digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Leopard will open the Mac OS X floodgates (and embarass Microsoft)

blogs.cnet.com — As many of you are aware, I think Vista is a blunder. And with its annoying UAC system, and horrifically slow operation, it won't take long before the majority of home users agree with me. And if the recent figures showing Mac OS X is already gaining market share is any indication of the future, look for Leopard to outsell Vista ...

show profanity settings
expand all
  • supermanred, on 10/30/2007, -60/+25Leopard should definitely outsell Vista. I just clean installed leopard and vista on the 2nd parition, Ive already in the last 2 days had to reinstall Vista, what a peice of *****.
    • dpcamp, on 10/30/2007, -9/+49thats odd, i've had vista since it was released from technet.. same installation.

      maybe its IO error...
      • MonsterChaOS, on 10/30/2007, -4/+28I think its that infamous ID10T error.
        • raynar, on 10/30/2007, -2/+13The chair to keyboard interface needs a little attention.
    • DaffyDuck, on 10/30/2007, -9/+39"Leopard should definitely outsell Vista."
      Should and will are 2 different things. I strongly feel that OS X is technically superior to Windows (which is why I use it when possible) but Beta was technically superior to VHS and look what happened there.
    • EvilWalksWithMe, on 10/30/2007, -11/+28My install runs fine. Always has... since launch. Although OSX on my mac runs sweet too, Vista is my preference.
    • Meatpuppet79, on 10/30/2007, -8/+42In just over 9 months of running Vista, I have had to reinstall it a grand total of 0 times. You may be exaggerating, very unlucky or you just may be someone who has no clue how to maintain his computer (with regards to repelling spyware/viruses/malware)
      • Terr01, on 10/30/2007, -1/+3IMO it's largely a matter of basic sanitation and careful behavior. My virus scanner has caught maybe one virus in three years, and that one was actually an attempted javascript exploit which couldn't affect my browser anyway.

        I'm using a Mac full time at work and I'm not particularly impressed or distressed with the difference from my old XP-SP2 box from a software perspective.
        • ShrimpCrackers, on 10/30/2007, -1/+1Oooh free screen savers and smileys!~ I gotta download that....
          OMG another e-mail that my bank account needs to verify my credit card number, ugh I'll fill this out...
          Oh look, a free software that gives me ringtones, gotta download that...

          *1 day later... Vista sucks! always crashes! Now I gotta reinstall! Ugh!
    • LucasKane, on 10/30/2007, -2/+8Haven't had a problem with vista besides games benchmarking slower then XP
    • bullhead2007, on 10/30/2007, -8/+28Yes. Let's compare an operating system that only has to work with a few Apple made devices and a few video cards, with an operating system that has to work with millions of different configurations.

      I've been running Vista since May, on a completely custom made box that I put together. Yes imagine that I selected the mother board, RAM, CPU, Case, PSU, Hard Drives, Video Card etc all by myself and put it together. I'm tempted to install the Leopard hack to see how stable it is on such a system.

      Granted it's running on Unix as a back end, and that lends greatly to its stability. I love Unix and Linux, and they are definitely more stable than windows when you have working drivers. However, I need Vista to play all the games I want, and use all the software I want. It's sad but true.

      Vista is pretty damn stable for me. I have had 0 issues with it. Also the UAC thing is not a big deal. All you have to do is turn it off if it annoys you, like I did. My biggest complaint about Vista is the patch that forces signed drivers unless you F8 before startup to turn it off.
      • TomFrost, on 10/30/2007, -2/+7I'm fairly anti-windows, not being able to say enough about my Linux and Leopard installations. With that said, though, I wish I could dig you up more than once. It's so rare you see someone come on Digg who can accurately weigh the strengths and downfalls between Windows and OS X without shilling for either one. Well done.
        • bullhead2007, on 10/30/2007, -1/+8Thanks man. I'm not anti-Mac or anti-anything except for all the brainless bashing of Vista that goes on on the internet.

          For example all my laptops will be MacBook Pros, because I know Apple makes superb hardware. That's where apple really shines in my opinion. Plus I think that Leopard would be an awesomely easy to use interface for a laptop. Also on the laptop I wont need all the applications/games that I need on my desktop.

          I still run Linux on a separate partition or on a VMWare machine. I love checking out the newest releases and messing around with linux. I still remember the first time I got Debian to run on my old Pentium 60. Ahhh fond memories. I also love messing around with configuration files and compiling kernels that are specific for my system to get it optimized beyond anything Windows could hope to become.
      • threemagic, on 10/30/2007, -1/+2All operating systems are made to support a myriad of hardware. Apple's and Linux's is just a smaller base to start. If an OS can't support myriads of different hardware it'd just die a slow death. Now granted I couldn't just build a Mac but that's hardware, that's entirely different. However I can put in cards and external devices all I want as long as the MANUFACTURER made drivers. The PC you built wouldn't do anything under Vista until you installed drivers. Typically Windows gets a raw deal for being unstable due to someone else's drivers, that I WILL give you.
        • twentytortures, on 10/30/2007, -0/+2"If an OS can't support myriads of different hardware it'd just die a slow death."

          I'm pretty sure a mac runs on apples hardware and not much more unless you have that neat hack like OSX86 (I think it's called) that lets you run it on a PC, and I don't see Mac's dying anytime soon. Also, I think Linux has a huge support base for hardware, comparable to Windows although some hardware doesn't have drivers on linux (the reason I have an nVidia card). Who knows, I could be completely wrong.
          • threemagic, on 10/31/2007, -0/+1Apple's OS X is supposed to sell Apple hardware. But that doesn't mean OS X doesn't run on anything, that neat OSX86 hack (not to mention darwin runs on other machines). The OS is made to be an OS but it's also made to handle drivers for whatever you want to add on. MS's OS isn't made to run on MORE hardware.. that doesn't even make any sense.
    • Darcy, on 10/30/2007, -3/+23"Leopard should definitely outsell Vista"

      Vista has been selling at around 10 million copies per month, Apple have been selling about 2 million macs per quarter. So I very much doubt Leopard will be outselling Vista any time soon.
      • KSUdesigner, on 10/30/2007, -3/+7Not to mention that with boot camp, many people who buy Leopard will also buy Vista as well. If Leopard sales are on the rise, so are Vista sales.
    • Seidoger, on 10/30/2007, -1/+6"Leopard should definitely outsell Vista"

      As much as I love Leopard as it is hands down the best operating system I have ever used, this is an absurd hypothesis.
      I work for a major telecom maker who's planning to switch to Vista next year. That's like what, 25 000 computers or something one shot to Vista.
      Corporate world people, corporate world. Sadly.

      I miss my Leopard right now at work.
      • dudup, on 10/30/2007, -1/+2Me, too. But that's one of the hundreds of glories of going back to home after each work day! :D
    • over90000, on 11/01/2007, -6/+2Imagine a giant penis flying towards your mouth, and there's nothing you can do about it. And you're like "Oh man, I'm gonna have to suck this thing", and you brace yourself to suck this giant penis. But then, at the last moment, it changes trajectory and hits you in the eye. You think to yourself "Well, at least I got that out of the way", but then the giant penis rears back and stabs your eye again, and again, and again. Eventually, this giant penis is penetrating your gray matter, and you begin to lose control of your motor skills. That's when the giant penis slaps you across the cheek, causing you to fall out of your chair. Unable to move and at your most vulnerable, the giant penis finally lodges itself in your anus, where it rests uncomfortably for 4, maybe 5 hours. That's what using a mac is like.
      • Kanidia, on 11/01/2007, -0/+4Okay seriously you post this every time you get a chance to talk about macs. Stop it, it's dumb.
      • notadiggtard, on 11/01/2007, -1/+0Hilarious the first time,after that,not so much.
        Just stop.Now.
    • Kanidia, on 10/30/2007, -2/+1***** I dugg you up by accident...
    • tao52nyc, on 10/30/2007, -0/+0Leopard could never "outsell" Vista unless it was miraculously opened up to run on generic PC hardware. Don't hold your breath waiting. Also note that as Vista is automatically pre-loaded on every new PC, MSFT is touting Vista sales as "consumer demand" when it's actually consumer demand for a new PC. Who knows what those consumers actually DO with Vista once they get the box home? Do they overwrite it with their legacy XP build? Install Ubuntu? No one tracks that. So every generic OEM PC sold is automatically chalked up as a Vista sale. "Consumer demand"? Don't make me laugh.
  • danbiz3, on 10/31/2007, -51/+153I think the funniest thing is Microsoft already showing off Windows 7. They spent 5 years on Vista and it was originally hailed as the giant leap 3.1 to 95 was. As they started missing deadlines they axed features, most notably WinFS, which very well may have saved Vista. Finally in January it's released with very little hype, with a half dozen different versions and extremely overpriced. The public saw no reason to install Vista on existing computers, not only because of numerous compatibility problems, but also because XP has worked fine since SP2; not to mention Vista has no big features the general public cares about (I do think instant search is nice, but we've had it for over two years). The only copies of Vista being sold are coming bundled on new PC's and most people would rather just have XP. Apple has made all the right moves and Leopard is a crowning achievement in every respect. Microsoft has to start making better decisions if they want to hold their market because from the looks of it Apple is schooling them.
    • EvilWalksWithMe, on 10/31/2007, -54/+15Blah blah blah... seeing as you know everything, perhaps you should be Microsoft's technical adviser.
      • malechi, on 10/31/2007, -9/+22VISTA should be listed among the dozens of product recalls already made this year. Even Linux is making headway because of it. Microsoft doesn't need technical advisers, it needs people skills. They obviously don't know their customers and depend on their monopoly to carry them through. It's worked for years, but people are finally seeing the alternatives. No shame in enjoying a Windows machine, but quality makes a difference.
      • danbiz3, on 10/30/2007, -5/+11Thanks for you valuable input.
    • MioTheGreat, on 10/31/2007, -9/+64From a technology standpoint, Vista is probably the largest Windows release Microsoft has ever put out. Sure the leaps from, let's say 9x to NT were pretty damned big, but Windows wasn't nearly as complex of a beast as it is now.

