, and the MPAA will give Apple an exception to this rule, because Apple computers are like shiny and stuff. Whatever you say.

    Or, more likely, OS X will "limit" you in the exact same way. (And by "limit", they mean "allow you to play Blu-Ray and HD-DVD on your computer.")
  • by zootm ( 850416 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @02:32PM (#14750442)

    Of course, the other option is to just not offer to play the videos at all. Agreed that it's a pretty horrid thing to have to do, but MS's support or otherwise for the format would be unlikely to change its design.

  • Re:So... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by NutscrapeSucks ( 446616 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @02:37PM (#14750475)
    Typical Mac-biased moderation. There's no real "insightfulness" in specualtion about how unreleased software might be worse than Apple's stuff, or might not even ship.

    For some reason, whenever there's a thread about Vista, the 100% Mac Loyalists see an invitation to start a big circle-jerk. Give it up. The basic marketshare figures (97% versus 2%) didn't change with Windows 2000, XP, OS X 10.0 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4, and they won't change with Vista. Spare the hot air.
  • by Animats ( 122034 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @02:41PM (#14750493) Homepage
    1. Solid reliablity.
    2. First choice of corporate America.
    3. You're in control. Windows 2000 doesn't talk to the Internet unless told to do so.
    4. Works fine with Firefox and Thunderbird.
    5. Fully supported by Dell [dell.com]
    6. Runs under Xen [win4lin.com], for casual Windows use in Linux shops.
    7. Compatible with existing hardware.
    8. No annoying update pop-ups from the operating system.
    9. Interoperates well with Linux and MacOS X.
    10. All files can be backed up to tape and restored.

    Windows 2000 - the all-business operating system for the new millenium.

  • Re:So... (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18, 2006 @02:44PM (#14750509)
    1. Security, security, security
    OSX already has the firewall, already has home disk encryption (not sure about the whole disk), and has had 'Account Protection' from the start. Account Protection isn't a feature, its just Vista doing accounts the right way at long last.

    2. Internet Explorer 7
    Great, I can already use Firefox on OS X, and I prefer Safari anyway. The anti-phishing sounds interesting thought.

    3. Righteous eye candy
    Once again, Microsoft miss the point. Vista looks fucking hideous; its all eye candy for the sake of being shiny. There's still no consistency, theres loads of disgusting 16 colour icons, and the over use of transparency gives you a headache in under an hour. The eye candy in OS X is functional. Aqua = classy sports car, Vista = your mum's old banger with a ridiculous body kit and some neons.

    4. Desktop search
    This will be interesting! Tiger had proper desktop search first, but I wouldn't be suprised if Microsoft do it a bit better.

    5. Better updates
    Old news for OS X users.

    6. More media
    Media Centre shits all over Front Row, but WMP is still horrific as ever. Also, Apple's Pro and Home multimedia apps kick the shit out of anything Vista has to offer.

    7. Parental controls
    Already got em.

    8. Better backups
    Already got em.

    9. Peer-to-peer collaboration
    Tiger already has the potential to do this, thanks to Bonjour, but with the exception of Hydra/SubEthaEdit, I've not seen anything take advantage of it. Vista could really pull ahead here, as collaboration like this will be big in the future.

    10. Quick setup
    Not much of a big deal, unless you think you're going to be reinstalling a lot.

    Overall, Vista has nothing you haven't already got if you're running Tiger. That said, Vista might do some things a lot better. The Leopard vs Vista fight will be an interesting one for sure.
  • by jdeluise ( 804732 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @02:58PM (#14750609)
    That's intereting......I run XP on a celeron 433Mhz at work with 512MB RAM and a crappy intel video adapter built on to the motherboard. It sounds to me like it runs circles around your newish computer. Either you're a troll or a novice computer user. Apparently you can't be bothered to set any preferences for your applications (or is this something that you think you should only have to do in Linux)? Word and Outlook are customizable and scriptable via VBA, far more than most applications written for either *NIX-like or Windows platforms (Apple has got AppleScript, but it's a mixed bag). Go find a clue before opening your mouth next time.
  • Re:So... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by NutscrapeSucks ( 446616 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @02:59PM (#14750610)
    Really? As someone who has owned Macs for 15 years, I enjoy heckling you zealous idiots who have blind faith in your "superior product" -- which nice, but in fact is only marginally better at some things and marginally worse at others.

