What is Digg?Sponsored by Double Your Dating
The "How To Meet Women" Quiz view!
doubleyourdating.com - Three attractive women are standing a few feet away from you at a bar. What do you do? Find out...
133 Comments
- KaosX, on 10/12/2007, -3/+37It's a win/win for both parties now.
I personally like OSX and Windows as well, it's not about what's better all the time, it's about what works.
It might just be that appX works a little faster on one OS than on the other, doesn't matter to me now I have the option/freedom to run either OS at a hardware direct level now.
People should stop fighting over which OS is better and just let it go... all you're going to do is piss off the other side, we shouldn't be like the whole democrat/republican thing where its just a big pissing battle. Do whats best for the people who are asking for it.
Apple should respond to it's users' wants and needs as well as Microsoft to their users. - retral, on 10/12/2007, -8/+34"Either way using mac on a pc or windows on a mac are both using halfass hacks to get it to run properly."
XP runs completely native on OSX after bootcamp (or, if I'm not mistaken, a 'firmware' apple recently released).. I'm not a mac user, but I've been considering buying an iMac after seeing bootcamp (and yes I do realize it was shadily hacked by someone else, but this is different, this is official stuff, the big kahuna.). - harshbarj, on 10/12/2007, -23/+37if your system is crashing your doing something wrong. I've run xp from day one and have yet to get it to crash. One install was over 2 years old and running fine till a hard drive crash ruined a good thing! Despite all the holes in xp you have to give it credit for one thing, Stability.
- tastypastry, on 10/12/2007, -7/+20I now know that my search for a new laptop is over.
- estvir, on 10/12/2007, -5/+18.. microsoft don't have their own computers to release firmware/other updates to run os x ? rather stupid question from you.
- ThinkBox, on 10/12/2007, -9/+21that is a very wide general statement....
You act like no current apple users have any need for windows.. - retral, on 10/12/2007, -15/+26Apple customers aren't excited about it, future apple customers are, since they can legitimately put XP on it to ease the switch.
- adizzy615, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14And Visual Studio, and Visio, oh and slingplayer, and yahoo online subscription service. And office 12 (if you have ever used it, then you would understand).
- Jhorra, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Aside from some nice mice and keyboards MS doesn't sell hardware. To my knowledge the only thing stopping OSX to run on other platforms is Apple. They want you to run it on their hardware. This could change however now that it's running on the 86x.
- vinny, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10"I windows is so siht then why do you all want to run it?"
People aren't excited about Boot Camp because they want to run Windows. They are excited because they want to run OS X, but have to run Windows sometimes. - TheQwe, on 10/12/2007, -7/+15What did you expect them to say?
- SilentPurity, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Lets just face it... if you dont like XP don't use bootcamp. Dont complain about it. I see this all as just a ploy to get more mac users, the second they use OSX there hooked. I highly doubt that Apple will support Vista though.
- hahanoob, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11How many ***** do you suck per hour?
- MechaKevinRose, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9good call KaosX, it's kinda wierd how people will try as hard as they can to trash one os over another. I for one use all three os's, (on different computers right now) and the thought of having one computer that can multiboot into all of them and actually run at normal speed is fantastic.
The thing is, i've used pearpc (which seems unusable by me, just waay too slow), and i currently favor linux w/ vmware running win2k, but there's no way i could play games on my virtual enviroment. so the thought of being able to have a great apple laptop, and be able to switch between my work needs (linux) and gaming needs(windows) and having an os "that just works" (osx) is like the ultimate dream.
i don't think people really see how great a move this is by apple.
People want to try something new, but also have the saftey net of the os that they know.
As for the idea of backfiring, apple really has always been a hardware business, and if they can market and sell thier laptops/computers just as well as they did thier ipods, i think the world will definatly see a new golden age for apple. - LxMx, on 10/12/2007, -8/+13@p-uz
Funnily enough, I've been using a Windows system and a Mac system for the past week now as general home machines. So far I've had the Mac beachball requiring a restart at least 5 times. Windows hasn't had a hiccup yet and it's been doing more. Granted this isn't always the case, but it says a lot about how different experiences can be across operating systems.
Fact is, if you want stability in a mission critical environment, you're probably not going to be looking at using either Mac OS X or Windows. Of all the *Nix servers I have administered, Mac OS X servers generally have the worst performance/stability of the lot. Blame that damn Mach microkernel.
One shouldn't make broad statements like "Mac OS X is more stable than Windows", it may well be in your case but that doesn't mean the same applies for everyone else. - Otto, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9>Apple has opened the market to those who like to be thought of as 1337 - anyone who is actually 1337 is
>already using OS X as their primary OS and will have no reason to dual-boot.
No, l33t people run some flavor of Linux, or possibly a BSD.
People who need to get work done use Windows.
People who don't understand computers and don't mind paying more for that lack use OS X.