      The leap from XP to Vista was gigantic. They're now enforcing new (And thus far very effective) security paradigms. Drivers are being shoved out of the kernel and into user-land. Win32/GDI/etc. are being slowly phased out in favor of better more extensible technologies (.NET/WPF, etc.)

      And a note on WinFS (You had to bring it up, didn't you?).WinFS was a database layer sitting on top of NTFS, not a filesystem, and virtually all of its tasks have been assimilated nicely by the Indexer. It would have done some things better, certainly, but overall the indexer is more than adequate, and I'm not sure they would have gotten WinFS's peformance good enough by Vista's release.
      • danbiz3, on 10/30/2007, -20/+3You do understand WinFS stands for Windows File System, right? It is a new file system and a damn good one, which was scrapped. What exactly is wrong with pointing out the main feature Microsoft touted before they realized it was too ambitious and dropping it out of nowhere? Hopefully they use it or the new name they have for it in Windows 7.
        • SanTe, on 10/30/2007, -0/+15"You do understand WinFS stands for Windows File System, right?"

          No, and it never did. WinFS means, and has always meant, "Windows Future Storage": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WinFS
        • MioTheGreat, on 10/31/2007, -2/+7Good job invalidating your entire above comment by showing that despite the fact that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, you go ahead and post blatantly incorrect information, AND backing it up by saying that I was wrong for pointing it out.
      • Ramble, on 10/30/2007, -1/+9WinFS is not a new filesystem, it's a database abstraction layer on top of NTFS. It is not a completely different new thing.
      • superkendall, on 10/31/2007, -1/+7Vista is a large technology change. But look at it from a user standpoint, what is really compelling a user to get it if they already have XP working an functional? There are a number of smaller things they fixed but also some annoying stuff they added, and the system requirements have been bumped up.

        Apple in contrast has done a great job offering compelling features to the users to get a good rate of upgrade conversion, while bundling in equally large changes under the hood in OS X.
        • honus, on 10/30/2007, -6/+4And Leopard vs. Tiger isn't Tiger with a prettier face and a few more features?

          Make Apples to Apples comparisons. It's not really that hard to do.
          • Laxaloot, on 10/30/2007, -4/+5no, no it is not. Leopard added time machine, built in boot camp, spaces, quick look, cover flow in finder, parental controls, not to mention all the tiny ***** you don't see at first. Sorry, you lose.
          • MioTheGreat, on 10/30/2007, -0/+5If Leapard has 300 new features/changes/whatever, Vista probably has closer to 10,000 (I'm not exaggerating.)
      • windohs, on 10/31/2007, -10/+12Vista is like a Leap from Windows 98 to Windows 98 SE (Second Edition)
        except a leap backwards
        • MioTheGreat, on 10/30/2007, -4/+4That's exactly the opposite of what I said. It's actually closer to 98 to 2000.
        • pmettes, on 10/30/2007, -5/+0i'd say its more like a jump from 98 to ME hahahah
      • cpbrown, on 10/30/2007, -0/+2what does that say about previous versions of windows??
      • thexder, on 10/30/2007, -1/+1Windows NT 3.1 (Microsoft marketing desired to make Windows NT appear to be a continuation of Windows 3.1) arrived in Beta form to developers at the July 1992 Professional Developers Conference in San Francisco. Microsoft announced at the conference its intentions to develop a successor to both Windows NT and Windows 3.1's replacement (code-named Chicago), which would unify the two into one operating system. This successor was codenamed Cairo. In hindsight, Cairo was a much more difficult project than Microsoft had anticipated, and as a result, NT and Chicago would not be unified until Windows XP, and still, parts of Cairo have not made it into Windows as of today. Specifically, the WinFS subsystem, which was the much touted Object File System of Cairo, which had been put on hold for a while, but Microsoft further announced that they've discontinued WinFS and they'll gradually incorporate the technologies developed for WinFS in other products and technologies, notably, Microsoft SQL Server.
    • bullhead2007, on 10/30/2007, -12/+34Funny. I built my computer from scratch and bought Vista seperately.

      I am enjoying it much more than XP. It's the most stable version of windows I've used (before a service pack of course. XP wasn't as stable at release despite the internet hate for Vista.)
      • MioTheGreat, on 10/30/2007, -6/+20Absolutely correct.

        Despite all of the 'outcry' I hear on Vista, even those who actually remember XP's release are forced to admit that Vista is faring much better than it did at release.
      • miniboss, on 10/30/2007, -6/+25Most Vista users are happy. The recent outpouring of FUD is almost entirely by people very very limited or zero experience on it. I'm not saying it lived up to its hype, but it's far from being the ticking time bomb that people want it to be.

        I think its just pathetic that Mac users obsess so much over a "competing" OS. And i put quotes around 'competing' because Apple and MS are competitors. To see so many end users acting like Apple employees is just so sad. There really is nothing better to do with your free time but defend one billion dollar company and attack another billion dollar company? Wake up, NEITHER of them care about you as much as you care about them.
        • larah, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1well said... i could care less about what OS i use. if it lets me get my job done, i.e., has software that runs on my OS... i'll use that... right now, windows is dominate and everyone makes software for it... if mac or even linux (gasp!) 3rd party support catches up... i'll move to that... i dont care... and neither should anyone else...
      • sponeil, on 10/30/2007, -10/+12BS. The "FUD" is not from people with limited experience on it. The complaints come from the people who beat the OS up the most, namely gamers, IT staff, and developers. As a gamer and a developer (for both commercial software and 3D games), I hate Vista so much it makes me want to leave the Windows camp entirely.

        If you're only using Vista to do things like surf the web and send email, it looks nicer than XP and it is sufficient (unless you're running it on a laptop, in which case even surfing the web is painful in Vista). Still, it's enough that "Most Vista users are happy" can be accepted as a true statement. However, most voting adults in the US were happy when Bush started the Iraq invasion. The majority is not always right.

        (Oh, and anyone who has tried Mac OS/X probably knows just how much slower Vista runs with "equivalent" features.)
        • lharrod, on 10/30/2007, -9/+6I agree with you 100%. I work for a software co. and use Vista and every other MS OS in every way possible. Of all the MS OS's, I prefer XP. It gives me the least number of headaches. Vista is full of problems, and I use all the Vistas (Home, Ultimate, etc.) on a number of PC's (min. spec., top shelf, loaded, etc.) At home? Mac OS.
      • fugazied, on 10/30/2007, -5/+7Yes OS competitions are juvenile. If you use Vista good on you. I hear that Vista has a great media player, I might purchase a copy for the lounge room PC. Mac OS X is obscenely good. It is a clever, stable, secure, beautiful OS. Mac fans drool over it for a reason, check it out you might be converted.
    • Ramble, on 10/30/2007, -15/+10Do you even know what WinFS is and does?
      Leopard crowning achievement? by implementing Vista features 4 years after they were announced and one year since release?
      • forgiste, on 10/30/2007, -4/+8which ones?
        • Ramble, on 10/30/2007, -5/+7Well, for example, Time Machine, Quick Look, Improved Spotlight, parental controls, extra security features, etc.
        • dantseytlin, on 10/30/2007, -1/+3and gadgets i mean widgets
        • christhechris, on 10/30/2007, -1/+1wtf...Vista has nothing that even comes close to comparing to Time Machine or Quick Look (and no icon previews have nothing on Quick Look), Spotlight was in Tiger, and isn't a resource hog. Spotlight was announced before Vista wannabe quick search.
          • Zalyster, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1He said improved Spotlight, not just Spotlight. He means the added stuff like boolean logic etc. in Spotlight, which Vista has along with many other operators for its search.
          • MioTheGreat, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1Actually Spotlight and Windows Desktop Search were previewed around the same time (GDS was around the same time too.) The previews shown were too far on to have been developed after the fact, so It's pretty safe to say that in the Desktop Search world, no one copied each other. (The exception being a number of Vista's powerful Advanced Query features making it into Leapord)

            And Time Machine is an answer to Windows' Volume Shadow Copy features, which have been present in some form since XP, and useable in the same was as Time Machine (Previous Versions) since Server 2003.
          • MioTheGreat, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1Actually Spotlight and Windows Desktop Search were previewed around the same time (GDS was around the same time too.) The previews shown were too far on to have been developed after the fact, so It's pretty safe to say that in the Desktop Search world, no one copied each other. (The exception being a number of Vista's powerful Advanced Query features making it into Leapord)

            And Time Machine is an answer to Windows' Volume Shadow Copy features, which have been present in some form since XP, and useable in the same was as Time Machine (Previous Versions) since Server 2003.
    • JimV, on 10/30/2007, -3/+10Actually, you can get a copy of Vista for pretty cheap. (Free, if you're a college student in the right program.)
      On Newegg:
      Microsoft Windows Vista 32-Bit Home Premium for System Builders Single Pack DVD - OEM $111.99
      APPLE Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard - Retail $109.99
      • christhechris, on 11/03/2007, -2/+3And how much is the Ultimate edition of Vista, yeah that what I thought, and thats not to mention you get a licence that stays with one computer, and has that activation nonsense with Vista.

