digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Engadget - Leopard vs. Vista: feature chart showdown

engadget.com — Vista and Leopard are both extremely advanced, feature rich consumer operating systems. But way back in January when Vista launched knew we had little choice but pit the two in a head to head chartngraph Thunderdome competition. We know we're not even going to be able to stop the epic fanboy arguments about break out over this one...

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • agarfield2004, on 11/12/2007, -48/+20That's 46-38, Leopard
    • Bartboy919, on 10/30/2007, -49/+25You fail to realize a few of those things are subjective, say the search feature, vista seems much faster than spotlight to me.
      • kris33, on 10/29/2007, -15/+53Something tells me that Bartboy919 has not tried Spotlight in Leopard..
        • jtbandes, on 10/31/2007, -13/+14Spotlight on Leopard is fast, even on my G4.
        • totorototoro, on 10/29/2007, -3/+16I think his avatar and Digg history pretty much shows that :p
        • Bartboy919, on 10/31/2007, -1/+2I only have tiger on my macbook, so im am willing to be impressed.
      • jakem1, on 10/28/2007, -4/+21Additionally, Vista does support boolean operators amongst hundreds of other constructs despite what Ryan Block says.
      • aryayush, on 10/28/2007, -6/+12Spotlight in Leopard is definitely the fastest system search and launch tool I've ever used and I've used quite a few, including Vista's Live Search feature. Spotlight in Leopard beats Vista's built-in search by a wide margin.
        • rompom7, on 10/31/2007, -3/+2Not a chance. I can search for networked computers, apps (built in apps, command line apps, and installed programs), files, my instant message history and inside emails. For example, I was looking for a chat log where I said "lol @ this pic" because I lost the URL, so I hit the Windows key, typed "lol @ this pic" and the chat log appeared in the results, hit enter and it opened the log.

          I can click a small button at the bottom (Search Everywhere) to search inside of any file that can be read (not just emails and IM history like the start bar results) or just search for that file name.

          And it works lightning fast.
          • SteveMax, on 10/29/2007, -2/+4Yes, exactly like Spotlight. Just slower.
    • thecosmicpope, on 10/30/2007, -7/+35You just can't compare operating systems with a points system like this. It isn't fair, doesn't address the main issues and isn't thorough enough to be of any use. All this article will do is serve as flame-bait for an argument rather than anything constructive.
      • frazw, on 10/28/2007, -0/+3True and it also missed the most important bit, what the individual wants. That makes both excellent and terrible at the same time
      • GawtMilk, on 10/29/2007, -4/+9It's a pretty biased article. FYI : I've only used Tiger and previous iterations, but I plan on getting Leopard running on my PC.

        "Whereas Time Machine may be easier to use than Windows Backup and Restore Center, Vista does feature all the same (if not more) backup features"

        How is this a tie? Having one big button on the screen that you click is easy, but it's not feature-rich. I'd say this is a point for Vista...

        "It's arguable that Windows may have more powerful printing capabilities, but OS X is far better at printer plug-and-play"

        Once again...Vista has the feature-rich lineup. My HP Photosmart was plug and play on Vista.

        Not only that, this doesn't include major points such as game availability on Vista [only mentions DX10] and the more secure [Virus wise] nature of OSX [says both don't come with antivirus software]. Those are the selling points, not whether or not the Operating System has Tablet support.

        Plus, most of the points awarded are based on software you're expected to upgrade. Who uses the default text editors? Microsoft Word is available on OSX and Vista and XP, and it's the best choice by far.

        Buried for not taking into account the REAL features, and having more than half the points be based on "lowest common denominator" programs.
        • Buu700, on 10/29/2007, -4/+1Exactly! That virus thing was REALLY bugging me when I read it... (among other things...) Also, about Word being the best choice by far, don't forget about Neo/OpenOffice!
          • Jholder112233, on 10/28/2007, -1/+2Well Pages 08 is pretty darn good too.
        • cleverboy, on 10/28/2007, -0/+2Based on software you're expected to upgrade??? LOL. Why should they bother including it then? Dude, I use Word Pad all the time, and hate having to pull out Microsoft Word to view every damn little thing. TextEdit is just better. Also, Shadow Copy on Ultimate is BS. Time Machine is a huge improvement instead of jumping into a properties dialog. Searching into the past for a deleted file is effortless and integrated. That an extremely important thing for a culture that has shunned backups for EVER. If you stick a drive in, it'll ask if you want to add it to TimeMachine... if I never hear another writer's latop crash sob story, it'll be too soon.

          I think a write up like this is GREAT... not because it can't come off as subjective in certain areas (that's inevitable), but because it HIGHLIGHTS the things that make an OS worthwhile. This is EXTREMELY important! Without coparisons and contrast, its hard to really get a good feel for the merit of anything. You'd just say, "I guess that's neat"... and take most things for granted. I'm pumped to jump to the Mac full-on soon. I'm tired of XP and according to CNET, Vista is mostly XP warmed over. I'd love to have Coverflow and Quicklook, and a Mail system that doesn't depress me. I have a G4 400 mHz machine, and its just plain SAD that I can search mail on my Mac FASTER (instantaneously) than on my 3 Ghz Windows XP machine in Outlook. It's ridiculous.

          Here are some of my points though:
          + Speech Recognition - I'm kind of thinking however commendable Leopard is with VoiceOVer, I don't think Apple gives you Vista's grid controls. Vista's controls seem FAR more granular, if to a fault (there was a security note that commands can be activated by a web page barking orders).

          + Frontrow (Note: only on Macs with infrared)
          + Speech Synthesis (New Alex voice in Leopard is extremely good, with breathing and natural pacing)
          + Preview Files - Leopard Preview 4.0 is so goddamn good, it deserves a leg up. While Adobe is squawking at Microsoft for incorporating PDF controls in Office, apparently they have few problems with letting Apple built-in a fantastic PDF viewer/editor. See AppleInsider "Road to Preview 4.0" feature.
          + Preview Files - More points, Quicklook has the potential to put ANYTHING in the "thumbnail" view as applications add the featture. Does Vista thumbnail PDFs? Quicklook let's you "preview" multiple pages in a PDF without "opening" it. Leopard also lets you create an on the fly list of selected thumbnails over a black background like Expose (quickly comparing different images).

          Good job, Engadget.
      • agarfield2004, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1Yeah but it looks good on paper...
    • SouthsideIrish, on 10/30/2007, -6/+23I wonder how Spotlight on Leopard could be any faster? You type a letter and it gives you your choices immediately. It could not be any faster.
    • DMCer, on 10/29/2007, -18/+21Search in Vista sucks, there aren't even categories like in Spotlight, it just dumps all your stuff into a cluttered list.
      • Totalchaos02, on 10/30/2007, -3/+14Sorry what? My Vista breaks down searches down into categories...
      • chris9902, on 10/30/2007, -1/+8Vista breaks it down for you.

        I had a URL to show but digg won't post it all
        • Grumby24, on 10/30/2007, -0/+3Use tinyurl.com.
          • Bartboy919, on 10/30/2007, -1/+3splits em in programs and files. Good enough for me.
    • FutureGuy, on 10/28/2007, -11/+4before you start salivating over it the number of "Nope"s (i.e. the feature does not exist) in Leopard is twice that of Vista (12-6 Vista)
  • chriskeyes, on 11/12/2007, -40/+313So what makes me mad about comparisons of this nature is that we all know that the DOJ simply will not allow Microsoft to be competitive in many of these areas. IF Microsoft decided to bundle their best mail, calendar, app or if they took the time to develop and integrate an industry leading DVD making program, or if they decided to do this in any of the areas in which separate executables are necessary, there would be an immediate outcry from somebody about monopolies. I think that the OPERATING SYSTEMS, themselves, should be compared. A lot of this stuff doesn't really count as part of the operating system.
    • MikeCerm, on 10/31/2007, -17/+97Seriously. Like how is a DVD player application part of an OS, and how sad is it that it accounts for 10 of Leopards 300 new features? http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/300.html#dvdp ...

      If you haven't read that whole list, you definitely should. It's completely laughable. I'm not saying that Leopard doesn't have new features, but claiming 300+ actually detracts from the 25 that are actually meaningful.
      • trippytree, on 10/29/2007, -5/+85Are you telling me #129 Empty Trash Button, "Empty the Trash from the Trash itself with the Empty Trash button." is not a real feature.

        How dare you!? How dare you!?
      • TheFinaleofSeem, on 10/29/2007, -15/+4Well, since the DVD player app comes bundled with the system, it kinda makes sense to list improvements, and the improved deinterlacing is a DEFINITE improvement.
        • MikeCerm, on 10/28/2007, -10/+16Are you serious? It took them until 2007 to write a DVD player that deinterlaces properly? If I was Apple, I definitely would have left that off the list. That's just pitiful.
          • TheFinaleofSeem, on 10/28/2007, -5/+10Um, no, it has an improved deinterlacing setting. Apple had deinterlacing on their DVD player but it wasn't the best. The new one seems to be more the equivalent of progressive scan rather than a simple deinterlacing algorithm. The quality is excellent.
          • nonymous666, on 10/28/2007, -4/+7"Um, no, it has an improved deinterlacing setting. Apple had deinterlacing on their DVD player but it wasn't the best"