    (And six years puts you back in the OS 9 era, which was superior at nothing.)
  • Shell game (Score:2, Insightful)

    by coastin ( 780654 ) * on Saturday February 18, 2006 @03:15PM (#14750710) Homepage
    It seems to me there is a downward trend with MS in every area, marketing, innovation, product design, and security. I think that it has reached a very noticeable level to even those who are die-hard MS fans. Maybe it was the marketing by hype practice that put MS on an inescapable treadmill of eroded credibility. It seems harder these days for tech writers to stick their necks out and jump on the MS bandwagon to fully hype the new products. That was a pretty wimpy review of Vista, and I expected more hype from the writer, otherwise why cover a beta that keeps loosing features just to meet a release date.

    While not seeming to overcome fear of innovating a new OS, MS asks us all to live in their imaginary world and believe that they are the innovators of all things new to desktop computing. This may be the way to go if MS were better at the art of illusion, but they are not that good at it. While David Copperfield can make a live crowd believe he just made an elephant disappear before their eyes, MS can't convince PC prospects that they are not following Mac and Linux in the desktop innovations Vista claims to offer, maybe, at some future date.

    Clearly, from the posts here by savvy /.ers, they are the followers and not the leaders of the "top ten reasons to buy an OS". Of course, in shear volume of sales they beat all other OSs hands down and they are truly the top dog of the desktop computer market. Why, then does MS seem to have to make such an effort to try and steal the "innovation" credit when so many know the truth is far down another road?

    Perhaps being on top so long breeds fear of innovating. It may be safer to wait and watch others do the innovating, fumble around at a knock-off and proclaim you have just innovated a whole new set of features that everyone needs, right now. It seems to work to a degree, but is that also failing to keep the giant of desktop OSs on top, as more markets slip away from MS.

    I switched from MS Win to Mac and Linux over the last few years. First by getting comfortable with Mac OSX at work and a couple of years ago I discovered Linspire. I still love the Mac, especially for graphics work, but I never got use to seeing MS products for the Mac, like MS Office and IE. So, Firefox and Open Office have been my primary browser and office suit for a while. I tend to rely more on Linux as my primary desktop OS now and have cut all but a couple of old ties to third party Windows software, that I rarely boot into XP to use. One of those is Swish, a light weight flash movie developer package. I tried to get Swish running in Crossover Office, but no go there.

    These days, I don't consider myself to be a MS product user to any noticeable degree, and I need not wonder why. MS has performed so poorly as at the corporate level, like a bully loosing his grip on the desktop playground, doing desperate things in response to the slightest threat from any new kid (or those already not cowering in the corner like Mac). I thought I switched primarily for security reasons, and would have said that if surveyed at the time, but now I think it goes further. As MS continues to disappoint me almost daily with their attitude towards their users and others in the market, I realize that this is the real driving force behind my switching from MS products.

    So, with regards to Vista, I don't see any thing for me in this OS shell game MS seems to be playing. In fact I think it may be the worst direction MS has ever taken their marketing in. MS seems to be resorting to carny trickery to milk money out of anyone they can. I wonder if this is the big downward spiral of the software giant that has been predicted for several years. It certainly is interesting to watch...