        Sly comparison though but not really valid

        ps its 180.00..thats about 160% more then Leopard
        • larah, on 11/03/2007, -0/+2to be fair, we've had to pay five times for each OS X release... each one was a point release. each one should have been a free download.
        • JimV, on 11/03/2007, -0/+1The System Builder version of Vista is $112.
    • thexder, on 10/30/2007, -7/+1Even more embarrasing is the fact that WinFS was supposed to be in Windows NT 3.51
      • thexder, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1Windows NT 3.1 (Microsoft marketing desired to make Windows NT appear to be a continuation of Windows 3.1) arrived in Beta form to developers at the July 1992 Professional Developers Conference in San Francisco. Microsoft announced at the conference its intentions to develop a successor to both Windows NT and Windows 3.1's replacement (code-named Chicago), which would unify the two into one operating system. This successor was codenamed Cairo. In hindsight, Cairo was a much more difficult project than Microsoft had anticipated, and as a result, NT and Chicago would not be unified until Windows XP, and still, parts of Cairo have not made it into Windows as of today. Specifically, the WinFS subsystem, which was the much touted Object File System of Cairo, which had been put on hold for a while, but Microsoft further announced that they've discontinued WinFS and they'll gradually incorporate the technologies developed for WinFS in other products and technologies, notably, Microsoft SQL Server.
    • cpbrown, on 10/31/2007, -7/+2Well said.
    • Falldog, on 10/30/2007, -0/+3I doubt the time difference between Vista's release and Microsoft starting to talk about Seven is that much different than Apple starting to talk about Leopard.
      • christhechris, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1The time it takes to deliver is very different though
      • tao52nyc, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1Plus the fact that Apple DOES deliver...
    • over90000, on 10/30/2007, -0/+4Let's see. Apple missed the deadline with Leopard. Apple removed features from Leopard. Not much different are they? On the other hand MS might be actually taking the market share away from Apple because of Mac's new ability to run Windows.
    • JEdwardFuck, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1Gutsy 7.10
  • meshman, on 10/30/2007, -29/+16Oh yeah, sure. Because of Vista I'm going to spend thousands replacing all my hardware at home. Hell, why not spend millions completely replacing everything in the office too?
    • benitojuarez, on 10/30/2007, -7/+7In most corporations ive worked for computers are replaced when the warranty runs out, which would be 3 years. So every 3 years all computers are wiped, thrown away and replaced, so yeah, why NOT upgrade to vista while youre at it.
      • Devrdander, on 10/30/2007, -3/+5and they also have MS-EA and network based Imaging of PC's so they will upgrade when they are ready. We have 8000 PC's at my Company and we dont allow vista on the network even the new ones we deploy are XP only.
    • Blisshead, on 10/30/2007, -1/+11Thousands to run Vista? Other than a lot, I can't begin to imagine what your doing wrong.
    • Chewie67, on 10/29/2007, -1/+2You're going to have to replace your computer at some point, right? That's when you change from Windows to OS X?

      As for the applications, most people upgrade all the time. The go from Office 2000 to Office 2007. From Quicken 2002 to Quicken 2007. From Some Random Software 2.0 to Some Random Software 3.0.

      Whether you change to the Mac or not, you're going to spend thousands on your computer hardware and software in the next 3 - 5 years. You're on the treadmill -- whether you like it or not.
      • threemagic, on 10/29/2007, -0/+1Hey.. that makes sense..

        wait..

        what about all the secretaries? Who's going to train them how to open and close apps and documents on a mac (don't laugh.. it's true).

        What about our server infrastructure we use to administer desktops?

        Point is, there is much more money into switching over a computer then just the obvious hardware/software costs
    • Zalyster, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1Huh? If your computer is that crappy, then spend maybe $1000 getting a new one, at most. Otherwise you may only need a bit more RAM or a slightly better processor to run Vista, if you can't already.
      Now, buying a Mac will more than likely cost more as you're buying the whole Mac, not just a few select parts...Although you can upgrade a Mac's hardware.
  • DaffyDuck, on 10/30/2007, -14/+43Stepped a bit too far into the RDF, have you?
    • lostngone, on 10/30/2007, -0/+3I have done that and let me tell you, it burns. For the best effect I would recommend 25-30 feet away, any closer and its way to intense.
    • newAccount, on 10/30/2007, -8/+3I remember when os x first came out, I thought I'd give it a spin, and one of the pr guys at the job always carried around two mac laptops in case one burnt up because of the power supply. That actually happened to him a few times, when we were at the company softball game, he wore shorts and had these HUGE skin grafts on his thighs from when one of his macs lit up his ass, but he just blamed it on microsoft office overheating the power saving cpu and swore never to run another microsoft product. Later he lost a house when another of his macs went but at least he escaped harm that time, his dog died in the fire though :-(

      Anyways, I borrowed one of his so I could see how close it was to a typical unix or bsd, and I was in the park taking it for a spin and this guy came over and sat down, but wait: the guy was wearing a orange wig and a pink tutu, you know, those ***** ballet outfits! I kid you not, and he said in
      the most girlish voice I've ever heard "how do you like your mac?" Well, I tried to ignore him, but he then sat next to me and put his hand on my thigh and said "I like my mac when it warms my lap."

      Well, that spooked me a bit so I didn't say anything but just got up and started walking back to the shop but then there was ANOTHER guy wearing the same thing, then another, and before I could get to my office there were 10 ***** FRUITCAKE MAC FANATICS doing some wierd ass dance in their freaky ass tutus and in unison they were chanting "HOW DO YOU LIKE YOUR MAC?" and so I went up to the nearest one and ***** COLD COCKED HIM UPSIDE HIS HEAD with the idiot ***** attracting mac and well yeah I had to pay the pr guy $100 for the laptop I borrowed, but sometimes you just need to hit an idiot upside the head you know?

      Gah, I don't know what it is with mac users, they are FOR REAL WIERD AS ALL GETOUT!
      • weirdlookinguy, on 10/30/2007, -1/+4Gah, I don't know what it is with digg users on medication, they are FOR REAL WIERD AS ALL GETOUT!
      • ChromaVita, on 10/30/2007, -1/+8I was waiting for his mom to get scared, and say he's moving with his auntie and uncle in bel aire...
    • over90000, on 10/31/2007, -7/+2Hey digg, I run a local internet/gaming cafe, and just recently I've had to ban Mac users.

      There's this group of kids that come to my cafe quite often, they come to play games on the PCs with each other, these kids helped keep my cafe afloat in those first shaky weeks of business. Apart from them, it's mostly students, and older men who come here to study or read news (porn), or whatever.

      Anyway, a couple of weeks ago, this new group of young men started coming into the cafe quite regularly, all of them had medium-long length hair, and they all smelled pretty bad too. Unlike the rest of the customers, they never bought any drinks when they came in, they just sat there with the Macbooks that mommy and daddy had bought them, and would whisper amongst themselves, with the odd giggle here and there. They were the a-typical angsty teens you tend to see around here.

      Yesterday, the "scam" as I've come to call them (macs backwards), came into the cafe as usual, not buying anything to drink, being cheapskates like always (thank god for that entry fee). I noticed that one of the "scam" started saying something to one of the younger kids (around 8 yrs old) who was sat playing Counter-Strike, and after about a minute, the younger kid burst into tears. I went over and asked him what was wrong, and he said that this guy had just told him that PCs are gay, and if you use PCs you become gay and your parents die (or some ***** like that).

      So, I threw those little mac ***** out, and told them never to come back. I now have a sign saying "No Macs" in the window.

      I never had this kind of trouble, ever, until those Mac users started showing up. It seems that Mac users hate PC users for some strange reasons that they probably weren't even old enough to remember.

      So, if you're thinking of running a net cafe in the future, remember to ban mac users. They're cheap, will cause conflict with good, honest PC users, and they ***** stink.
      • inspecality, on 10/30/2007, -0/+4if you replace "mac" or "mac user" with "black" or "blacks" you sound like a huge racist
  • OMGWTFROFLMAOx2, on 10/30/2007, -60/+228Until Apple releases an OS that doesn't require you to own an Apple computer to use (without hacking something together), they won't be embarassing anyone.
    • Gustomucho, on 10/30/2007, -26/+68My thought exactly. Why can't they do an OS for PC ? Yeah, that's right because they can only program for a limited type of hardware : theirs. Apple U.S market share : 5.6%.
      • danbiz3, on 10/30/2007, -31/+17Not only is your market share number out of date (now around 8%), there is a very good reason they only allow it run on their hardware, its called compatibility. The nightmare many Windows users had upgrading their OS to Vista? That just doesn't exist when Apple can can control which hardware their OS is being put on. I admit that comes with a higher overall cost, but over the last years Apple has done a great job lowering their systems price, so they are competitive in the market. They are only missing the "budget PC" in their lineup. I'll take compatibility over being able to choose from HP, Dell, Sony, Toshiba, Gateway or parts on New Egg any day.
        • Gustomucho, on 10/30/2007, -5/+17http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/07/07/18/appl ...
          ------
          Back up your claim or I call BS on you. July 18 2007, if they raised 2.4% in such a short time I would be more than surprised.
        • tallonx, on 10/30/2007, -6/+7It really has nothing to do with Apple not being able to develop for anything other than their own hardware. Take, for example, Itunes. . . A majority of itunes software is on windows.

          The reason Apple develops on Apple hardware, is because they're a hardware company. That's how they make their money. That's why they can make $831 per Iphone. That's why they can freely distribute Itunes, because it leads to iPod sales.

          As for the ***** below me, citing Nightmarish Leopard instillations.... That's a rather rare happening. The only reason it's getting so much media is because it is so rare. The same thing happens when ever apple releases something with a flaw in it. And I gurantee you, Apple is already printing new install disks with this error fixed. (or atleast as soon as they fix the error). Apple is unique because it is so pro-user, and not because they're any more benevolent than anyone else, but they can afford to be in their software, because that's not where their money is.
          • SpectralSounds, on 10/30/2007, -6/+1"It really has nothing to do with Apple not being able to develop for anything other than their own hardware. Take, for example, Itunes. . . A majority of itunes software is on windows."