            Then it's not a feature, it's a bug fix.
        • cleverboy, on 10/29/2007, -0/+1The DVD player is excellent. Just go down to an Apple store and USE it. The thumbnail scenes are highly cool. XP should list its new DVD player features as a feature too. Compared to what there WASn't in Windows 2000, its a reason to buy the OS. Don't be stupid just because you want to gripe about meaningless ***** bouncing around your head. If they do good, let them toot their own horn.
      • NoNamesLeft, on 10/29/2007, -8/+4As the title suggests, this is about the included OS features, not just the OS itself. Perhaps the main consideration here should be that they have included apps from the iLife suite, which is not included when you purchase the OS - it is a wholly separate product. This 'may' be because Apple does not want to end up in the same DOJ situation as MS. So in this sense, without iLife, Vista wins. Of course this also makes your point somewhat invalid, because MS is then including apps for free which competitors consider to be marketable and paid for products - this is monopolistic practice. At the end of the day though, who actually cares? Just use what YOU think is best, ***** these comparisons.
      • Yodacola, on 10/28/2007, -11/+8Yeah, a lot of the "new" features is just Apple playing catchup, like Font Book. Adobe, Linotype, and Extensis have been doing all the features that the new Font Book touts for years. Font Book still doesn't have half the features of Suitcase Fusion. I think a more correct, abeit less concise, verbage for" 300+ new features" is "300+ examples on how to attempt to copy ideas from your third-party developers"
        • cleverboy, on 10/30/2007, -2/+1Wow. Stay on the same page. We're comparing different OS' here, not talking about how Apple is "catching up" to existing software on its own platform. If "catching up" is horning in on 3rd parties, let's hope that's not the game everyone is playing. --No, if Vista/XP doesn't have a "Fontbook" (and I don't think it really does) then shaddap and enjoy what they just gave ya. I don't need no stinkin' Suitcase. Apple fixed most of what I used it for (back in pre-OS 9 days) a long time ago.
      • crazybrit, on 10/28/2007, -5/+7They also left off a lot of technical features, which is where most of the change happens. Whatever.
    • PhillyMJS, on 10/29/2007, -30/+17"So what makes me mad about comparisons of this nature is that we all know that the DOJ simply will not allow Microsoft to be competitive in many of these areas."

      Oh, cry me a river. Before the DOJ got involved, Microsoft was only as competitive as it had to be until it drove all its competitors for a given product/service out of business.

      I suppose the biggest example would be IE. Once Microsoft sewed up the browser marketshare, they all but disbanded the Windows IE team-- until Firefox appeared and started kicking their asses all over the place.

      Microsoft made their own bed w/r/t what they are and are not allowed to do these days.
      • screwzluse, on 10/29/2007, -10/+15I'm not sure what you're argument is.. I mean, yeah, they did what they wanted by creating applications that could be included in the OS, kinda like what Apple does now. Weird.
        • PhillyMJS, on 10/29/2007, -11/+8The difference is, Microsoft was determined by a court of law to have done those things to harm competitors, not just to compete.

          Apple has 6-8% marketshare currently, so they can pretty much do whatever they want. When they get convicted of antitrust violations, then they'll be subject to the same restrictions as Microsoft.
        • kodybryson, on 10/29/2007, -6/+5Don't lose sight of the main argument against Microsoft. Everyone remembers the IE thing because the web is such big deal. But the main problem was that Microsoft was (effectively) not allowing hardware vendors to ship their hardware with other software. Apple, by the nature of their business model, does not have this problem.

          One of the secondary points was that Microsoft made it difficult for some other software vendors to provide the same services with hidden apis and bizarre methods of bundling (the way IE had to be used for some things even if another browser was installed.) Note that it's quite possible for a 3rd party to create an email app that does everything Mac Mail does, and it won't result in your computer running poorly or downgrading your experience.
      • quikboy, on 10/29/2007, -4/+15Well if you're going to include that fact ...

        People only wanted IE because there was another browser called Netscape. Let's just say that more people found a reason to pick IE over Netscape. So Microsoft won that fair and square.

        And of course, Microsoft has been getting a bit lazy in early 2000, and now that competition is picking up again, and Microsoft is fighting back.

        Even though most FF fans see IE as small beans, I find that the latest version - IE7 - comes with much more enhanced security tools (compared to reliance on FF's current marketshare), tabs do much more, lots of add-on support (3rd party stuff, it's available), and it has caused no problems compared to IE6.

        I'm not going to bother mentioning the fact that IE7 also is pretty speedier and less of a memory hog as FF, but that would just start a mini-browser war right here.

        OK, so my whole point is, is that competition shouldn't be stopped for the sake of competition. Microsoft should be allowed to make themselves better in order to compete in the market. If they have the tools and resources, Microsoft should be able to use them to bring what users WANT. The DOJ was not cool in putting these laws.
        • PhillyMJS, on 10/29/2007, -13/+5"Let's just say that more people found a reason to pick IE over Netscape."

          You mean because Microsoft decided to bundle IE into Windows for free, to "cut off Netscape's air supply"?

          I would hardly call that fair and square, and the DOJ didn't think so, either. That's why Microsoft's behavior is subject to limits and oversight today.
          • GawtMilk, on 10/29/2007, -3/+5It's stupid. People make fun of MSPaint and Notepad, but they don't realize that they aren't allowed to upgrade it due to the Judge's orders.

            What's the difference between the latest Ubuntu distro and OSX including a kickass word suite? Whatever the competition can do, MSFT should be able to do.

            Until MSFT is physically preventing people from installing FireFox, OpenOffice or Photoshop, they shouldn't be called a monopoly and should be able to develop and include IE7, Word and an upgraded "Paint" in future Windows operating systems.
        • sammykeyes, on 10/28/2007, -0/+10@PhillyMJS: You seriously don't get it do you?

          MS just simply went competitive with Netscape by just offering it for free. Do you really want to pay for a thing such as a browser?

          Apple bundles a ton of things with their system, and it's quite ok to do that, isn't it? But not for Microsoft?

          Hmm. I guess Microsoft just trying to compete in the market, such as the Xbox 360 and the Zune 2.0 is really worth nothing, is it?
        • Kanidia, on 10/29/2007, -2/+11@PhillyMJS
          I'm risking to get dugg down to comment on this, but personally I think Macs have many things "bundled" into their OS. Quicktime, iLife, and everything else comes into mind. So why is it illegal for MS to bundle Windows Media Player?

          Although if you can't bundle IE, how the heck would you download firefox without knowing command lines? Same with bundling Safari.
        • kodybryson, on 10/29/2007, -3/+10The problem wasn't that Microsoft bundled IE, it was that they took measures to prevent other browsers from being successful on Windows. Bundling is not a crime, abusing a monopoly is, and Microsoft was found to be guilty of that.
          • zezerik, on 10/28/2007, -6/+3Yah, found guilty by a judge who waited in line for 3 days for the iPhone. Hmmm....


    • Naga10, on 10/29/2007, -8/+23I buried this by accident. =(
      • stoanhart, on 10/29/2007, -3/+33That's ok, I dugg it up for you :)
        • Kanidia, on 10/29/2007, -3/+28Dugg you for digging him for digging him.
          • sv650touring, on 10/30/2007, -2/+1I randomly dugg or buried comments all over this page, ignoring yours, stoanhart's, and Naga10's.
    • htan, on 10/29/2007, -6/+25i buried this on purpose

      comparisons of random features picked out of the air is meaningless; i might be able to find 10 things on this list that i would actually take into consideration, while i listing at least 10 others that should've been included
      • h0m3styl3, on 10/29/2007, -1/+13me too, lame. Very opinionated, no speed or technical references other than what the author "feels". No objectivity to this in any sense.
        I really like Tiger and I really like Vista. I just don't know if I'll spend another $129 on yet another version of mac os X with it's "300 new features". I think I'll wait for it to come bundled with my next mac purchase.
      • grumpyrain, on 10/29/2007, -4/+12I find it a bit bizarre to be honest, but I guess it comes down to the different ways Windows and Mac users consider their computers. Why would I care if Windows Mail sucked when I could easily install Thunderbird? Why would I care about Windows Messenger when I have Pidgin or Trillian? When has anyone had trouble with locating a printer driver in Windows? Screen capture - you can use print screen you know. And from Leapards side, why would I care about Auxillary display when no current hardware from Apple would even support it? Just bizarre comparison points.
        • stacky, on 10/29/2007, -2/+6Same with tablet support. There is no mac tablet, so why mark Leopard down for not supporting tablets?
        • cquinnd, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1Actually I can see the point of at least filing a "wish list" item for a mac tablet from Apple. (There was a Mac Tablet introduced last year(?) called the modbook). A lot of graphics designers and other creative drawing focused users would look forward to a closer relationship between Apple and a company like Wacom.
          But then I don't own a Tablet PC because it was more efficient for me to buy a used laptop and look toward saving up for a better Tablet later (or buying the tools to emulate some of the tablet functionality on my own).
      • misterjangles, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1I agree the list is arbitrary when you consider the thousands of possible issues that could be listed. But, I actually thought it was a pretty fair comparison. Comments like "why can't OSX have this...?" hint that the writer has a personal preference for Apple. But otherwise, I think they manged to keep it fairly objective.
    • jayfehr, on 10/29/2007, -11/+27The difference here is the ability to replace the app. The DOJ complaint was that MS was tying the apps to the OS so they couldn't be removed. This occurred with both Media Player and Internet Explorer. Therefore 3rd party's couldn't write competing apps. This is where the monopoly came into effect.

      Apple on the other hand designs very productive software and includes it with the OS. The difference here however, is that they allow you to remove their product and use a competitors.

      The complaint wasn't bundled apps (that was the talking point) it was unfair business practices.
      • Kanidia, on 10/29/2007, -2/+9Really? I didn't actually know that the reason was because you couldn't remove it. Well you learn something new everyday. And I'm soon about to learn through personal experience that commenting on a comment is going to result in some negative diggs for me... *braces*
        • GawtMilk, on 10/28/2007, -5/+2But you could remove it...always. Either be an idiot and use the "Delete key" and screw up your registry or go to "Add / Remove Programs".

          And not only that, but you could always install third party programs.
      • sammykeyes, on 10/29/2007, -7/+16Now don't get me started! :P

        Even if you can't delete IE or Media Player (which works pretty fine and great for me), you can still use alternatives.

        Nothing is stopping you from using Opera, or Real Player, WinAmp, iTunes, Safari, and such. You can still use them. Microsoft doesn't stop that.