    Sorry for the long reply on this one ;-)
  • Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cyborch ( 524661 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @03:22PM (#14750755) Homepage Journal
    I posted 10 reasons to buy OSX Tiger in response [cyborch.dk].
  • by Simonetta ( 207550 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @03:26PM (#14750781)
    Security, Security, Security
        yeah, they're so good at this. The world's richest man wants to 'protect' you from people who will give him more money for the opportunity to sell you junk that you don't need, using commercials on your desktop, or 'jump-outs' in your application.
        Plus since we're talking security here, what makes you think that you're going to get any from the guys who bend over backwards to put ordinary people in Chinese concentration-camp prisons. You can be assured that anything from Redmond is going to have plenty of backdoors for the Gitmo Gomers to read and monitor everything that you do on your PC. And Linux won't have this.

    Internet Explorer 7: IE gets a much-needed, Firefox-inspired makeover...
        So use just FireFox. 'nuff said.

        Righteous eye candy...
        Do like Steve Jobs and just drop some acid if you ...need... eye candy.

        Desktop search: ...just use Google and Yahoo like you do normally anyway since they're already here and better.

        Better updates:
        one word...sourceforge....next?

        More media
        more embedded DRM, you mean.

        Parental controls
        we are already grown-up, and we don't need any more excuses for library restrictions on web access. Like prohibiting 17-year-olds from getting information on effective birth control, just cause 'Jesus or Allah says no'.

        Better backups
        the application programmer's responsibility, not the OS.

        Peer-to-peer collaboration
        they seem to want to make that quite illegal if I recall correctly.

        So how much money or honey did they give this guy for writing such a transparent puff-piece about an operation system that doesn't even exist yet?
  • by mr i want to go home ( 610257 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @03:55PM (#14750941)
    Jumping Jesus man. OS X has had better drivers for all that stuff than windows for a long time. Most of the time you can just plug it in without installing anything.
  • by aduzik ( 705453 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @04:35PM (#14751148) Homepage

    I didn't see anything on that list that Mac OS X or your favorite Linux distro doesn't already have. I looked, point by point, and could think of a comparable feature on either Mac OS X or Linux or, usually, both. That's what I wish Windows users would understand, particularly home users. Microsoft, despite their dominance of the OS market, sells, by far, the least advanced operating system of the big three. Linux gets features as soon as someone contributes code, which happens all the time. And, if you're impatient like me, you can install Debian testing/unstable and always have the latest features as they come down the pike.

    Let's review:

    Security
    Every Linux distro I know of forces you to make a non-privileged user account. There are plenty of features built into GNOME and KDE now that let you do a graphical 'sudo' to do administrative tasks. On the Mac, this is the default. They have their own graphical 'sudo', which works incredibly well. And, aside from the occasional exploit, neither OS has the same kind of inherent security problems that Windows does.
    IE 7
    One word: Firefox. OK, two: Safari. Both great browsers that already offer all the same featuers.
    Righteous Eye Candy
    The GNOME and KDE themes have improved dramatically over the past few years and they look pretty good. Maybe not "Aero Glass" good, but then again they don't require an outrageous graphics card to use. Mac OS X has Aqua. Very pretty indeed, and far less distracting than Aero Glass.
    Desktop Search
    On Linux, locate. On the Mac, Spotlight. And developers can write Spotlight importers that give those apps better control over how their files are indexed. Windows has nothing like this. Oh, and if you are using Windows, use Google Desktop Search. It works well. I like it.
    Better updates
    On Linux, set up a cron job to do an apt-get update && apt-get upgrade every now-and-then and you're set. On Mac OS X, Software Update already updates every piece of software Apple sells with about one or two clicks. And, it runs automatically. Done.
    More Media
    iTunes, QuickTime. And with Flip4Mac, you can play un-DRMed WMV files right in QuickTime. On Linux, there are too many media players to name. No, they won't work with Windows Media, usually, but there's definitely no lack of MP3 library apps.
    Parental Controls
    Now here, I don't know about Linux, but I'd find it hard to believe there isn't some way a person couldn't use PAM to control when and where his/her kids use the computer. On the Mac, parental controls are already built in, system-wide.
    Better Backups
    Sure, it costs $99/year, but .Mac backup is awesome. It has backup plans for all the most common things: purchased music, documents, and so on. Custom backup plans are easy to configure. On Linux, every file copy program is a backup program with the right flags. And there are a few graphical tools to automate the process as well.
    Collaboration
    On the Mac: SubEthaEdit. Can't beat it. Again, I'm not sure about Linux, but I don't think that collaborative editing is a make-or-break feature.
    Quick Setup
    Mac OS X install has always taken about 20 minutes. Depending on your distro, you could be up and running in, well, no time if you use a live CD, but most CD-based Linux installs (think Fedora) take about the same time.