            I hope you are joking with that statement. I wont even state the obvious flaws in that logic.
          • Gustomucho, on 10/30/2007, -0/+4I don't disagree with the fact that Apple is a hardware compagny, I disagree with the fact that Leopard "embarass" Vista. It is far from the reality. Vista isn't great by any means, it gets the job done if you have the computer to run it. (I have it on 2 computers and haven't run in any problems so far.) But Apple CANNOT compete in the OS market vs MS, until they start programming for PC. If they do "great" on their computer, props for them, but Vista is designed to work on millions/billions of configuration.
          • grumpyrain, on 10/30/2007, -0/+4Please don't cite the Windows version of iTunes as an example of good software. I can't count the number of HIG problems with it. If only they followed *their own* HIG guide.

            http://developer.apple.com/documentation/UserExper ...
            * Users will learn your application faster if the interface looks and behaves like applications they’re already familiar with.
        • mysteri0usdrx, on 10/30/2007, -5/+10my 1,600$ from newegg parts runs fine with vista and xp, all at half the price of an apple product. If apple did release an OS version compatible with more logical hardware selection, I don't see why I should choose to use it. Could someone let me know what advantages OSX holds?
        • tallonx, on 10/30/2007, -7/+3Unix core... Sandboxing, NO REGISTRY, better parallelism

          But I mean really... What difference does that make..

          http://www.apple.com/macosx/technology/bonjour.htm ...
        • orangysb, on 10/30/2007, -0/+3So you are suggesting that Microsoft should follow Apple's route and tie and close up their operating system to their own hardware, effectively reducing the PC market to 2 huge vendors, Apple and Microsoft?
          I'm sorry but i'd prefer Microsoft's choice, it is this strategy that propelled them to the monopoly they are today.
      • DiggLive, on 10/30/2007, -18/+8@ danbiz3

        The nightmare many Mac users are having upgrading to Leopard?
        • spectre_25gt, on 10/30/2007, -1/+9Are you referring to the BSOD that was caused by a third party application that dug too deep into the OS? Yeah, that was a big blunder by Apple alright.

          Don't get me wrong, I think MS has a lot to deal with and there are a lot of good reasons for the trouble they had, but comparing the two situations is ridiculous.
        • danbiz3, on 10/30/2007, -1/+7I fully admit some people are having problems, but not nearly to the extent people with Vista are having had. Thankfully Microsoft has updated drivers and fixed much of the compatibility issues since its release, but that doesn't change the fact it was a nightmare for many people. My roommate's graphics and sound wouldn't work at all when he installed it. In addition, most of the Leopard problems I have seen stem from preexisting issues. Either way, its a much simpler and seamless upgrade for the vast majority.
          • Zalyster, on 10/30/2007, -0/+2Less people are having Leopard issues, oh I don't know, possibly because Macs have about 8% marketshare, while Windows has almost the rest? True, the 8% isn't all Leopard and the other isn't all Vista, but be realistic here.
        • Gustomucho, on 10/30/2007, -2/+2"My roommate's graphics and sound wouldn't work at all when he installed it. In addition, most of the Leopard problems I have seen stem from preexisting issues. Either way, its a much simpler and seamless upgrade for the vast majority."

          @danbiz3 : Much easier to program for your hardware than for all the third-party hardware, it is not MS fault if the 3rd party company didn't complete the driver in time. I have seen my share of blunders in the computing industry in the last couple of years, buying a product when it comes out and expecting it to work for thousands/millions of configuration is pure crazyness. Apple have it easy, they know every hardware that will run the computer.
          • danbiz3, on 10/30/2007, -0/+3I completely agree with you. Nobody can put all the blame on Microsoft for compatibility problems, but it doesn't change the fact they occurred for lots and lots of people. You should be upset with Microsoft and all your third party hardware. Apple does have it easy and in turn, so do I.
      • Tserk, on 10/30/2007, -15/+7"they can only program for a limited type of hardware : theirs" NOPE.

        Apple business plan is to sell high margin hardware via their software. End of story. If you can't accept that, then get out of this thread.
        • BlackAle, on 10/30/2007, -4/+4If Apple's hardware is 'that' good, it shouldn't matter if OSX was available for none Apple hardware. The people that like their cutesy hardware, would still buy it.

          Aslong as Apple wants to control everything, their OS marketshare will remain relatively low.
        • Gustomucho, on 10/30/2007, -2/+3I don't think people will change computer because of a new OS. Maybe it is my bad but I bought a computer then I chose my OS. Going the other way around is pretty stupid. If I could run everything Windows can run on OSX, and run it on a PC, I would. Since Apple has a tiny market share, they aren't embarassing MS. Plus what will you put on your MAC if it is not OSX ? At least with a PC you have a choice. So in conclusion : 5.6% Market Share, monopoly of OS on their hardware, 0% of the 94.4% market. What would help MAC sell more ? Gaming performance, compatibility with Windows-based programs (games, apps,). I would buy a Mac for my granny and for video-photo editing, that would be the only reason.
        • Tserk, on 10/29/2007, -2/+1BlackAle, that's not the point (about their hardware being that good). It's the software and it's marriage to the hardware that is that good, thus people buy the integrated system and Apple makes a mint on the hardware sale. That's the business plan, and it seems to be working (eg, see their latest earnings statement and note the profit margins in the report).
      • cquinnd, on 10/30/2007, -2/+3Gustomucho, the last time Apple tried to license their OS to run on a wider range of machines they lost money on royalties. They have been carefully avoiding getting back into such a situation ever since.
        • mos6507, on 10/30/2007, -1/+3Works well enough for Microsoft.
        • thewfirestarter, on 10/30/2007, -2/+3MS has enough marketshare they can force upgrades, absorb losses and dominates markets. They also have most of the business market, where the big money is. Not true with Apple, so they have to play smarter.
      • tao52nyc, on 10/30/2007, -0/+0Actually, according to Gartner, Apple's domestic market share is 8.1 %, which is a helluva lot better than the 3.5% it had 10 years ago, just prior to reacquiring Steve-o.
    • andywebb95, on 10/30/2007, -6/+18I agree.
      IMHO if Apple REALLY wants to start stealing market share away from MSFT start selling a version of OSX that will run on any x86 platform (not just Apple's own machines).
      • MioTheGreat, on 10/30/2007, -4/+38At least 70% of Windows crashes are caused by 3rd party kernel mode drivers. If OSX was subjected to the same staggering amount of hardware that Windows supports, I doubt it would fare much better.
        • hexydes, on 10/30/2007, -4/+2Oh well, then keep your niche portion of the market, Apple, and be happy with it.

          There are people that will pay $1400 for a computer. They constitute a small segment of the market. Everyone else is willing to pay less, and that is a market that Apple will never have, so long as they overprice their systems, and don't allow installation on any hardware.
        • Tippis, on 10/30/2007, -2/+6Given the track record when they've tried to port their software to a more varied environment (windows), they'll probably fare quite a bit worse :/
        • jwkpiano1, on 10/30/2007, -1/+0Actually, I would think it would fare much better given that it's based on UNIX.
      • diggSJaustin, on 10/30/2007, -1/+11The beginning of Apple's resurgence began with the decision to cease doing that. Profitability is far more important than market share.
        • mos6507, on 10/30/2007, -0/+3The computer business is a lot different from back then. You have to be willing to adapt to different market conditions. Hardware tends to always race towards commodification and Apple will not be able to keep charging a premium for its hardware indefinitely, now that it's largely identical to everyone else's.

      • tao52nyc, on 10/30/2007, -0/+0Been there, tried that. Market share for MacOS never grew - it just siphoned sales from Apple. So as soon as Steve-O was back in, he pulled the plug. It was the right decision. Half the appeal of Mac is the user experience. If they had to constantly fight the same battle with third-party kernel drivers and backward compatibility issues, OS X would be Just Another OS, with no compelling reason to adopt it.
    • EvilWalksWithMe, on 10/30/2007, -1/+16Hell, I'd buy it for my PC's if Apple would release it...
    • deepakhj, on 10/30/2007, -3/+27Because they are a hardware company.
      • mos6507, on 10/30/2007, -3/+1Maybe they shouldn't be. Look at how thin Dell's margins are. Seems like software would be a better bet.
        • thewfirestarter, on 10/30/2007, -0/+4Look how big Apple's margins are. They'd be stupid to walk away from that profit. They're worth more than Dell at this point. The difference is that Dell's target market is low end budget buyers, so they have to have low margins. Apple sells to the luxury crowd.
        • tao52nyc, on 10/30/2007, -0/+0Dell's margins are thin because they are king of the "low-end" cheap PC, where they lose $$ on every sale. Apple doesn't (and won't) have a dog in that fight. They like profitability.
      • over90000, on 10/30/2007, -2/+1If they're a hardware company why do all the Apple fanboys keep on going about OSX. If their hardware is so good, they should sell themselves.
    • cogit0, on 10/30/2007, -11/+4Um, you can install Leopard on a PC, with a few caveats.
      http://www.osx86project.org/
      From a previous article on digg:
      http://forum.osx86scene.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=2 ...
      The problem is that it's technically not legal, since Apple will only license their OS for their own hardware.
      • tao52nyc, on 10/30/2007, -0/+0Why are you being dugg down? You're just sharing information...
    • yeshuu, on 10/30/2007, -9/+18Thank you, who saw the line sayng that Leopard would outsell vista?? WOW these people are either extremly unimformed, or ignorent to anything except apple products, Apple do not and will not at this current time rule the computer industry, they DONT have a version of mac that can be run on a PC, and leopard is a glorified patch! Also, Apple will NEVER be used in business, and there are alot of business PC's
      • KSUdesigner, on 10/30/2007, -2/+13I wouldn't say Apple will NEVER be used in business, as there are many businesses out there running all Macs (I work for one of those businesses). I would say that Apple will NEVER dominate the business market though.
      • gazzerh, on 10/30/2007, -4/+8You sir are misinformed and ignorant to think leopard is a glorified patch. This story may inform you to the changes made in OS X: http://digg.com/apple/Ars_Technica_review_of_Leopa ...
        • cquinnd, on 10/30/2007, -0/+6People ignored it when Ars did the same type of review for Windows Vista. You are as correct as comments on that subject were, and there are still going to be people who ignore it.
    • NSResponder, on 10/30/2007, -14/+8"Until Apple releases an OS that doesn't require you to own an Apple computer "

      That horse is dead. Flogging it won't help.