        You just have to keep IE and Media Player. It's as simple as that.

        Plus on Macs, you can't opt out to install OS X. Some people might be interested in only putting a copy of Windows, or installing Linux themselves if they don't want to pay extra for a copy of OS X. I had that argument with an Apple employee, because I find Mac hardware very attractive, but not OS X. I HAD to buy OS X with it.

        So much for Macs can run both Windows and OS X. Windows is more like an add-on than anything. And I don't remember, but I'm quite sure there's software elements that you can't delete in OS X.

        And the term "very productive" is rather subjective.
        • jayfehr, on 10/28/2007, -2/+9Sorry about the wording. You're correct, "very productive" is rather subjective. I'm not saying that MS's software wasn't useful, it was that it was unremovable. And yes you could add other browsers / media players, but MS was strong-arming the computer manufactures to only including their apps. The media center debate was started by Real Player for this reason (it's possible that that was just the EU complaint).

          I'm not knocking MS software. And the DOJ complaint was very long and complicated. But my original post gave the gist of it. The bundled software thing is (mostly) a myth. The real complaint was unfair business practices.
        • jayfehr, on 10/28/2007, -1/+4btw, I Dugg you up for actually responding with a rational comment.
        • rjl252, on 10/29/2007, -4/+9Ever have another browser set as your default and STILL have IE pop up on you? I have.
          • Dotdotdot, on 10/28/2007, -1/+6Whenever this happens to me however, it is from third-party software that didn't decide to allow the users default browser to pop up. It's not Microsoft's fault that the third-party software developer didn't realize not everyone uses Internet Explorer.
          • MioTheGreat, on 10/28/2007, -0/+4If a piece of software properly Shell executes a website, instead of looking for and manually calling IE, that will never happen. (It's actually easier to write software that does it right, as opposed to software that ***** it up.)
        • hunchback, on 10/28/2007, -3/+2wtf?? I thought OS X came free with new Macs, you only buy upgrades later.
          • grumpyrain, on 10/28/2007, -0/+6presumably he thought he was entitled to some sort of discount if not purchasing an OS X license.
        • Scaryclouds, on 10/28/2007, -1/+5@hunchback
          If by free you mean the cost of the OS is included in the cost of the new Mac you are buying, then yes it is free.
        • MacSuxWindozSux, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1I think common sense is stopping you from using Real Player. Either that or your virus scanner is.
      • chroko, on 10/29/2007, -3/+12There's no difference. You can't remove Quicktime or Safari from OSX.

        Sure, you can remove their end-user executables (the .app bundles) - but the Quicktime libraries and Safari Webkit are deeply embedded into the OS. There's no way to remove or replace them.

        Also note that some Apple applications are hardcoded to use, for example, Safari whenever you click on a link - even if you have a different browser configured as the default.
        • gimpsley, on 10/29/2007, -7/+4Oh god, this so fking stupid. I read all these comments, that truly must be written by 10 yr olds... M$, an American company, was found guilty by an American court, for intentionally harming it's competitors by abusing it's market position. Most companies do this to a certain degree, but when the effect is so great as to slow the growth of the entire industry... something had to be done. There is absolutely no comparison between M$ and Apple in this regard. Apple can't use it's (OS) market share to do *****. If they could, many would argue they would. BUT THEY CAN'T.

          When M$ bundled IE and put the icon on the desktop.... it had the effect of destroying competition in a rapidly growing industry. It was done as a purposeful tactic to promote an inferior product... If your memory doesn't go back that far, i have a few reminders about the kind of company Microsoft is:


          What about, purposely sabotoging their own document format to make it impossible for other word processors to legally interoperate with it.

          Wait no, how about Microsoft serving up broken web pages to the browsers of competitors.

          Would Microsoft break Windows so that it would refuse to run under a competitor's version of DOS?

          Maybe it's like Microsoft shipping a browser that has the option to uninstall other software vendor's browsers. Or Microsoft forcing OEM's to pay them a fee for every computer they ship, with or without Windows installed. Perhaps it's like Microsoft hiding crucial API's from everyone but themselves, and when forced to expose them for all to see defining "all" as anyone who can pony up 50 thousand dollars plus additional fees. Or Microsoft attempting to ship broken versions of Java to destroy the standard. Or forcing OEM vendors to carry Microsoft ads, and only Microsoft ads, on all desktops sold. Or negotiating with another company for a year only to steal their technology. And then refusing a court order to turn over all e-mails from that period.

          But all of this is metaphorical: Microsoft would never do anything like this. This is all speculative fantasy. And besides everyone in this country is innocent until proven guilty in at least 4 different courts of law.

          (some of my rant here is borrowed from other peoples rants... still, it's an impressive list of attempts to ***** the entire industry to line ones own pocket, no?)
          • FoxtrotYankee, on 10/28/2007, -4/+3M$? AHHAHAHHAHAHA! I see what you did there! You used a dollar sign instead of an "S" to show that they're GREEDY! And we all know that GREEDY=EVIL. You're so clever! I wish I had thought of that. The best I could come up with is calling them "MicroShaft"! Get it? See? Because you get the SHAFT from them. AHHAHAHAHAHA!

            (Actually, you had a lot of very good points about the scummy things they've done...but I bet a lot of people write you off as a 'tard and stop reading the moment you start with the "M$" *****. You should stick to the facts. They're damning enough that they don't need your (not) clever enhancements.)
        • jayfehr, on 10/28/2007, -1/+4But there is a difference. Yes the underlying frameworks are bundled as a part of the OS, same as MS. But the difference is MS always tried to hide them. They have (or had) thousands of undocumented API calls that effectively prevented the competition to compete on an even platform. So while IE was basically built into the OS, Netscape had to build it's own library to run on top, This caused it to be slower, and appear inferior. Add this to the fact that MS was penalizing OEM distributors that were bundling competing products and you have a DOJ case for Unfair Business Practices.

          In Apples case they supply the frameworks, and build their apps. They also allow other companies to build apps using those same frameworks. Also they do not strong-arm them out. Even though there is (thankfully) very few non-Apple apps bundled with a new machine. It is very easy to remove the offending app, and replace it with something from a 3rd party vendor.

          So it is not the same as the DOJ case against MS. Although the talking points appear equal the underlying criminal activities were completely different.
    • kodybryson, on 10/28/2007, -9/+3Microsoft doesn't want to bundle their best mail and calendar app with the OS. They want you to pay $300 for it. If they wanted to bundle it but couldn't, they'd charge $19 for it and not include any email or calendar apps with the OS.
      • boiboi, on 10/28/2007, -1/+1time to come out of the cave. they tried but got sued.
    • firepowered, on 10/28/2007, -9/+4this chart is a bias as bill o reilly.
    • robdazomba, on 11/06/2007, -11/+14The misinformation in the comments here is astonishing. Microsoft WAS NOT punished for being a monopoly (which is totally legal, and in fact, encouraged by the government in some cases where it makes sense.) MS was punished for using their monopoly power *along with* the bundling of applications in a tactic to undercut competition in a way that is illegal. *That's* why Apple can bundle without any problem. You first have to show how they're unfairly undercutting competition using bundling and monopolistic practices. And since they have ab out 5% of the market, it's gonna be a hard argument to make.

      Those of you scratching your heads about "How come Apple gets a free pass... blah blah?" please take a moment and get educated.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Micr ...

      Read it. Don't hit reply and start trying to tear me a new one. Just read the damn thing and know what you're talking about. Seriously.
      • Scaryclouds, on 10/29/2007, -6/+6Actually I think Apple should be sued for that as well, because now in order to run Windows on a Mac you HAVE to buy Leopard. Or at least to run along with OS X. Either way Apple i doing the EXACT same thing Microsoft did, in others they are both corporations who care more about money than their customers.
        • jdpalite, on 10/29/2007, -1/+3Apple should be sued for not making it easy to run Windows on a Mac? Maybe Microsoft (or, every OEM PC manufacturer) should be sued for not making it easy to run OS X on a PC.

          You do not need Leopard to run Windows on a Mac. You can use boot camp on Tiger, or you can buy Parallels Desktop.
      • DiggLive, on 11/06/2007, -2/+2Yeah.... because we all know how accurate Wikipedia can be...
        • robdazomba, on 11/06/2007, -0/+1So you don't have a substantive comeback then? You just want to attack the source? I followed the MS trials very carefully as it affected me in ways I won't bother detailing for you and what's on Wikipedia (in this case) is accurate. You can verify this information out there with other sources if you want. Or you can just continue to ignorantly post smarmy comments because I'm pointing out some facts that apparently clash with your delusional concept of reality.
    • theuniversal, on 10/29/2007, -8/+1So the DOJ is what makes Windows so crappy because it doesn't allow MS to use its 'best' mail and 'best' calendar. LOL, that's too ***** hilarious.
      • MacSuxWindozSux, on 10/28/2007, -2/+2It's true. In eurpoe they can't even bundle their Media Player with windows.
      • cquinnd, on 10/28/2007, -1/+1The threat of further action by the DOJ or the EU court has seemed to have an effect on the features of some of the bundled apps that came in the box with Windows. More so that could be attributed to just a concern that they would detract from sales of their commercial apps.
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 10/28/2007, -3/+1Also they only compare out of box experience. When people start actually using the computer... windows platforms (and linux) seem to get a huge advantage.
  • rebotfc, on 10/29/2007, -32/+9Fair breakdown. Although Vista only has the advantage on some items if you have a certain version.
    • MikeCerm, on 10/29/2007, -20/+32How was this fair? It didn't even mention Vista's better hardware compatibility, or it's vastly superior support of 3rd party software. There was no mention of how the Start Menu/Taskbar is vastly superior to the (nice looking but) totally useless Dock. They forgot to give Vista another point for allowing windows to be resized from any edge or corner. There wasn't any mention of Vista's superior support for 5-button mice. I could go on like this all day.