    Granted, Linux still has to do some catching up in terms of user-friendliness, but like all UNIX, all the pieces are there if you know how to assemble them. There are more and more graphical tools appearing everyday to put those pieces together for you. Mac OS X already has just about every feature the article describes and they're planning a new release about the same time as Vista appears.

    And Microsoft would do well to drop certain features. The Windows Registry, I think, is one of the worst-conceived ideas ever. If Microsof

  • by aj50 ( 789101 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @05:21PM (#14751379)
    DRM shackles you whether your computer supports it or not.

    If your computer doesn't support drm, then you can't see the content at all. Your system not supporting drm does not magically make all drm protected content play without restrictions. If drm is widespread, then you receive all the disadvantages of drm and none of the benefits (eg. more content being offered online).

    The only good thing is if few people have drm then it is harder to distribute drm'd content but if by having a computer that doesn't support drm you are in the minority, there is no direct benefit to you.

  • by jav1231 ( 539129 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @05:26PM (#14751408)
    Let's see. IE 7 will be more like Firefox and Vista will be more like OS X and Linux. So much for original thinking.
  • Re:Honestly (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Jester99 ( 23135 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @05:50PM (#14751566) Homepage
    After paying for 3.1, 95, 98, 98SE, ME, 2000, XP ... I just can't afford Windows anymore.

    Bullshit.
    1) You'd never pay for both 98 and 98SE -- SE was a free upgrade.
    2) You'd never pay for ME and 2000, since they were both released at the same time, and if you'd bought 2000, you'd never even consider installing the far-inferior ME on a second computer, you'd just use the same copy of 2000.

    So you've paid for six OS revisions since roughly 1993. 6 in 13 years. Or once per two years. At $100 each, that's $600, or $46 a year -- twelve cents a day. Even at $150 a copy (I'm not sure what the exact costs are), you're up to a whopping 18 cents a day.

    Considering that the cost of owning a car is somewhere on the order of $12-18 a day, 18 cents for the heart of your software system doesn't seem that unreasonable. That's 100 times cheaper than your car. Take the bus or train to work for one week straight, and the money you save in gas will pay for 6 months worth of operating system.

  • by westlake ( 615356 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @05:56PM (#14751601)
    I'm sure it will at least have "product activation," for starters. And then the "compatibility" with Microsoft's music DRM, yeah. And also the signed drivers and support for Treacherous Computing.

    wake me when any of this affects mass market sales. wake me again when trusted computing doesn't look attractive to your boss.

  • by thewise1 ( 955170 ) <anbro@h[ ]ail.com ['otm' in gap]> on Saturday February 18, 2006 @06:10PM (#14751672)
    I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but quite frankly, what you call OS bloat is what the average joe user who doesn't know about computers calls "a computer that doesn't take me 6 hours to install an app on because I don't have to download source, configure, make, make install, and HOPE that nothing goes wrong on the way". I'm all for linux and the options available freely, but until you can reliably take away that barrier to entry for computer newbies, that OS 'bloat' is the best option for many people.
  • by Nirvelli ( 851945 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @06:31PM (#14751785)
    1. Security, security, security: New holes, new holes, new holes.