      -jcr
    • ez12a, on 10/30/2007, -0/+12Apple is perfectly content on keeping OSX on the Apple platform, as long as their market share increases, even if by 1%. If they sell more Macs due to people switching from Vista and to Leopard, they win.

      And it is logically impossible Leopard will outsell vista. Their marketshare is a small fraction comapred to Microsofts = less Macs than windows based PCs = less copies of leopard sold. Its common sense people. The wont sell hundreds of copies of leopard for computers that don't exist.
    • MrFisty, on 10/30/2007, -3/+6Personally I'm embarrassed for Apple thanks to Leopard bricking my system at home. I've been using Macs for over 10 years now and ever since they became "popular" the quality has been nowhere near as good. The G3 in our studio is still kicking on while we've had several MacPros that had to go back to the shop. Really, I don't understand where the newfound loyalty comes from.
      • topherfitz, on 10/30/2007, -0/+3I totally agree. I have been thinking the same thing for the last 2 or so years.
      • atdakore, on 10/30/2007, -5/+2Leopard bricked your system???? sound like another 1d1ot error. G3 in the studio???? are u slow or just poor?
        • MrFisty, on 10/30/2007, -0/+6The G3 works as a support server. Most reliable machine in the place. And yes, we've got money, as I mentioned we have Mac Pros, but have found a 10 year old machine that is worth exactly nothing is far more stable than something that costs a few grand. They just built them better back then.

          And thanks for pointing out what an idiot I am with your excellent spelling and grammar. Serves me right for assuming a product everyone raves about will work properly the first time I use it.
          • atdakore, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1Support server, supporting what? old hard drives. Seriously which "shop" did you buy the Mac Pro's from. I've sold 15 Mac Pro's since their release, and not one has failed in any way! As for Apple's hardware, it is still the most reliable computer company you can find, so stop whining and do some work! Only really bored people install APE and other stupid haxies to their OS X systems. Seriously if you bricked your machines don't blame Apple. If you had used those Mac Pro's for work instead of playing around on them, I'm sure they'd work just fine.
          • MrFisty, on 10/31/2007, -0/+1Christ, here we go. Angry Mac fan gets defensive.

            The bricking (yes, bricking as in dead - kaput) is an aside to the quality of the old machines vs the new, not a literal tie in. And no, there's no APE or other ***** around installs on it. Call it a freak occurance, but the install killed the system, and I've installed countless OSs on countless machines, so I know how to do it. And mate, I'm surprised you've sold 15 of them if that's how you speak to people, getting in their face if they speak ill against Apple. Great way to reaffirm positive values on the brand and close the sale.

            I spend thousands of dollars a year on Mac equipment so I feel well within my right to comment that I don't feel they're as good now as they used to be. If you're a Mac fan, cool, more power to you. But as soon as you start going as far as saying the Mac platform is infallible and start insulting people and using such grown-up terms as 'haxies' you're really nothing more than an unconvincing forum fanboy.

            But I digress and, as you've so politely suggested, I should get back to work. And so should you.
          • atdakore, on 10/31/2007, -0/+1You're seriously unconvincing. most people spend thousands when they buy a computer. I understand you're frustration! An expensive computer doing nothing is stupid, but is it Apple's fault for making you install Leopard? and seriously did you archive and install? It is a whole new operating system after all! There is no way you're going to convince me that the original PowerBook G4 which is similar vintage to you're G3 tower, is more durable or better made than any of the new Macbooks/pros or that the Quadra or older are more durable or reliable than any of the current line of computers. Like I'd speak to my clients like i write on DIGG, yeah right! Also did I mention how uncovincing you sound. A bricked Mac Pro, because of Leopard! Not in this world! I think you'll find once you take you're mac pro in for AppleCare that it was co-incidental or user error.
      • noisymime, on 10/30/2007, -0/+3Leopard bricked your system? So it overwrote some crucial bit of firmware or damaged a piece of hardware? When you turn it on, absolutely nothing happens? Dear God I wish people would stop using the phrase 'bricked' when something is simply broken. Bricked means that its dead, gone, never to be recovered from, it does not mean some piece of software simply isn't working.
      • smoger, on 10/30/2007, -0/+2apple software > apple hardware
    • TomPlansMedia, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1http://digg.com/apple/What_if_apple_actually_relea ...
    • over90000, on 10/30/2007, -0/+3http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=37557 ...

      Just check out the people in that thread blaming Adobe for not making CS3 compatible with Leopard. If it was Windows, they would be blaming MS instead. Ironic that Apple fanboys are always going on about how Windows is bloated with legacy support.
    • bremstrong, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1The fact that Leopard has been hacked to run on standard PCs and runs well suggests Apple could switch to being a pure OS supplier at whatever point it feels best.
      • smoger, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1..but if they unlock OSX for generic hardware, they'd need to drop their claim that they're the only computers that run OSX or Windows, even though that situation is created entirely by the fact that OSX is artificially locked to specific hardware
  • DaffyDuck, on 10/30/2007, -4/+130I'm loving Leopard on my MacBook Pro at home but I am not blind to reality as you (writer of this fan diatribe) obviously are. There is no way Leopard will outsell Vista. It might do so for some slice of time but taking into account the lifespan of both OS's, Leopard will only sell a small fraction of the number that Vista will. This article is just an Apple lover pipe dream.

    Enterprise: Entrenched into Windows by custom apps and hardware contracts.
    3rd world countries: Usually cannot afford Mac hardware and Windows is often deeply discounted.

    I know in some countries Mac hardware costs way more than it does here in the US. Now, all of these people aren't going to upgrade to Vista right away but they will eventually and by that time Microsoft may have actually solved some of its problems.
    • EvilWalksWithMe, on 10/30/2007, -6/+27Holy *****... LOGIC! Where am I? This can't be Digg!
    • spidoman, on 10/30/2007, -6/+8I find this article extremely strange. I've bought and installed Leapord, and it's beyond buggy for me on my macbook. Menu bar has all of a sudden switched to black and white, timemachine will just not back up at times, not to mention it's just straight up slower than Tiger.

      Seems like people are praising Leopard because it's new, not because it's better.

      I love my macbook but I have seen more bugs out of Leopard more than I have seen the 300+ new features.
      • Snuxoll, on 10/30/2007, -3/+1Buying a new version of OS X is like buying a new version of Windows, wait for at least the .1 release before anything else, .2/3 preferably. I like Apple products, but there are ALWAYS issues before the first few patches.
    • cpbrown, on 10/30/2007, -2/+3in terms of licenses sold, vista will win by default. however, leopard will probably get a *higher proportion* of "upgrade sales", you know what i mean.

      apple has won our hearts with leopard; vista is, considering the time, money, massive overhype (remember how amazing longhorn was going to be?), a complete and utter disappointment, from all perspectives barring that of the osx-illiterate.
    • theuniversal, on 10/30/2007, -1/+5"There is no way Leopard will outsell Vista."



      The writer says "... and once that happens, Leopard will start its rise and take a significant share away from Microsoft." Significant share could be 5% or 10% over the next few years. Nowhere in the article does the writer say or even suggest that OS X will "outsell" Vista.
      • tnoy, on 10/30/2007, -1/+1Only an Apple user would look at their competitor getting 90% of the market as being a success.
      • theuniversal, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1Really? Doubling market share isn't a success? And from the other point of view, Microsoft would also see a 5% or 10% decline in market share as very significant. It's funny you blame my comment on me being an Apple user, because you obviously don't have a clue. The market conditions that allowed for MS's monopoly are gone forever and windows market share will only slowly decline from here on in. I'm not saying that as an Apple fan, or as a MS hater, but simply because it's a fact about the future of the industry.
    • aurorion, on 10/30/2007, -0/+13rd World Countries, as in India?

      I live in India, and here Windows is FREE. ;)

      But of course, I use Ubuntu. And I suspect my next machine will be a Mac. But most people I know, use Windows for free. Piracy rules here, and I think MS doesn't want to do anything that will curb piracy. What would they do if people start switching to Linux all of a sudden??
  • richardiscool, on 10/31/2007, -5/+43OS X has a UAC-like system too, as do most Unix derived OS
    • MioTheGreat, on 10/31/2007, -3/+16It's not as interactive or automatic as UAC...

      It's less used, because on the *nix's and BSDs, LUA has always been pretty strictly enforced, and while 'encouraged' by Microsoft, they've never really been big on enforcing LUA until now.

      But UAC has a few neat features behind it that other OS's don't. The secure desktop, for instance, prevents the need to enter a password into the prompt by ensuring (Thanks in part to UIPI and session isolation) that input on the dialog cannot be falsified by software. Then there's the ability to automatically run processes in lower integrity levels, like IE.
      • Tippis, on 10/30/2007, -0/+5"while 'encouraged' by Microsoft, they've never really been big on enforcing LUA until now"
        So the question is not really "what will MS do to improve on UAC", but rather "how long will it take until Windows programmers learn to make UAC- and LUA-compliant software". The minute they do that, UAC will be about as much in the way as good old sudo.
        • MioTheGreat, on 10/30/2007, -0/+4In what way is it flawed? Can you name a few things that give unneeded UAC prompts? You will never get a UAC prompt for anything that only affects your user account.