      I know, I'm cherry-picking. That's the point: this article is totally biased. I'm not even saying that Vista is necessarily better. I'm just saying that there's a lot more points that weren't given.
      • RubberBinder, on 10/29/2007, -18/+15Personally I find the dock to be amazingly useful, and last time I checked, the mighty mouse has 5 buttons.
        • MikeCerm, on 10/29/2007, -3/+6Check again. It has 2 mechanical buttons, and performs 4 functions: left-, right-, ball-click, and squeeze. Any way you slice it, not 5 buttons. You have to lift your index finger to right-click, and the whole thing is an ergonomic nightmare. I get an RSI just thinking about it.

          Since Apple is essentially a design company, you'd think that they'd have heard of the axiom, "form follows function". The Mighty Mouse is a perfect example of the opposite, and it's just a totally disaster. Except for the scroll ball. I'd actually like to see that in a decent, usable mouse from Logitech, Microsoft, or any company that takes ergonomic peripheral design seriously.
          • MioTheGreat, on 10/29/2007, -1/+4"and the whole thing is an ergonomic nightmare. I get an RSI just thinking about it."

            Agreed. The design is a disaster for usability. Logitech MX518/G5's ftw!
      • rebotfc, on 10/28/2007, -11/+9Mike, many of the points you bring up are entirely subjective, at least Engadget tried to factor in definite areas where one OS was better than the other.

        Personally I find the Start Menu in Vista ridiculous , it seems they just tried to dump everything in there. But that is an opinion and why it shouldn't be on a comparison like this.
      • estvir, on 10/29/2007, -4/+8Everyone should report it as Inaccurate, I miss the days of articles being marred with the "Diggers report this story may be inaccurate" label, it's rarely seen despite the amount of sensationalist BS on here daily.
      • Konstantino, on 10/29/2007, -4/+5Note that they said they weren't including any 3rd party stuff, just what was included on the disk. AND, OS X supports just as many mice and Vista.
    • Ramble, on 10/29/2007, -12/+19This is not fair, some of their choices were just wrong, opinion wise and actual technology wise.
      Anyone who has used Windows Search knows it is far superior to Spotlight, in terms of features and speed.
  • MikeCerm, on 11/03/2007, -12/+223Yikes. They should have just titled this article, "Flamebait for Fanboys: Help Engadget Increase Page Views and Ad Revenue".
    • monospaced, on 10/29/2007, -9/+24Totally. At first I thought it was fair, then realized it's full of extra Leopard comparisons instead of actual operating systems alone, and even as a Mac fan I'm disgusted. Then I realized it did the same with Vista. And to say the Mac doesn't have a "presentation" mode isn't fair. It's ideal for it, in fact. Most of the time 3rd party apps can make up the difference. But, take out a few of these features, and the Mac still kinda wins.
      • screwzluse, on 10/31/2007, -8/+43rd Party Apps should not be taken into consideration to fix issues with the OS. If that were the case, both Vista and OSX would be almost the same except for the GUI.
        • JaceFuse, on 10/28/2007, -0/+12But that's exactly the point. I can very comfortably go back and forth between my Mac and PC because the shortcomings of both are minor issues after dealt with by just a few 3rd party apps.

          This whole article is flamebait.
        • cquinnd, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1What JaceFuse said. I was just thinking the real value of a comparison like this would be to tell each user what add-on apps they might start looking for to make their own computing experience more "complete". That is assuming that user would even care about the difference.
      • jayfehr, on 10/31/2007, -6/+1Hence the very even scores of 46 vs 38
    • jamima69z, on 10/29/2007, -2/+21personally i get pissed off when i think i'm going see see at least an honest attempt at a comparision between two operating systems (i'm thinking of jumping ship from xp) only to find useless and obviously padded flamebait like this article was.

      i expected better from engadget :(
      • jakem1, on 10/29/2007, -2/+13Why? This seems like typical Engadget fair to me. It seems like the only "gadgets" they report on are iPods, iPhones, iMacs, etc.
    • acitcratnA, on 10/28/2007, -0/+16I agree completely. What kind of ***** comparison would give Windows a win in one category saying it's more powerful, then giving it a loss in another category because it's slightly harder to use (while still mentioning it's more powerful).
      It contradicts itself.
    • Kanidia, on 10/28/2007, -12/+4This is the only digg article I can talk about Windows without being bashed by the scary fanboys... *cries for mommy*

      AHHH! STAY AWAY! *takes out a Zune and waves profusely*
    • JamesRocks, on 10/28/2007, -9/+5I find this article funny because its blatant apple fanboy-ism. I mean OF COURSE Leopard will get more categories to win because EVERYBODY hates Vista and they haven't even tried it and Leopard has been out for 1 freaking day! I mean srsly!

      THE APPLE CULT IS SPREADING!!
    • Saiing, on 10/29/2007, -1/+10This is what happens when you make the mistake of confusing bloggers with professional journalists.
    • reubencm, on 10/28/2007, -1/+2yikes?
  • quikboy, on 11/12/2007, -10/+89Being that Spotlight searches shared files and supports Boolean logic, we had to give this one to Apple
    -----

    Um, both parts of this line is incorrect.

    Vista's search has always done shared files, network shares, etc. It is one of the nice features of Vista's search in that it can query over a network and not have to enumerate the files in the search, instead it lets the hosting computer return the indexed results.

    Vista's Search not only has Boolean, but it also has advanced search constructs and nested search capabilities, including the use of pre-exiting search folders.

    Here is a link to a more indepth guide to the syntax of the Vista Search abilities showing Boolean operations as well as other search features not even offered by Spotlight.

    http://search.msn.com/docs/toolbar.aspx?t=MSNTbar_ ...
  • quikboy, on 10/31/2007, -13/+105Is it really fair to have the iLife apps when comparing? Technically Leopard comes with iLife only when you buy a new computer with it, right?

    iPhoto, iMovie, and iDVD are not included with Leopard ($79 iLife package).
    • bastian89, on 10/29/2007, -24/+15You need a mac to install Leopard, and macs come with iLife
      • cpcouvillion, on 10/29/2007, -1/+27But, you can install Leopard on a Mac that predates iLife.

        I don't think iLife should have been in there and I think they should have picked one version of Vista and stuck to it. When you start comparing things like Home Server and Apple TV you've stretched way beyond the OS.
        • thewfirestarter, on 10/28/2007, -9/+1Also they apparently use Vista Ultimate for the comparison, to be able to compare media center capability, tablet modes, server/domain tools, etc, to Leopard, which in that case, lets you also compare price, where Ultimate is in the losing position.
    • mrgreen4242, on 10/29/2007, -22/+9$129 + $79 = $208 which is still less than many of the versions of Vista, so it seems pretty fair.
      • Blubi, on 10/29/2007, -1/+12No, you cannot count like this or you would have to consider all the 3rd party apps which are for free as well (whatever OS). If they claim to make a comparison of OS only, it should be OS only. iLife isn't part of Leopard.
      • inspireology, on 10/29/2007, -3/+6To be fair you will also have to consider that there are more then likely to be multiple paid upgrades to the OS during the lifespan of a single Vista purchase.
        • Kanidia, on 10/29/2007, -5/+8To be fair you will also have to consider that you can actually upgrade your Vista system without taking apart your monitor.

          Edit: I just submitted this and my intuition tells me it will get dugg down... or maybe it's my fear of fanbois
      • grumpyrain, on 10/28/2007, -0/+7Nope, search newegg. You can get Ultimate for under 200.
      • Sonizel, on 10/28/2007, -1/+1http://www.pricegrabber.ca/search_getprod.php/mast ...
    • iChainsaw, on 10/28/2007, -9/+1you are not factoring in the fact that you must own the ultimate version of vista to do most of the things in the list.
      • estvir, on 10/28/2007, -1/+6By 'most' you meanlke.. 2 things, right? Otherwise I'd have to call you a liar and this whole situation would get messy, you don't want that, do you?
    • shadoturtl, on 10/29/2007, -1/+10No it's not fair. To say "you have to have a mac to get Leopard and macs come with iLife." is faulty logic. FTA: This chart is only for out of box features. And seriously. gaming...two categories...snicker
    • diggimator, on 10/29/2007, -4/+3The article now says: "And yes, we know, iLife isn't included in Leopard, but it IS bundled with all Macs, so it's fair game."
      A purchase of Leopard doesn't come with iLife '08, but any Mac with hardware capable of running Leopard is likely to have a fairly recent version of iLife anyway that came bundled with the Mac.
    • ferrariman60, on 10/29/2007, -0/+2I noticed this too, and pointed this out on the comments page- 4 times. (All are highest ranked, so I think people agree) He's only responded by inserting that "it's bundled with all new macs" thing at the end. I usually try to look for the good things in everything, but man..... the pro-apple bias is really showing here. He's violating his own rules without shame. You might as well include Office, since it comes preinstalled on a lot of new computers. That would change the chart a little bit, dontcha think?
  • sammykeyes, on 10/31/2007, -12/+126Activation:

    Leopard : No
    Vista : Yes

    I think Leopard doesn't need an activation because you have to have a Mac to (legally) use it. Apple should already pretty much know if you're allowed to put that on your computer. It's a lock-in system, but the whole set-up is already controlled by Apple. Microsoft doesn't have that ability with varying PC makers out there.
    • cpcouvillion, on 11/07/2007, -26/+13That doesn't change the fact that you do have to activate Vista and it can suddenly decide that you are no longer legal and disable features.
      • jakem1, on 10/29/2007, -2/+30Well then Engadget should just add another row to their table like "Can be installed on any computer" or "Not limited to Apple hardware", etc.
    • NightOwl4, on 11/07/2007, -16/+8leopard has been hacked to be used on PC's already
    • chris9902, on 11/07/2007, -7/+19You think Apple doesn't use activation? Hardware Activation anyone?