    2. Internet Explorer 7: GetFirefox [getfirefox.com].

    3. Righteous eye candy: Ooohhh shiny...

    4. Desktop search: Learn to organize.

    5. Better updates: Why update? Because it was broken in the first place!

    6. More media: More DRM!

    7. Parental controls: Real parents don't need an OS to babysit their kids.

    8. Better backups: Already have that.

    9. Peer-to-peer collaboration: ???

    10. Quick setup: Why am I running setup more than once anyways?

    In short, 10 compelling reasons why you don't need to upgrade to Vista.
  • A little odd (Score:3, Insightful)

    by CastrTroy ( 595695 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @06:31PM (#14751786)
    Does it strike anybody else as odd that all the features (maybe minus the eyecandy, although probably not) are not actual parts of the OS, but applications that should be completely separate from the OS. Doesn't microsoft have enough monopoly troubles without tieing more crap into the OS?
  • by visualight ( 468005 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @06:47PM (#14751879) Homepage
    Yet another option is to call their bluff. Hollywood has played that card with Intel, MS, and the U.S. Congress already and I don't understand why it sways anyone.

    Hollywood: If you don't (pass the dmca)(implement drm)(produce tpm compatible chipsets) we're going to take our ball and go home.

    Appropriate response: Well take your goddamn ball and go the fuck home then.
  • Who decides? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Tony ( 765 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @08:19PM (#14752297) Journal
    Remember that Bill Gates is the Dr. Death of software. HE decides when Microsoft's software is no longer usable, not the customers.

    I decided their software wasn't usable a long time ago. Bill Gates didn't have to tell me that.
  • by ylikone ( 589264 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @09:19PM (#14752482) Homepage
    1. I like freedom
    2. I like freedom
    3. I like freedom
    4. I like freedom
    5. I like freedom
    6. I like freedom
    7. I like freedom
    8. I like freedom
    9. I like freedom
    10. I like freedom

    Hence, I use a few different variations of Linux on my boxes. No MS. No Apple. Just open-source and freedom. I don't give a shit that I can't play the newest games. I don't give a shit that I can't run the latest and greatest commercial apps. I don't give a shit that I can't use every cheap off-the-shelf piece of hardware. I don't give a shit that I don't belong to a an elitist club with a superior GUI. I value freedom over all. Am I an idealist? You bet.

  • by jchap ( 628091 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @09:21PM (#14752485) Homepage
    >4. Desktop search: Learn to organize.

    Whoa there!

    Let's face it, if we're discussing improvements to Windows XP Search then a fish on the end of a stick would be an improvement. The fact that MS now realise[sic] that a change here is important is a big thing.

    Organisation[sic] in itself is simply not a solution to the overwhelming amounts of data on a hard drive. Consider the relative successes of Yahoo Search and Yahoo directory, or Google Search and Google directory. Further, consider the difference between a CLI and a GUI treeview. The former gives speed by flexibility, the latter gets you there in the end but is far slower in comparison.

    My HD is unbelieveably well organised[sic Goddamnit!] but I still find it easier to type a search into Google to find information, even when I know that I already have a local copy it. This is really mad and needs work.

    Unfortunately, of course, it looks like the metadata handling required to pull off desktop search has already been hamstrung by the removal of 'virtual folders' - just about the most important 'innovation' in Vista. Looks like users will continue to have to attempt to file all of their lives in a single organisational[sic] hierarchy for a little while longer.

  • by mrchaotica ( 681592 ) on Sunday February 19, 2006 @04:47AM (#14753671)
    Galileo was censored by the Church. Martin Luther King got shot. Ghandi fasted for weeks at a time. And countless others, whose names we do not know, suffered even more. Unfortunately, fighting the good fight usually requires making some sacrifices.

    Thanks for your concern, but I think I can deal with missing out on the "benefits" of the DRM'd content.

So you think that money is the root of all evil. Have you ever asked what is the root of money? -- Ayn Rand

Working...