          There are a few legit concerns, such as when you try to create a folder in an area you don't have direct access to, you get a sort of double prompt (AFAIK, this has been improved in SP1. I haven't tried it out yet.). Of course, on most Linux distros, you'd just get an Access Denied, so I'm not sure anyone is allowed to complain about it coming from that angle.
          • Tippis, on 10/30/2007, -0/+7Like cquinnd says below: I'm not calling it flawed. I'm calling it something completely new to many Windows software developers. So far, they've never had to worry about limited-mode functionality — now they're required to (or they'll go out of business). The flaw isn't with UAC but with programmers having to learn new rules about what they can and can't do.

            I'm quite familiar with this problem, even on XP, since I tend to heavily restrict access to the registry, to important directories, and to some key files... I've seen quite a few programs (and installers) fail spectacularly simply because I've forbidden writing junk files to the desktop or to the C: root directory, and they expect to have full permission to write anything anywhere. It also trips up spyware something fierce, let me tell you ;)

            <drone on>
            It kind of reminds me of the good old Win98 vs. Win2k days, when there was a simple way to determine wether you were dealing with competent programmers or not, particularly when it came to games. Well-programmed games (e.g. anything based on UnrealEngine or any kind of Quake derivative) ran furiously fast, and exceedingly well in Win2k... programs made by some CS-dropout in a shed would crash before even the splash screen had had a chance to show up.

            This behaviour gave Win2k a reputation of not being gamer friendly. That couldn't have been farther from the truth. It just refused to run *crappy* games ;)
            The same holds true with Vista and UAC: it doesn't cause any problems for the user — it causes problems for programs made by idiots.
            </drone on>
        • cquinnd, on 10/30/2007, -0/+3I don't think Tippis was calling it flawed.
      • spectre_25gt, on 10/30/2007, -3/+4Unfortunately, that password issue has a downside as well. People tend to think a bit more before entering a password. With UAC, they're still going to get used to hitting that "OK" button and end up getting into trouble.
        • Orihara, on 10/30/2007, -0/+5Stick a password on the administrator account. Also, don't run as administrator. Voila, password required.
          • FLarsen, on 10/30/2007, -0/+3You don't need another account. You can set it to ask for a password regardless of the type of account.
        • cquinnd, on 10/30/2007, -0/+4That was also the reason for the annoying screen blanking feature. It was to encourage the user to focus on the elevation request, if only for a few seconds longer than a normal dialog, before just clicking OK.
          • MioTheGreat, on 10/30/2007, -0/+4While it does provide focus, it's not the primary reason it.

            The primary reason for the blanking feature is that you're now running on the secure desktop, which is a seperate desktop session, and completely isolated from Session 1, where everything else lives. In making this switch, the UAC dialog is completely protected from malicious code potentially manipulating the UAC Consent dialog, and thus bypassing it.
    • Darcy, on 10/30/2007, -5/+2But that doesn't count...
    • noisymime, on 10/31/2007, -1/+3Critial word: 'like'
    • pradador, on 10/31/2007, -1/+1The difference is that Windows decided against usability by spawning a dialog which dims the screen and doesn't let you navigate away until you make a decision. OS X just asks you to authenticate with a non-intrusive dialog should the OS require more privileges for the operation.

      That's really one of the main things that irks me about Windows. The programs always enter "modes" such as in preferences or dialog boxes which don't let you do anything to the main window until you leave that mode. It's rather annoying when you want to move the main program window for a reason, but the preferences window doesn't let you. Terrible from a usability perspective.
  • Beto0707, on 10/30/2007, -2/+17Microsoft may be even more embarrassed than you for not knowing how to spell such an embarrassing word. (Yes, digg spell checker does know how to spell this word.)
  • Nomad559, on 10/30/2007, -18/+6The Cult Of Apple
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_F9gdx_LIAc
    • hoshizakistar, on 10/30/2007, -3/+13stop posting this cult of apple ***** everywhere.
      • Nomad559, on 10/29/2007, -7/+1***** Off Bitch
        I Never Did Give Anybody Hell, I Just Told The Truth And They Thought It Was Hell ... Harry S Truman
        • Iwantawii, on 10/29/2007, -2/+1"A Real Man Makes His Own Luck." ... Billy Zane ... 'Titanic'
        • cfulp, on 10/29/2007, -0/+2Googling windows tattoos will give you crazy windows guys.
        • byttle, on 11/01/2007, -0/+2Jesus i love reading this guys comments...first it starts out with "The Cult Of Apple" then someone says "your a stupid mofo" and then he refutes it in some weird way...classic...
  • 4degrees, on 10/30/2007, -20/+44(/obligitory)
    to hell with these two, go linux.
    • WiseWeasel, on 10/30/2007, -2/+6As an aside, I just spent a day this weekend trying to help a friend get WiFi working on a WPA2 network with his new installation of Ubuntu 7.1.0 Gutsy Gibbon on his fairly recent HP Pavillion laptop (and failing - damn you, Broadcom drivers!). After spending many hours looking for info and trying various tips, we gave up, and still can't get online except through wired ethernet. Linux on generic PCs is still a huge hassle, and it is NOT ready for set up and use by mere mortals yet. As such, if they didn't buy a PC with Linux pre-installed, it is not an option I can recommend to people just yet.
    • zeromancer, on 10/30/2007, -1/+1so you bought an HP to put linux on? it should work, but if you're serious about linux, go spend $400 and build a linux friendly machine. the more you use linux, the more you realize it's a hardware choice as much as a software choice. it's gotten better by leaps and bounds in the last few years though. if you want a linux distro that will support ANYTHING out of the box, i suggest knoppix. i use it to rescue broken windows drives all the time and i don't think i've ever had drivers not work.
  • ThinkFr33ly, on 10/30/2007, -18/+11Give me a break. The only part of Vista that is a blunder is the marketing.
    • mysteri0usdrx, on 10/29/2007, -1/+4and "ultimate extras"...

      /still waiting for something more useful than poker, even though that is entertaining
    • Tehrab, on 10/29/2007, -5/+2The only blunder is marketing? Are you serious? They chose not to market it because of the numerous blunders that come w/Vista and they knew it:

      UAC implementation, Desktop Search infringing on Google, absence of WinFS, incompatibility with old hardware, Ultimate Extras, ignoring domain group policy...need I continue?
      • ThinkFr33ly, on 10/30/2007, -1/+5Ya, you do, actually.

        Please, smart guy, explain how UAC could be done better?

        Desktop Search infringing on Google? Holy crap give me a break.

        WinFS? Come on now... while it would have been cool, leaving it out is hardly a blunder.

        Vista is more compatible with old hardware than XP was when it was released, so what benchmark are you using, exactly?

        Ultimate Extras... ok, got me there. They ***** that up.

        How does Vista ignore group policy?

        I await the reply that will never come...
  • JasonCox, on 10/31/2007, -31/+26When OSX passed 80 million in retail sales and ~20 million in volume license sales I will kiss Steve Job's ass. Until then, to quote the bus driver on South Park: SIT DOWN AND SHUTUP!
    • meltingrobot, on 10/31/2007, -2/+9Better watch saying stuff like that, didn't you see the latest episodes of South Park? ;)
  • soot, on 10/30/2007, -24/+12Vista is a piece of *****, I reformatted and reinstalled to XP after trying to work with it for a week on my home machine. I think its already seen the pinnacle of its popularity with consumers. Its just Windows ME all over again.

    No doubt Leopard will probably kick its ass.
    • Ramble, on 10/30/2007, -12/+6You know Leopard has implemented most of Vsita's features to remain competetive right?
      • soot, on 10/29/2007, -2/+5I hear it works, too.
      • danbiz3, on 10/29/2007, -1/+3@ Ramble

        Maybe you should look back in time a little more than 11 months. Vista copied (with good reason) a lot of the features in OS X already. I understand why it's harder for them to roll out brand new features (they have to support a much wider range of hardware), but that's why Apple's OS's (since X) have been ahead of the curve in terms of features. Time Machine isn't a copy of Vista's backup. Spaces, while definitely not a new idea, is the best implementation of virtual desktops I have used on my OS (including Fedora, Ubuntu, Mac and Windows). The integration between Mail, iCal and the address book is incredible and comes with every Mac. Searching over the network and file sharing has never worked so well and even though Vista improved their network sharing immensely, it's still not quite there. If they do copy Microsoft on a good idea then I applaud them. The only way we will all have better operating systems is if they all borrow the best features from each other.
        • Ramble, on 10/29/2007, -0/+3I agree with you, I don't see anything wrong with it, I'm just tired of the Vista stole Tiger stuff (which it did not, stuff like instant search was shown at PDC03, and Tiger was released in 04).
      • PismoDuo, on 10/29/2007, -0/+3I love it when the MS fan boys try to tell us all how Apple copied Vista's features in Leopard. Like danbiz said, a lot of the features in Tiger ended up in Vista. I'm sure a lot of the features are similar in both operating systems, but come on. How many products on the market are copies of something else, just under a different name? Someone takes a good idea, and expands on it. That's how we progress through technology. If everyone had to reinvent the wheel just to implement a new idea they had, we'd never get anywhere.

        Microsoft "copied" some features from Tiger. Apple "copied" some features from Vista. But did they really? Or did Vista and Leopard just end up having similar features and Vista hit the market first? With Vista in the making for so long, couldn't you make the argument that the features in Tiger are really "stolen" from Vista?

        The whole argument is ridiculous.
    • yeshuu, on 10/30/2007, -8/+5You sir are an Idiot, the average consumer will look at a macbook and then a laptop, the laptop being in some cases half the price, thats were the decesion ends, said consuer has no care for which OS is on it, and Vista is not a joke, its not great though, but very few OS's are right out the gate, if OSX was why did they need leopard??
      • PismoDuo, on 10/29/2007, -0/+2Ignoring your awful spelling, you make a pretty good point. Most people will buy a laptop based on price, not on the operating system. But you also have to consider that a lot of people own iPods or iPhones and because of that are looking at more Apple products. Some of them may play around with a Macbook in an Apple store (or Best Buy, now) and decide they like the way Leopard is set up enough to pay a little more.