      Without patching it it doesn't run on anything other than Apple hardware.
      • grumpyrain, on 11/03/2007, -0/+24No, it doesn't use activation. It uses a dongle called a Mac.
    • raymore, on 11/07/2007, -4/+4S how does that not constitute Anti-trust?
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 10/29/2007, -0/+3I thought you said
      Activision:
      Vista Yes.
      Leopard No.
  • Ramble, on 11/07/2007, -8/+50Vista search has been searching shared files and has supported boolean logic since November last year. Why do you think Leopard includes them?
    • jtbandes, on 10/28/2007, -16/+3Because it's better than not including them?
      • sammykeyes, on 11/07/2007, -2/+8That's like saying Microsoft copied obvious features from Tiger.

        Oh wait, what you just said is exactly the same meaning.

        People can say Microsoft copied Tiger elements into Vista, but some of them were pretty obvious elements to an OS, and they also have been developed at Microsoft for awhile. More than anything, Microsoft at least "enhances" a few things Tiger did. Like Desktop Search. I find it much more faster and convenient to use than Finder.

        Plus, I do remember Microsoft showing at some WinHEC demo about desktop search. Like in 2003?

        I wouldn't be surprised if some of Apple's "ideas" also came from being first to market, after sneaking into Microsoft demos. Microsoft is a pretty open company you know. Their employees even blog without being swayed by MS.
    • stoanhart, on 10/28/2007, -8/+4I must say, boolean logic is sweet. I used OS X (tiger) for the first time (for more than 30 seconds) the other day. I made a typo in the search box, and made a "negate" sign. I was like, "No way!" So I tried some searches, and it worked just like expected. Very cool!

      Otherwise, I have to say, not too impressed. More annoyances than anything else. I remember switching from Windows to Ubuntu; everything just worked as I expected WRT keyboard shortcuts, being able to mount remote drives and partitions, navigating the filesystem, etc. Every time I tried to do something in OS X, the key combo didn't work, or the details I was looking for were hidden away to keep things user friendly, etc. I used the "Connect to remote server" option thinking I could mount an ssh drive... nope. No, I think I will stick with linux, thank you very much. OS X is too dumbed down.
      • enicholas, on 10/28/2007, -2/+5So... basically... "Mac OS X is different from Windows and Linux, and therefore I don't like it."

        Among other things, you're complaining about the fact that Mac OS uses different keyboard shortcuts than Windows. Do I really have to point out that most of Mac OS' keyboard shortcuts were well-established before Windows even EXISTED? But, since it's not what you're used to, it's annoying and wrong....

        The complaint against mounting ssh shares is silly as well. True, out of the box Mac OS can't mount Linux ssh shares. And out of the box Linux can't mount Mac OS afp shares. Both of them require the use of FUSE to access each others' filesystems. How exactly is that a strike against Mac OS?
  • deadbaby, on 10/29/2007, -16/+2Pretty fair for the most part. The only thing I disagree with is MCE vs. FrontRow. They're not really directly comparable. MCE supports OTAHD/CableCARD/tuners but iTunes offers a much better selection of online content to purchase. It should be a tie.
    • neiltc13, on 10/29/2007, -1/+19Except with the Vista solution, you don't pay $1.99 per episode. I think that is a clear winner.
    • chriskeyes, on 10/28/2007, -0/+6Are you comparing anything? Directly?

      "MCE supports OTAHD/CableCARD/tuners" - That's a great thing for MCE. FrontRow doesn't, so that's a bad thing.

      "iTunes offers a much better selection of online content to purchase" - That's true. But there's also other online stores within Media Center to buy from. NOT as good, but they're there. I'm thinking maybe Zune Marketplace can be updated to offer just as much or more content and offer it on Media Center itself.

      And just to add this in, many people find Windows Media Center a much more appealing way to watch TV than Apple TV/FrontRow. WMC works great with my Xbox 360, and the way it works is rather solid. Can't wait to see what comes in Windows Fiji.
    • deadbaby, on 10/28/2007, -3/+3"Except with the Vista solution, you don't pay $1.99 "

      And with iTunes you don't pay a $80/month cable/satellite bill. For someone like me who would have a VERY hard time watching 40 shows a month it's ideal. That's why I'm saying you can't really compare them. They're two entirely different models.
  • ghostfish, on 10/29/2007, -22/+37Stop posting major blog links to digg, I can check them myself.
    • GreatOne08, on 10/28/2007, -11/+5I gave you a digg
    • wesd, on 10/28/2007, -4/+11Maybe you should give us a list of what you consider to be "major blog links" so everybody on here can make sure they check them themselves. /sarcasm

      Honestly, I found it a little annoying at first that I was reading things on blogs then seeing them again on Digg but then I actually thought about it - that's the point of Digg!

      Not everyone reads all the sites you read and maybe, get this, they use Digg to identify the 'hot topics' so they don't HAVE TO check every major blog.

      Digg != your personal news service.

      p.s. I didn't give you a Digg.
    • iChainsaw, on 10/28/2007, -7/+2I'm with you, my friend always sends me links that are in the top then in digg...it gets on my ***** NERVES.
  • fenixconnektion, on 11/07/2007, -7/+15Fairly nice comparison between the two OSes feature sets. Some mistakes though, such as A2DP not working in Vista....otherwise these Logitech FreePulse bluetooth headphones wouldn't be working now!
    • thomas, on 11/07/2007, -8/+4Windows Vista does not support A2DP out of the box but you can add it.
      • aelias, on 11/07/2007, -2/+4Technically, it's a hardware feature, not an OS feature. A2DP is supported by the Bluetooth chipset, not the OS, but as pretty much all current chipsets include support for this, I think it's a moot point. My Dell 1520 lappy with Vista supports A2DP just fine, right out of the box.
    • ozroy, on 11/07/2007, -1/+5Because thomas ha been dugg down for telling the truth I'll repeat what he said.

      Vista does not support A2DP out of the box. It requires a driver install. However, it is trivial to do.
    • dentalFOSS, on 11/14/2007, -0/+0well, the Logitech FreePulse headset pairs, but does not connect to my macbook pro with leopard :-(
  • chriskeyes, on 10/29/2007, -7/+13You know one thing that came to mind as I was reading this is the real "size" of Microsoft. Many of us had made comments/complaints about Microsoft's whole activation issue. It's true that it may be somewhat annoying but Apple hasn't got that big yet. They are still somewhat small (I believe 6.x percent of market), and as they grow into a larger company--which they will--they will have to change.

    I think one of the main reasons Apple has so much going for it right now is because it can still afford to experiment and try out. Later on though, when they hold above a 10% of the market share, they will be much more scrutinized. In other words, they'll be under their own "Spotlight" (forgive the pun).
    • krische, on 10/29/2007, -3/+11Actually, the reason OS X doesn't need to be activated has nothing to really do with the size of the company. It has to do with the fact that it will only install on Apple computers, whereas windows installs on just about everything. So Apple could have 80% of the market, but still require it be installed on their hardware and there would be no need for activation.
    • boiboi, on 10/28/2007, -2/+1and right now it's not worth the time and effort to write viruses for OSX. Why waste time on the few 6 percent (6% U.S only) when you can hack the planet.

  • TheLoneWolf071, on 11/07/2007, -20/+6Advanced Features of vista? What the hell are those?
  • nubnub, on 11/07/2007, -3/+16the IM part isn't really apart of Vista. iChat supports a lot of protocols because its not MSN messenger.
    • neiltc13, on 11/07/2007, -5/+18Most of my friends use Windows Live Messenger and really, it's unusal to find someone that uses AIM or something else.
      • estvir, on 11/07/2007, -0/+4.. and? Just because a lot of people use it doesn't magically change what nubnub said.
        • unruled, on 11/07/2007, -4/+2hardly anyone in the EU uses anything but msn, so.. who cares if it supports more networks. on the windows platform, you have the freedom to download 10+ alternative IM apps if you want to do so. Not something I can say for mac.
    • chriskeyes, on 10/28/2007, -1/+13I agree. I do find iChat a great IM program (it does a ton of things!), it doesn't work with all my accounts and sadly, you have to have an AOL screenname to chat. I would like little to do with AOL thank you.

      Windows Live Messenger isn't even on Vista by default. You get it from the website : http://im.live.com/

      And just FYI, I think Live Messenger is the best free IM program out there for many users. It does a ton of games, IMing helps support many charities if you check the im.live.com site, very customizable (3rd party too), nice look, and it just does a whole bunch more than Y! or AIM. Just thought I should put that in.
      • stoanhart, on 11/07/2007, -5/+3heh, funny how different people have such drastically different priorities. All that crap you just mentioned is precisely the reason I HATE Live Messenger. I love my pidgin, because it's dead simple. Text and not much else!

        Also, if you are using a "foreign" messenger to chat on MSN, you can do this (at least in gaim/pidgin):
        /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge /nudge

        And they can't do it back. Lots of fun!
        • Kanidia, on 11/07/2007, -3/+3hehe, I patched my WLM to do the same thing. And I don't feel the nudges. Perfect for your fatal enemies that you have on MSN for some reason.
      • iChainsaw, on 11/07/2007, -4/+2live messanger = do not want. I love my google talk. if i need to use anything else i use a web based service.
    • Kanidia, on 10/28/2007, -0/+5Exactly. You can't say that iChat is better than Yahoo Messenger. Well obviously Yahoo messenger is going to only support their own Yahoo network. Maybe if Apple owns an IM network, then you'll find iChat supporting Apple Chat only.
      • grumpyrain, on 10/28/2007, -0/+2Actually Yahoo and MSN have a cross network deal. (You can talk to MSN contacts using Yahoo Messenger and vice versa). In any case, I have used Trillian for years, and pidgin apart from looking ordinary, does work well.
        • Kanidia, on 10/28/2007, -1/+1Yes, but what I meant is that you can't log onto your MSN account using Yahoo, but you can add MSN users with Yahoo. Trillian is a pretty good IM chat though.
  • neiltc13, on 11/07/2007, -43/+90I use both Leopard and Vista now and I have to say that Leopard is definitely looking like a half assed product from Apple. When Vista came out everyone criticised it for being unstable and insignificant, but I've found that many of the features (especially Windows Media Center) are quite nice.