        And OSX(Tiger) was a great operating system. Leopard is a great operating system. Leopard is an upgrade, and includes new features -- particularly the integrated boot camp-- and upgrades to old ones. Would you suggest that Apple just continually release patches or service packs to incorporate those new features? At some point, those patches would get rather large, wouldn't they?

        And one last thing-- if XP was so great, why do they need Vista?
  • jonsimo, on 10/30/2007, -16/+29OS X has its problems, much like every other operating system in existence, but FAR fewer problems than that of Vista.
    A winner in my book.
    • jhaks, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1When you have a system that can hold up to the hardware configurations that Windows can then you can say it has less problems. Once you open up the hardware gates there is no possible way Apple would be able to quality assure all drivers or write all the drivers. Then you get some crappy buggy drivers written by some lazy developer.
      • notadiggtard, on 10/31/2007, -0/+0So I should buy a windows box and put up with problems because Apple has an "unfair"advantage?The fact is OSX works better.The reasons and excuses are irrelevant when I get out my Mastercard.
        You buy what you like.
  • Hosalabad, on 10/31/2007, -36/+44Dugg for aptly describing Vista as horriffically slow.

    I just downgraded a new dual core 2GB ram Vista workstation to Xp because it can't load a network share in less than 10 minutes.
    • MioTheGreat, on 10/30/2007, -6/+29Then you're doing something wrong....
    • natenovs, on 10/30/2007, -6/+25I'm sick of people exaggerating. you just sound like a fool.
      • BRODEL, on 10/30/2007, -5/+1It may be an exaggeration, but not by much. The main reason I stay away from Vista is because it's slow as *****. I have a laptop with Vista that every day I think about reloading with XP so I can open more than three god damn applications without waiting forever if I want to do something else. It's getting better with patches at least from what I can tell but it's a slow process (like Vista itself in that respect I guess).
    • TheSabre, on 10/30/2007, -4/+18This was a problem a few months ago. Then they put out a patch to fix it over the summer. My network shares load as fast as a local folder. Maybe it's your network...
    • Siraf, on 10/30/2007, -4/+3If you went to xp, that's an UPgrade, not a downgrade. Grammar people, grammar.
      • MioTheGreat, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1To a less secure, featured, and functional OS? Oh yes. That sounds like an upgrade.

        Idiot.
  • youMISERABLEpos, on 10/30/2007, -25/+15Oh shut the f*ck up already.

    No way leopard 'outsells' Vista. Vista already sold like crazy and made M$ some crazy dough since it came out. Once they come around to releasing a service pack, all the bugs will be worked out. Leoperd is the 4th version of OS X.. isn't it?

    Sigh..

    Fanbois..
    • soopafly, on 10/29/2007, -0/+5You didn't read the article did you?
    • GothAlice, on 10/30/2007, -0/+2There's a difference between selling to end-users and forcing on OEMs. Copies forced on OEMs shouldn't be counted into the equation, especially as many of the bigger OEMs, like Dell, begged Microsoft to allow them to continue to install Windows XP when requested.

      Windows is going into it's 7th major revision, as per: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windows#Tim ...

      Apple has released all four updates to OS X in the time it has taken Microsoft to release it's latest consumer offering. Fanbois, no. Sold facts, yes. You can not remove all of the inherent bugs from Microsoft Windows without getting rid of Microsoft Windows.
      • kretik, on 10/30/2007, -1/+1"Forced" on OEMs? That's funny, I remember hearing Dell is selling Linux now. Wait, let me check... yep, laptops and desktops with Linux pre-installed. Wow, Microsoft must be really "forcing" these poor OEMs.
    • PismoDuo, on 10/30/2007, -0/+3Yes, Leopard is the 4th version of OSX. And Vista is what version of Windows?

      Hate to break this to you, but you're a fanboi too, just an MS one.
      • Tippis, on 10/29/2007, -0/+11. Leopard is the 6th version of OSX, compared to Vista, which is the 1st.
        2. OSX is the 10th version of MacOS, compared to Vista, which is the 6th.
  • effedup, on 10/30/2007, -12/+26Ubuntu filled the need for a new OS and saved me thousands on hardware. I agree, to hell with them both.
    • hexydes, on 10/30/2007, -4/+12I wanted to upgrade from XP. Vista looked terrible. My choices were Ubuntu or OS X. Ubuntu ran on my current system; OS X would require me to buy $1500 in hardware. I picked Ubuntu, and have been very happy with that decision.
    • adila01, on 10/30/2007, -4/+9Say it like it is dude, Linux RULES!
  • m4sterofmurd3r, on 10/30/2007, -5/+28lol somebody put a dash too much crazy in their coffee today
  • majortom1981, on 10/30/2007, -12/+33Aam I the only one who has had no problems with vista? My experience is that everybody is blaming vista for horrible third party software and drivers.
    IF the next version is a major change then vista there will be even more problems.

    SXometimes I think people absh microsoft just because. People should place more of the blame with the people who write the drivers.
    • bluenullity, on 10/30/2007, -2/+9I don't have any problems with my Vista box. Replaced MCE05 with Vista MC and have been happily records shows and steaming them out of the house with Orb and have been playing games on it. People talk ***** but from my experience it all just works very well.
    • Spectre77, on 10/30/2007, -4/+10Vista has been running smooth and sexily for me. I'm sure lots of people have zero problems with it, but that wouldn't make nearly as exciting news/blogs/boards now would it? Now digg me down Mac fan-boys, this is your thread after all.
    • TheSabre, on 10/30/2007, -1/+8Agree. I haven't had a single problem running Vista Business since June. I use it every day and I haven't run into a problem getting drivers or had to reformat or anything. I did experience the slowness when accessing a network share. But this was fixed a long time ago.
    • zeromind, on 10/30/2007, -6/+1Sorry, I just helped a neighbor get a new HP with Vista installed. The only software installed on this box was a commercial Anti-spy ware, Anti-virus, and MS Office. The anti-crap software was installed by Best Buy. System has locked up a couple times already in casual use. Parts of the OS just stop responding. Can't even bring up the Task Manager. Checked HP for newer drivers and such. No luck. I could go on with the silly issues I had to deal with on this thing. All of them Vista. She really wanted to find a machine with XP on it.

      I was very disappointed. I honestly expected better. Wish she had bought a Mac like suggested to her.
      • Magadass, on 10/30/2007, -0/+5It's not Vista's fault people install ***** software on it and then ship it out of their store like Best Buy, Apple has the uperhand here cause they don't let vendors futz around in the OS before it goes out. Something IMO Microsoft should stop but they can't becuase it would diminish sells, NEVER EVER keep the BS installed that comes with these machines from Best Buy!! I am no Vista fan, and I have been using Vista since Beta 1, it's been a rocky path, and there are several things I dislike about the new interface, but overall performance now is up to snuff with XP. If you can't get Vista working your A, an idiot and shouldn't be touching a computer or B, a noob and should go back to A.

        • Ranneko, on 10/30/2007, -0/+2Buried for mixing up your and you're.
        • crazed792, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1Damn. I dugg his comment before reading yours...
    • nocircleno, on 10/30/2007, -1/+4I've had no problems so far. I defiantly prefer using Vista over XP at this point.
    • nuudles, on 10/30/2007, -4/+3Am I the only one who has had no problems with Linux? My experience is that everybody is blaming Linux for horrible third party software and drivers.
      Sometimes, I think people bash Linux just because. People should place more of the blame with the people who write the drivers.
      • jhaks, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1No one said Linux sucks. People have been chanting Vista sucks for along time and it is overly exaggerated. It has some problems but it is all on the same level as any other OS. Linux has problems and so does OS X.
    • HyperionHK, on 10/30/2007, -0/+0I also have had no major problems with Vista. My only gripes with it are really that it seems to take excessively long to shut down (which isn't a huge deal) and that transferring data between drives sucks. When I try to transfer large chunks of data from my laptop to my external HDD, it bogs the computer down a fair bit. Often I like to watch movies/tv shows while doing this, but it bogs the system down enough that it makes watching videos impossible due to choppiness. it sucks, but it's not a major problem, and one of the few I've had.
      On the other hand I tried switching to Ubuntu 7.10. I wanted it to go well, I really really did. Some things about Linux I absolutely loved. However there was just too many problems, and too much incompatible software (most of it games, which I do like to play a lot), that after a week of struggling with it I went back to Vista.
    • smoger, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1no problems with Vista here either.. it freaks out when I wake it from sleep, but I suspect that it's more an issue with my video card. otherwise everything is great. how does Crysis look on a Mac, btw?
  • animusart, on 10/30/2007, -25/+20Vista made me love XP.

    Microsoft claimed Vista was easier to use, yada yada yada.. but changing the way you use what's familiar is far from usable. The most irritating thing to me, right out of the box, was the new "Start" menus. Inline frames and scrolling?!

    Reformatting followed...
    • Ramble, on 10/30/2007, -2/+14Use the search numbnuts. No-one looks through the start menu when there is the superior search present.
    • killerofkiller, on 10/30/2007, -0/+11seriously.. just hit windows key and type the name of the program u want... no going through menus and folders
    • TheSabre, on 10/30/2007, -0/+15You could have just switched to the classic start menu.
    • xdeliriumx, on 10/30/2007, -0/+11If you don't like change from what is familiar then run your programs from a command prompt, you toolshed.
    • Miche1987, on 10/30/2007, -1/+11You reformatted because of the *Start menu*?

      Oh wow...if anything, Vista's start menu is infinitely better than XP's.
    • cquinnd, on 10/29/2007, -0/+1One of the few things that still catch me up was changing "Add and Remove programs" to "Programs and Features". Most of the other standard Windows apps I was used to calling up are actually easier for me to find under Vista.
  • JamesMorris, on 10/30/2007, -37/+41Boo hoo lets cry about Vista. Grow the ***** up, vista is fine.
    • sparkey182, on 10/30/2007, -7/+4shhhh just because you paid for it doesnt mean you have to defend it.
    • froggiestone, on 10/30/2007, -6/+2no its not it suck in every way possible.. lagge programs slow system games are close to imposslible to play (for me) im back on XP witch i DL from mininova aweek ago, and everything runs fast and easy even CoD4 in max details....screw vista !
      • Kanidia, on 10/30/2007, -0/+3Download some grammar for dummies software.
  • JimSwarthow, on 10/30/2007, -5/+16some surveys show Apple's market-share is finally larger than the margin-of-error of said surveys and like so many lemmings, the drones start squirting out of the woodwork all crazy-eyed and wet.. phkn hilarious
    • PabloMac, on 10/30/2007, -7/+4This question may be a bit over your head, but do the terms"lemmings" and "drones," more accurately describe a majority or minority?
      • jhaks, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1You should look up those terms; they have nothing to with the majority or minority, they apply equally to both. A cult is certainly filled with mindless drones but it is also usually a minority. Example of a drone: a person who has the name "mac" in their user name and uses the Apple logo as their user icon. Hopefully you are not a mindless drone but it does describe a lot of Mac fanatics.
  • stevebor1, on 10/30/2007, -13/+8is this similar to Apples own BSOD embarrassment?
    • joel8x, on 10/30/2007, -1/+3Oh, you mean the hang that was caused by upgrading a machine that had third party software installed that hacked the older OS and some of the plug-ins that loaded at boot time were incompatible with the new one so they crashed? Yeah Apple really screwed that one up and embarrassed themselves. Fail.
  • flashingcurser, on 10/30/2007, -8/+9I use mac and linux daily. I would much rather use either than a ms product. That said, microsoft is the 800 lb gorilla. If their OS needs more innovation from the hardware manufactures that is exactly what they will get. In another year quad-core desktops with 8 gigs of ram will be commonplace. Hardware manufacturers have ridden that gravy train for 20 years now, why should they stop now? Complaints of vista being slow will vanish. All the sheeple with pre-installed vista will not know the difference. This may help sales of mac somewhat in the short term. This, unfortunately, will not dethrone microsoft.
    • sparkey182, on 10/30/2007, -7/+1WHY DOES THIS COMMENT HAVE A NEGATIVE DIGG.. I HATE WHEN PEOPLE SAY THINGS THAT ARE EITHER FACTS OR WELL STATED OPINIONS AND PEOPLE NEGATIVE DIGG... ITS LIKE OUT OF SPITE FOR THEM BEING SMARTER MAYBE?
      • neodorian, on 10/30/2007, -1/+4Caps-lock is not cruise control for awesome.
  • animusart, on 10/30/2007, -16/+11I remember the "WOW starts now" campaigns... man.. "Wow does that suck!" is more like it. But honestly, Vista showed me a whole new appreciation for XP, an operating system I was growing tired of. I also was hoping Vista sales would lower the cost of XP, but no.. unfortunately XP is just as much as Vista. Meanwhile you can get the full shebang Leopard for.. less than XP Professional OEM. Microsoft definitely has their heads in the clouds.

    But yes, I do enjoy XP. Not more than OS X though, naturally.
    • cquinnd, on 10/30/2007, -1/+2Meanwhile you can get the full shebang Leopard for.. the regular upgrade price that one would expect having already shelled out a couple of thousand for a new Mac to run it on.
  • lessew, on 10/30/2007, -7/+4I think the writer goes off track a bit here.
    "Reason 1: The Vista debacle
    Microsoft Vista is nothing more than a public beta of an operating system that should have been held back until the major issues with the operating system were addressed. Instead, Microsoft--obviously feeling pressure from Leopard--decided to release a faulty operating system. "

    Microsoft spent 5 years working on that OS... people are always faulting them for being late... and now this writer says they should have left it longer. Does this not say something about Microsoft's overall management?
    • Snuxoll, on 10/30/2007, -1/+15 years you say? Last I checked those 5 years were split between "Longhorn", which was a complete rewrite of the Windows OS, the OS I was drooling over. But then they scraped Longhorn, and began with the Windows 2003 codebase and rushed out the half-finished product they called "Vista". Coming from a person that uses Linux as their primary OS, I will say it again, I was *drooling* over Longhorn. Vista is a rushed piece of garbage designed to get some money in the short run.
    • kretik, on 10/30/2007, -0/+2No, it says something about the stupidity of the writer.
    • joel8x, on 10/30/2007, -0/+2Unfortunately, MS does of the disadvantage of not having control over the hardware their OS runs on like Apple does. It is something though that Apple can release an upgrade that runs better than the previous OS on machines that are 5 years old. This has been something that Apple has been really good at since the release of OS X. If MS just kept the code base and optimized instead of bloating it, they would be applauded for their new versions.
  • Gorfian, on 10/31/2007, -17/+124I just bought a copy of Leopard. It is a good week with Guitar Hero III sitting next to my Nintendo Wii and Ron Paul gaining support every day.

    (Mention of Apple ... check.)
    (Mention of Wii... check.)
    (Mention of Ron Paul... check.)
    (Mention of hatred of Microsoft... missed.)
    (Mention of hatred of GW Bush... missed.)

    Bill Gates & Bush can go to hell. Is that a good digg comment, now?
    • CLShortFuse, on 10/30/2007, -0/+17Very good. It seems you are starting to fully understand how the Digg comment system works.
      By the way, needs a bit more Sony, AT&T and/or Verizon bashing
    • civdis24, on 10/30/2007, -0/+4You should probably add a "don't tase me, bro" reference.
    • feeman4life, on 11/12/2007, -1/+1+ the "***** the riaa" comments as well =)
    • doctor49152, on 11/12/2007, -1/+0Vista or the 'War on terror' I'm not really sure which one was sold with more lies.

      But Vista doesn't kill people... YET!!
  • BlackJackJester, on 10/30/2007, -12/+7I'm just waiting for the day when Mac OS's take a large enough market share to be considered a target for hackers. The complete lack of security on Macs will leave such a huge hole to take advantage of. And don't even try with the "Macs are way more secure" because its just not true. There are plenty inherent vulnerabilities to a Unix based OS, but its just the state of the market that nobody bothers to target it. You heard it here first.
    • Snuxoll, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1*****, half-the web is run on LAMP setups, any moderately knowledgeable sysadmin knows the basics of keeping the pretty-secure-by-default OS maintained. Step 1: dont setup Apache to expose / to the entire world. And that's in the server world, us desktop users have it easy, usually no ports open by default, and we get security updates like every other OS.
      Stop spreading FUD, UNIX is as secure as you want it to be, OS makers should keep their end-users safe by closing unneeded ports, and sysadmins should grow half a brain.
    • aurorion, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1Perhaps you can write a new virus or a trojan for *NIX and prove it first. And, Snuxoll sums it up perfectly.
    • monospaced, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1We've been hearing it for years. First, my ass.
    • notadiggtard, on 10/31/2007, -0/+0Considering the huge satisfaction of being the first one to wipe the millions of smug grins off millions of faces(including mine),I'd say the fact that it hasn't been done means it's pretty damn hard.

      The funny thing is all you people who have never used a mac scream it sucks,then turn around and come up with excuses for why it's better:
      No viruses-small market share
      reliable-fewer hardware configurations
      which is it?
  • lordtyros, on 10/30/2007, -7/+20I can't say I've read a more idiotic article this week.
  • jordanrobbins, on 10/30/2007, -7/+14The idea of Apple releasing an OS for any hardware is rediculous. The *only* reason why their OS runs so great is because of the socialistic hardware control they have on their computers. I seriously doubt OS X would stand any kind of chance if released in the wild. Its easy to make a stable OS if you only have to support about 5 different hardware setups compared to the endless types that Msoft supports. OS X in the wild would be the most stupid thing Apple could ever do.
    • RajAtWork, on 10/30/2007, -3/+7while factually this is true, the picture is a lot different from what it used to be. Today, we really don't have endless permutations of motherboards, cpus, gpus, etc. the PC hardware is pretty much standardized. "What Apple OS runs on" probably constitutes 70% of the new hardware spectrum.
      • cquinnd, on 10/30/2007, -0/+4The remaining peripheral industry still keeps the number of possible system combinations (and potential hardware conflicts) several orders of magnitude beyond what Apple's manufacturing process is comfortable dealing with.
    • sparkey182, on 10/30/2007, -1/+2i never thought about that... osx sure runs like a dream anyway.
    • noisymime, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1Does the common hardware also make the interface better or does that come from the sexy designs?
    • monospaced, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1Yeah, but with unix in OS X, assimilating the code to work with a ton of hardware would be much easier as it's basically open source.
    • smoger, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1considering the terrible resource management that osx has, i wouldnt even say it works that great on *apple* hardware. my 1 year old macbook spins for 20 seconds or more when switching apps , low end stuff at that.. itunes.. firefox.. mail

      my vista machine uses a lot of ram too, but then again thats producing transparent windows, live video previews, 3d flip, and more across 2 monitors.. and it rarely ever hangs on anything. if it did, i'd also have the option of simply using the classic windows theme, of course.(or any combination of themes between classic and Aero)
  • xdeliriumx, on 10/30/2007, -6/+21I have been running Vista fine with no problems at all. I actually like it much more than XP. Apple fanboys need to actually try the ***** software before creating some bias based on what some other apple fanboy douche posted on their blog.

    And to be clear I think Apple is a great company and Leopard is great. People need to get down off their horse and realize that they are two different things and both deserve credit.
    • NSResponder, on 10/30/2007, -8/+2" I actually like it much more than XP."

      Damning with faint praise, indeed.