    Leopard's interface is a place where it really falls down. I don't know what they've done but it looks pretty shoddy now, as if they've waved a messy stick over it. There are also far too many programs that refuse to start or hang or even crash the entire system.

    Contrast this with Vista where Microsoft has clearly put a lot of effort into making things as unified as possible without harming product development. All icons look like they're from the same land and menu and title bars are pretty to look at. Leopard's "traffic light" buttons need to go down on the saturation about 10 notches. Vista has also never ever crashed on me whereas Mac OS X (Tiger and Leopard) do it probably about once a week to me.

    I like both, I prefer actually working in Mac OS X thanks to Expose mainly but Leopard really hasn't added anything worthwhile whatsoever. They can keep their stupid Time Machine and their horrifically flawed Stacks. I sort of regret buying this now, I haven't gained anything from the purchase.
    • krische, on 11/07/2007, -15/+4Technically, Media Center isn't a new feature, it was introduced in XP with XP Media Center Edition. They just updated it since then.
      • Ramble, on 11/07/2007, -1/+17They were seperate editions however, Vista has an updated Media Center as a feature in it's standard home OS.
    • JamesRocks, on 11/07/2007, -7/+19Vista was released like a year ago and Leopard was released a day ago, so Apple could of adding new features so it makes Vista look crap. Also, I agree with neiltc13, I have had NO BSOD's on my laptop OR computer which both have Vista installed on them around 1/2 year ago. All of the Apple cultists go "LOLORZ WE DONT BSOD EVERY 5 MINS!!" when it is totally untrue.
      • estvir, on 11/07/2007, -3/+10It's funny how Apple makes the lame, tired jokes about "photocopiers in Redmond" when it's as guilty, if not more so. Hell, when they had that banner Vista was FEATURE FROZEN yet the Apple fanboys drank it up from Steve Jobs.
      • thedragon4453, on 11/07/2007, -2/+4You know, I don't think I have seen a BSOD since ME. However, on my Vista laptop, I have had it become inoperable because it was using all of the ram/processor opening a word processor. But crap like that is few and far between.

        In the end though, I do enjoy using OS X more. But for the most part, that is subjective. It is simpler for my needs, but not necessarily for everyone.
    • iChainsaw, on 11/07/2007, -7/+10I don't know, i love my leopard...and vista has been a horrible expirience for me. Would you mind telling what model computer you have tried both on?
      • estvir, on 11/07/2007, -4/+6I'm sure he won't mind, but would you mind telling me why Vista was a horrible experience for you?
      • neiltc13, on 10/28/2007, -3/+2I run Leopard on a 1.83GHz first generation MacBook with 2GB RAM. Vista runs on an Athlon X2 5800+ with 2GB RAM and a Geforce 8800 GTS.

        Incidentally, I built that second machine for less than £500. Oh how I pity the people buying the new iMac from Apple and getting a ***** Radeon HD for between £200 and £1000 more. They should give you a t-shirt saying "I spent £1400 on a computer and all I got was this lousy graphics chip".
    • toxicvarn90, on 11/07/2007, -6/+3In the end does it really matter? An OS is an OS, it either works for you or it doesn't.
      • vwgtiturbo, on 10/28/2007, -3/+1My problem with this idiot's comment is that he bashes OS X, yet at the same time, says that he prefers it simply for Expose? WTF is THAT?! So, a simple feature like that turns the tide in OS X's favor. That is ridiculous. I use XP, Vista, and OS X, and personally prefer OS X for a MYRIAD of reasons that aren't asinine...
    • boiboi, on 11/07/2007, -5/+6No one has mentioned that if you get a virus on Vista, it's contained to that user account and it cannot spread to the entire system or even overwrite any core files. So all you do is delete that account. And please don't say that there's no virus for OSX. Of course not. Because it's not worth the time and effort when a mere 6% in the US use Macs. It's a simple fact. And if you're a marketing genius, you'll use that info to your advantage. "OSX is Virus Proof!!"
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 11/07/2007, -3/+5UAC is annoying for the first few days until you've settled in and finished adjusting settings.
    • RealHyperX, on 10/29/2007, -2/+2Leopard runs faster on my mac pro. My firefox issues (where firefox ran slow) went away. However, I agree, there is something about Vista I like too.
  • nubnub, on 11/07/2007, -26/+6298% of that crap. I could care less and secondly thats all right out of the box. There are plenty of apps for windows that would beat Apple.
    • neiltc13, on 11/07/2007, -11/+9If you could care less (ie, you care) why do you call it crap?
      • MacSuxWindozSux, on 10/28/2007, -2/+1Figure of speech.
        • neiltc13, on 11/07/2007, -1/+3No, that would be couldn't care less, not could care less.
    • sLm4ever, on 10/28/2007, -6/+0exactly ... the os is just the base for a very big world of apps ... if that is a good "base" for these applications that you need then that's it ...
    • krische, on 11/07/2007, -5/+5Umm, they said that right in the beginning of the article. Thats why they are comparing OS features, not 3rd party features.
    • deadbaby, on 11/07/2007, -4/+7And? There are lots of Mac apps too. Show me something as good as QuickSilver for Windows.
      • chourobin, on 11/07/2007, -4/+1U need to checkout LAUNCHY (google it). Quicksilver for windows.. wala.
        • mrBitch, on 11/07/2007, -1/+3I used Launchy, and then decided that this whole " quick search my apps by typing in the first few letters " thing is all absolute crap. And then ( by painting QuickSilver with the same feather ), decided that QuickSilver must be crap.

          And then I switched and bought a MacBook Pro. A few months later I decided to download & try QuickSilver, and BOOM - realised that QuickSilver is awsome, and Launchy is just a lame crappy copy.

          Moral of the story : actually try something before you say " it's just as good ". Launchy is nothing near as good as QuickSilver.
    • avatarpalin, on 10/28/2007, -1/+2Windows Paint... Every day man I wish they would port that OS X...


  • dechah, on 11/07/2007, -7/+52iPhoto 08 and iMovie 08 do not come with Leopard, so it is unfair to rate Vista's movie maker and photo gallery apps capabilities lower than OS X. You get iLife 08 either as a separate software suite purchase, or with the purchase of a new Mac, not with a mere purchase of Leopard.
    • Disodium, on 11/07/2007, -16/+7But to have leopard you need a mac with came with some type of iLife. Maybe not the newest but still a version of iLife
      • Zalyster, on 11/07/2007, -3/+8Not if you're using it on a pre-iLife Mac, or a hacked version of Leopard on a normal PC...
        And secondly, iMovie 06 is way better than 08, IMO.
        • deadbaby, on 11/07/2007, -2/+6A pre-iLife Mac? That's going wayyyyy back. If you're using the hacked build on a PC you might as well just steal iLife too. (also, FYI, the old iMovie comes with Ilife 08)
  • nycmac247, on 10/29/2007, -8/+16Pricing???

    hahahahaha
    • acitcratnA, on 11/07/2007, -8/+11If you want to argue about pricing, then you'd have to give another point to Windows for selection. It evens out, see?
    • MikeCerm, on 10/29/2007, -7/+6I paid $69 for Vista Home Premium. The retail price is higher, but it's widely available for under $100. What was your point again?
      • boiboi, on 10/28/2007, -1/+1I paid 80 for mine. Cheaper if you go to your local community college or university, ey?
      • muchocheeto, on 11/07/2007, -2/+3The point is that Leopard AS IS has all of the features enabled for $129 retail.. you can get it for $99 at CompUSA with coupon... Leopard is more like the Ultimate edition in Vista. Also, yes.. through a university you can get Leopard for $69 I believe.
        AND... as I can tell by all the features listed and tested... half of them in Vista are not working properly. But it is the experience, the productivity and the amount of hours and weeks that you can leave the computer running with no viruses, spyware, etc... basically.. no worries... no security updates every single time you turn on your computer... etc etc etc...
        Also... I do have several Macs and several PCs... I do use my MacPro to play Windows games. Best of both worlds I tell you.
    • Kanidia, on 10/29/2007, -4/+1Actually I think we just assumed he was a mac fanboy. For all we know he could be some Windows guy making fun of mac peripherals VS price. But that's only my personal personal opinion. (opinion = digg shield... hopefully)
  • Nomad559, on 11/07/2007, -12/+2The Cult Of Apple
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_F9gdx_LIAc
  • rootnik, on 10/29/2007, -5/+67Remote desktop (host).

    They give Apple credit for VNC? I was using that with windows98...
    • qbyte, on 10/28/2007, -1/+16No kidding! I've been using ultravnc (http://www.uvnc.com) with a proggie called VNCScan (http://www.vncscan.com) on our LAN for about 5 years, now. It's just one of those standard open source apps that Apple is rebranding.
    • PhillyMJS, on 11/07/2007, -11/+5It's not just VNC, they expanded on it. Sure, you can use a bare-bones VNC client to control the computer remotely, but if you use Apple's you can do tons of things.

      http://www.apple.com/remotedesktop/
      • rootnik, on 11/07/2007, -1/+7all for the low price of $299. No thanks, open source VNC works fine for me.
    • mjar81, on 11/07/2007, -10/+5Actually... they've used the PROTOCOL to develop their own implementation. That's a lot different than "rebranding" an application.
    • deadbaby, on 11/07/2007, -6/+6You can also do SSH on OSX out of the box. Very handy.
    • ExSlashdotter, on 11/07/2007, -6/+4This is one place where you guys digging down are wrong. Apple Remote Desktop (RDC) is way more than just a remote desktop app. It makes Microsoft's SMS look pathetic really.
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 11/07/2007, -3/+6It's called *****. When macs actually get features that PC's have had for a while they act like it's a revolution. Then all the people who said such feature was useless or a joke suddenly embrace it like they're fooling people.

      There's plenty of examples:
      Desktop widgets
      x86 Architecture
      Search while you type, searches...
      Napster/iTunes
  • MBHoy, on 11/07/2007, -16/+10Surely Leopard should still get the green over Vista's red in "Antivirus" because, although neither include it, Macs don't actually need Antivirus software?
    • quikboy, on 11/07/2007, -5/+9Not exactly true. There "could" be the day when a group of hackers are set to exploit the Mac OS X, and before you know it, your computer isn't working quite well.

      Kind of like doing sex without a condom - it's just best to have it in place, just in case.

      And Microsoft isn't allowed to bundle their own "official" AV solution, because of darn anti-trust laws. I have to say, OneCare is the easiest security suite I have ever used, and it works quite well. It could use a little bit more in terms of actual security, and some more features, but it's great for my family. Never had a problem at all with viruses.

      If you notice, Norton 360 has copied OneCare's ease-of-use, and so are other companies. Just proves that Microsoft really can do something good for the market once in a while. The OneCare site also offers free tools to check your computer for malware. And then there's Windows Defender, and Windows Firewall, etc.
    • Okari, on 11/07/2007, -3/+3If you know what you're doing and have no script for FireFox, there really isn't much need for an anti-virus on Windows.
      • Godlesswanderer, on 11/07/2007, -3/+3True, but chances are the majority of Windows users haven't got a clue what they're doing.
        By the way, that's a dig at the general population, not Windows users.
      • MioTheGreat, on 11/07/2007, -1/+4Or if you're simply using IE7 with UAC enabled, you're safe.

        I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that with IE7 running at it's "Low" integrity level, that it's safer than Firefox in any configuration. Even if it's totally hijacked, it can't even put an icon on your desktop, let alone delete your documents or install a virus.
  • biocandy, on 11/07/2007, -9/+30What? iChat wins over Messenger because of more protocols! What if all your friends use Messenger? I think Microsoft should have that one. That's actually a good application that removed ICQ from the scene back in the days.
    • rootnik, on 10/28/2007, -7/+7I like pidgin, personally, for Windows/*nix. Adium is pretty nice on OSX.
    • thewfirestarter, on 11/07/2007, -8/+5Huh? Messenger should win because all your friends use it? How about technical merits? iChat supports AIM, Bonjour, Google Talk, and Jabber, SMS messaging, and has superior video chat. I think the only thing Live Messenger wins at is folder sharing and Yahoo compatibility.

      Regardless of the size of the user base for each program, iChat is the winner here.
    • jasmus, on 11/07/2007, -4/+4That can work both ways though. What if all my freinds are on ichat. I agree messenger is a good app though.
      • Kanidia, on 11/07/2007, -3/+3There's no such thing as "being on iChat" other than using the software. It's the network we're talking about, and Windows Live Messenger is the only legit IM software that is allowed to use the MSN network. Technically Microsoft can ban other pieces of software from touching the MSN network. Not that it should, or that Adium, iChat, or other software suck or anything, I'm not saying that.
    • boiboi, on 10/28/2007, -2/+3meebo wins you buncha virgins.
  • 35263526, on 11/07/2007, -6/+27Some of those comparisons are... well, dubious, at best. DX10 as an advantage over OpenGL (and, for some reason, Core Animation in a gaming context)? If they just said that Vista could play games and Leopard couldn't (don't kill me, fanboys, I know there are some Mac games but I still wouldn't run OS X on my gaming rig), then fine, but that didn't make much sense. Plus, some of the hardware stuff is silly; it's hardly reasonable to blame the operating system itself for Apple not manufacturing any tablet machines (given that the software is there and does work for third-party MacBook modifications) or auxilliary displays. I don't really want to take sides in this one given that I don't have any Leopard-capable Macs and my PCs all run XP or Linux, but this is a bit of a shoddy article.
    • jakem1, on 11/07/2007, -2/+12Vista's tablet features are clearly superior at this stage though
      • grumpyrain, on 11/07/2007, -6/+2Yes they are, but you can't buy a tablet Mac to install it on anyway. If they sell the hardware in the future, I am sure their support will improve. It is just as pointless as criticising that you need to install a driver to use stereo bluetooth headphones. I mean it is as complex as inserting the CD that came with the headphones and clicking next a few times.
    • thewfirestarter, on 11/07/2007, -4/+2I agree. Specifically, DX10 vs. Leopard's OpenGL 2.1 is a close race. From renderings I've seen, the only thing DX10 claims is widespread usage among developers. Graphic quality is almost identical. As for API robustness, I don't have a clue which is better, but both platforms are very mature, I'd imagine they're similar.
  • lukasmack, on 10/29/2007, -5/+35It's a biased article its always its close but we will giveit to apple, also it doesnt give windows media player 11 over quicktime player.
    • quikboy, on 11/07/2007, -8/+41I agree. I don't want to start a flame-war over media playing but...

      I find WMP 11 to be the best out there right now. Why? Well, because:

      1. Tons of online stores to choose from (iTunes has only iTunes store)
      2. Support for tons of devices
      3. Good codec support (and if you want more, Microsoft has an official developers site: http://wmplugins.com/ )
      4. Easiest UI ever - in iTunes there's a ton of buttons and menus to choose from, but WMP 11's layout is much more cleaner and to the point to use
      5. Watch DVD's - my favorite, or I use Media Center
      6. Lots of skins and visualizations
      7. Minimize to the Windows taskbar, and your can view a video in a very small screen that floats above the taskbar, while you can surf the web. All the controls and things works in the minimized level very well. Great for multi-tasking
      8. Advanced audio controls - if you have it, take a look at "Show Playing" tab > Enhancements > Show enhancements. Now that's pretty cool!
      9. Customizing formats/bitrates better

      I could go on and on. But I definitely agree: WMP 11 is the best one out there right now. If they would just tweak it to enhance a few things some more...
      • chriskeyes, on 10/28/2007, -2/+21That's exactly what I've always said.

        It's about time people realize that Microsoft products aren't always bad.
    • Ramble, on 11/07/2007, -4/+18WMP 11 has amazing library support, codecs are the best since they're just directshow filters.
    • jakem1, on 11/07/2007, -2/+18WMP11 also has watched folders which are sadly lacking in iTunes.
    • GunOfTheMartyr, on 11/07/2007, -9/+6Winamp ftw.
    • celticcrossfire, on 11/07/2007, -0/+4Who uses either? VLC anyone?
  • qbyte, on 10/29/2007, -8/+6One small mistake - Vista's answer to Time Machine is called "Previous Versions". The article called it "Backup and Restore Center, ShadowCopy".
    • jakem1, on 10/28/2007, -1/+9Previous versions is Volume Shadow Copy.
      • grumpyrain, on 10/28/2007, -2/+3and it is not a new feature in 'Vista' either. It was a Windows 2003 Server feature that has been passed on.
    • Hacktivist, on 10/28/2007, -0/+7"Previous Versions" is ShadowCopy.
    • MioTheGreat, on 10/29/2007, -1/+3Vista's answer to it? Microsoft has had that feature since Windows Server 2003.

      Time Machine is Apple's Answer to VSC.
  • rsmithrun, on 11/07/2007, -8/+18This was quite opinionated I think. It gave the win to Leopard for some things that should be equal.
    • totorototoro, on 11/07/2007, -8/+2You don't even see the irony in your comment, do you? :p
  • lazlonger, on 11/07/2007, -13/+211. Nearly EVERY ap that the Apple has native (with the purchase of a $2000 computer) that Windows doesn't, I use external aps for that blow away the Apple ones anyway. Free ones at that. Microsoft will not bundle those things due to the fact that the DOJ is half up their ass. The DOJ would be suing Apple too if any real quantity of people bought those pretty little toys.

    2. I am able to move files fine from my Vista partition to my XP partition and back easily. That one seems poorly researched to me.
    • MikeCerm, on 11/07/2007, -1/+9I can't even make sense of the the claim that Windows won't let you move files from one partition to another. I'm pretty sure that copy and paste were available even before Vista. Sure, you can't do that from the Disk Manager, but that's not what it's for.
      • gridrunner, on 10/28/2007, -1/+2Yeah, I think they got it wrong. What I think they were referring to was transferring files between partitions with different file systems. i.e. OS X can copy files to and from a Windows FAT32 partition, whereas windows cannot read a Unix-type drive.
        • cquinnd, on 10/28/2007, -1/+1Not without a third party add-on like ext2fsd
    • muchocheeto, on 11/07/2007, -3/+2The Mac mini is $600 and it does include iLife and Leopard... no activation, no viruses, no spyware, and the Leopard included has all the power needed to even be the file server and "ultimate" edition... doesn't cost extra. Mac also has a huge collection of free and shareware products.. it is not the point. You can uninstall iLife easily if you wanted to. You couldn't uninstall IE when DOJ jumped on them. Apple had a very large piece of the action in the 80's if you recall... no DOJ problems.
  • dooms13, on 10/28/2007, -12/+4I know they said wait for Ubuntu /Linux to compare, but seriously, come on now. It would crush either in a lot of those categories IMHO.
  • dolphumous, on 11/03/2007, -13/+46UT3
    CoD4
    Crysis

    I'll stick with windows for the time being.
    • 35263526, on 11/07/2007, -6/+17While you're generally right that Windows is the gamer's OS of choice, UT3 is going to be available for OS X :P
    • thewfirestarter, on 11/07/2007, -13/+6Typical gamer. 3rd party applications (games) are not OS features. And yes, OS X is quite capable of those graphics (OpenGL 2.1). See here:
      http://www.winmatrix.com/forums/index.php?showtopi ...
      • ermau, on 11/07/2007, -2/+4Many of those OpenGL images are not rendered in real time but rendered from the likes of Maya or 3DS Max.
  • xgambetx, on 10/29/2007, -22/+5i hate mac with a passion and dont like vista
    • Kanidia, on 10/29/2007, -1/+7Linux fanboy? Or just another failed computer user?
  • YuriSakazaki, on 11/07/2007, -20/+24Amazing, a discussion on Digg where the Apple fanboys haven't buried every logical, unbiased post that doesn't say "APPLE IS SUPERIOR!!!" into oblivion. Maybe they just haven't found this article yet?
    • Kanidia, on 10/28/2007, -0/+2They found you already.
    • Kanidia, on 10/28/2007, -0/+4By the way buddy, I'm just kidding. I actually have the same thought as you... how come all the pro Windows comments aren't being buried like in the other discussions? Maybe Digg is in fact people who are just afraid of being dugg down so they just sit on the bandwagon.
      • estvir, on 10/28/2007, -0/+6You're only now realising that? :P It just depends who gets to the Digg article first before it's claimed by a side, seriously, find a 'controversal' upcoming story, make a logical, reasonable comment backing up one side and get to about +7 and you can more or less control that article or begin the controlling for one side.

        Digg is full of just kids who Digg up the current zeitgeist. Go to Reddit, /. and other sites to avoid this, for the most part anyway.
        • MagicCake, on 10/28/2007, -0/+6I've noticed this trend as well, however I've yet to see a Wii story that isn't claimed by rabid Wii fans. I can't figure that one out.
          • estvir, on 10/28/2007, -0/+3Yeah, there are some stories where the other side has a really tough time, I think the worst would be religious folk and PS3 users, I almost feel sorry for them. ;)

            I've begun the 'controlling' for one side many-a-time (But mine was valid, etc, none of this Apple fanboy rubbish seen daily) on Digg and I see who the regulars are who do it for certain sides. Add schestowitz to your friend list and do a cloud view of the upcoming Tech stories (And put Popular as the selection in the drop down box), now go to the green links to see his posts and many by the same other people.
  • mal1964, on 10/29/2007, -6/+1Available free software to upgrade?
  • TheDeuceBox, on 11/07/2007, -6/+16They forgot the "Capable of Playing Decent Games" section. Secondly everyone knows that third party apps are almost always more useful than those included so it doesn't make a difference.
    • chourobin, on 10/29/2007, -1/+2I think apple 3rd party apps (there are tons) are 10x better than windows 3rd party apps. VisualHub, iBank, iBilling, great apps that make windows apps look half assed. Plus, theres still no virtual desktop app that can beat spaces/virtuedesktop.
  • fugazied, on 10/29/2007, -3/+8I didn't know Vista's media playing capabilities were so advanced, I hadn't gone through that when playing with the OS (XP on home boxes)! It looks like Vista does have a place for me after all, plugged into the TV and for downloading torrents. I'll keep using Mac for work, photo editing, web development, programming and editing home movies though
  • GreatOne08, on 10/28/2007, -9/+3It reminds me of the 50 cent vs kenya debate.
    • halfgook, on 11/07/2007, -1/+1550 cent vs an african country?
      • GreatOne08, on 10/28/2007, -9/+1I meant Kanye jerk
        • haterofps3, on 11/07/2007, -0/+12Right its his fault that you can't spell.
        • Daniel591992, on 11/07/2007, -0/+5How can you mean Kanye, but spell it as Kenya?
      • deepakhj, on 11/07/2007, -3/+0How old are you?
        • ChuqAU, on 11/07/2007, -0/+2Same age as me apparently, since I thought the same thing.
    • diggSJaustin, on 11/07/2007, -0/+14Pff, too new school. Why, I remember when Run DMC took on Ethiopia. Now THAT was an epic battle.
      • Zalyster, on 10/28/2007, -0/+2Pff, too new school. Why, I remember when Blind Lemon Jefferson took on all of Africa. Now THAT was an epic battle.
  • deadnewton, on 10/28/2007, -7/+1its like...
    Everest Vs. Embankment !!
    huh !
  • ariez84, on 11/07/2007, -9/+57So they gave WMP11 vs. Quicktime a tie? A TIE?!?!?

    WMP11 Trumps Quicktime.
    • wheresaldo, on 11/07/2007, -4/+15Just to add, with WMP11 I can buy my music and movies from whatever provider of content I want.
    • sammykeyes, on 11/07/2007, -4/+14I agree. I don't want to start a flame-war over media playing but...

      I find WMP 11 to be the best out there right now. Why? Well, because:

      1. Tons of online stores to choose from (iTunes has only iTunes store)
      2. Support for tons of devices
      3. Good codec support (and if you want more, Microsoft has an official developers site: http://wmplugins.com/ )
      4. Easiest UI ever - in iTunes there's a ton of buttons and menus to choose from, but WMP 11's layout is much more cleaner and to the point to use
      5. Watch DVD's - my favorite, or I use Media Center
      6. Lots of skins and visualizations
      7. Minimize to the Windows taskbar, and your can view a video in a very small screen that floats above the taskbar, while you can surf the web. All the controls and things works in the minimized level very well. Great for multi-tasking
      8. Advanced audio controls - if you have it, take a look at "Show Playing" tab > Enhancements > Show enhancements. Now that's pretty cool!
      9. Customizing formats/bitrates better

      I could go on and on. But I definitely agree: WMP 11 is the best one out there right now. If they would just tweak it to enhance a few things some more...
      • MioTheGreat, on 11/07/2007, -1/+3"4. Easiest UI ever - in iTunes there's a ton of buttons and menus to choose from, but WMP 11's layout is much more cleaner and to the point to use"

        I love WMP11's UI. Oh if only I could use WMP11 with the iPod Touch....
    • Kanidia, on 10/28/2007, -1/+13If Quicktime didn't tell me to upgrade to pro every other time I open it, I might reconsider it.
    • MikeCerm, on 10/28/2007, -1/+14Quicktime is a disgrace in Windows. From the non-standard interface, to the horrible performance, it's probably the most poorly written program ever. It's not nearly as bad in OSX, but certainly doesn't have many of the features of WMP.
      • MioTheGreat, on 10/28/2007, -1/+3I wouldn't be so sure. Apple has managed to outdo itself in terms of UI ***** with Safari on Windows.
    • Kanidia, on 10/28/2007, -0/+6Well anything is better than Real Player, that's for sure.
    • chourobin, on 10/28/2007, -1/+1iTunes is the best, I cant share music in wmp so easily. movies/media/music... everything just mounts on itunes. : (. Plus quicktime+itunes is really what they are comparing.
  • wheresaldo, on 11/07/2007, -9/+32This is so wrong in so many levels...it's clear Apple fanboy wrote this. Vista features are in red for NO reason.
    • MagicCake, on 10/28/2007, -0/+2And that's why I don't go to Engadget anymore. Close to fair, but not quite, and sometimes very far from it.
    • diehardapplefan, on 06/23/2008, -0/+2yeah, they used red to indicate features that are missing...leopard has red features too, not just vista
  • sammykeyes, on 11/07/2007, -14/+68Not counting the very subjective stuff like parental controls, and since you are talking about "out of the box." between incorrect info and including iLife in with leopard's features The score is closer to:

    Leopard=40 Vista=48

    Reasons, HD-Disk Playback. Leopard has no way to play HD-DVD or BluRay movies at all. Vista does.

    Access: You forgot the voice control with Vista which works extremely well (dispite the beta video) and puts Vista's accessibility controls in a different class.

    Vista's Search does, as has been pointed out, do what you claim it doesn't/

    Time Machine isn't any better than Previous Versions and previous versions do not require a seperate drive or backup location to work.

    You may like opera better than Safari or IE7, but IE7 is better than Safari.

    RSS is in both the browser and accessible via the sidebar.

    DVD authoring is only better if you buy iLife and it's not a part of the Leopard feature set. If you don't include office 2007 apps, you don't include iLife Apps.

    Photo's: Same as above.

    Video Editing: Same as above.

    Blue Tooth support. Incorrect. It has already been pointed out.
    • ariez84, on 10/28/2007, -4/+25Finally someone who is making some sense.
    • ghostfish, on 10/28/2007, -16/+2I think they included iLife because it comes on every Mac, whereas Office doesn't come on any PC.
      • ariez84, on 10/28/2007, -2/+7It could come with every PC if you buy it. The point is if it did come with Windows, MS will get sued out of their asses.
      • MikeCerm, on 10/28/2007, -1/+6For the price of a Mac, you could buy a comparable PC with Windows, add in Office (~$150), and still have plenty of money left over.
    • daizaru, on 10/28/2007, -1/+16As much as I would like to see Leopard as the leader of the pack... I have to agree.
    • jasmus, on 10/28/2007, -1/+7"You may like opera better than Safari or IE7, but IE7 is better than Safari."

      That's exactly what's wrong with this article, it is essentially an opinion. Your opinion, or personal preference, doesn't match the writer's. "Is better" for you maybe, but maybe not for me.
      • estvir, on 10/28/2007, -1/+3That's fine and dandy and should be upheld.. but there's just a stupid amoun of bias and lies in the 'article' by the tools at Engadget.
    • jasmus, on 10/28/2007, -9/+3"You may like opera better than Safari or IE7, but IE7 is better than Safari."

      That's exactly what's wrong with this article, it is essentially an opinion. Your opinion, or personal preference, doesn't match the writer's. "Is better" for you maybe, but maybe not for me.
    • Kanidia, on 10/28/2007, -3/+5I would somewhat argue about IE and Safari. Personally, as a webmaster, IE just doesn't display my sites properly. But just personally, imho, I think, etc. etc. HAH, now you can't digg me down because it's a personal opinion.... hey wait a minute... NOOOOOOOOOOO! *cries*
      • skyscape, on 10/28/2007, -6/+1you are a lousy coder. Learn to code and IE will display the pages properly. Problem with you is that you only know how to code for Mozilla, unfortunately