It's a very simple system we've got going here. Makes it easy to recommend systems to people. Try and keep up. - pu-z, on 10/12/2007, -14/+18In the past, I was a bit miffed that I had to leave a couple of Windows programs to enter the Linux world. Now, that I have left Linux and reside comfortably in the Mac world, I can't even remember what those programs were.
What I DO now is that I can't go back to the Windows world. Why? Well, you see, the programs I need to be effective don't exist there. How ironic that way-past-genius programs like SubEthaEdit only exist on Mac, also the RSS readers in Windows look like ***** compared to NetNewsWire. I really enjoy killing a program in Terminal if it misbehaves, the Activity monitor is way nicer than anything on Windows, I have my Word (but rarely use it after getting SEE), I have Entourage to meet the demands from IT. I use iPhoto, iTunes (non-crashing version) and even iWeb. I LOVE Spotlight. It is what universal search in Windows didn't become and what Google Desktop tries to be. It has made me several times more effective in everyday use of files on the computer.
So, even now when I can dual bot into Windows, it's pointless. I have absolutely everything I need on Mac OS X. As I'm a tech writer, I may make a Windows partition, but it will mostly have one specific purpose: to test the latest Explorer errors. Kinda sad, really. I have used Windows for many years and really did consider it superior to Mac OS while Mac OS was < 10 in version numbers. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7"It can run the same JS, without crashing, for several weeks with small hacks like Saft to make it a kiosk machine. After using Safari, I honestly did not expect this, but it surprises."
Sounds more like an issue with your Java VM than windows. I've worked with the various flavours for years, and while there are certainly problems with all of them, XP has turned out to be surprisingly reliable provided you don't overload it with crap (like huge numbers of people do). Macs are the same. Just don't stuff them to the gills with useless cute fuzzy software, download accellerators, appointment managers, mouse software, etc etc, all that sort of stuff and just about any PC can be made a heap more stable.
My own AMD based PC routinely runs for weeks without any ill effects and only gets turned off should I leave town for a few days or install a new piece of hardware. - j_bellone, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Let's start bringing up some videos of OS9, OS8, and claim them to be OS X!
- Fipe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5mictester: a video of a beta version of Windows 98 rejecting a device does not prove anything about the stability of Windows XP.
In the years I've used XP it has crashed twice, and both of those times I was running far more programs than I had RAM for. I don't recall ever seeing the BSOD with XP. - MOGua, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7"the rendering is choppy"
Not the font, though.
http://qster.com/2006/03/10/cleartype-vs-aat/
http://www.macobserver.com/columns/devilsadvocate/2003/20030523.shtml
But you are right on the faster boot and the looks. thumbs up.
note: I am dual booting Windows XP and Mac OS X on my ASUS core duo laptop. - mark1372, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10"We're pleased that Apple customers are excited about running it..."
Too bad for Microsoft they're excited about running it for all the wrong reasons. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+11pc users dont have to spend 3000, i bought mine 3 years ago for 750$ and could probably buy it now for 300$
- vamsi, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7towel401, don't know if you are trolling or simply baiting. Digg ain't /. crap where a few mods have the power. It's the actual user base that has the moderation power. That might explain why rabid anti ms comments with a +5 rating on /. get a negative moderation on digg. Actual pc users worth a crap and who read digg are good enough to maintain their pc's in good shape rather than paying for overpriced hardware. And a public company doesn't pay employees to browse through and comment on forums. If so, I can claim that Apple puts it's employees on /. more than any other. Try thinking the next time.
- estvir, on 10/12/2007, -9/+12is there something os x does that xp doesn't do ? please, refrain from saying stupid things like 'omg viruses lol' and 'it crashes every second cuz winblows kek.'
- macewan, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7people want to run Windows because of Windows only software, not because Windows is a great OS.
- DanVersion1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3This is great news for me, because as a developer it sucks having to swtich between computers when working on something that may only work on one platform. It's even worse when I dont have either my mac or my pc available.
That being said, it does make me wonder where Apple is going with this... - adolfojp, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4The last version of Windows that crashed was Windows ME.
If your system keeps crashing you either have a highly corrupted machine or hardware issues. - cookedchicken, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I don't think this is surprising. It seems that Apple and Microsoft actually have a pretty good relationship right now, but that could change. Microsoft is going to love this deal because its going to put XP and hopefully Vista on more machines now and in the future (with Vista, it may be *way* in the future!), and to Microsoft "market-share," regardless the device or hardware its running on is everything. Market-share = ISV's writing to your API's and ISV's writing to your API's = perpetuating their monopoly due to a stronger applications barrier to entry. Now what would be *really* interesting is what Microsoft will think if Apple opens up OS X to run on non-apple machines! A lot of people say that will never happen, but a lot of people thought the switch to Intel would never happen. Another monkey-wrench is how Virtualization will play into this game. The world of the Titans of Software is getting much more complicated.
- tecmec, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5If all you want to do is run simple programs, just use VirtualPC or the like. Or even wine. But you will never be able to run intensive windows programs on osx (not well).
- hasbeen, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6I don't know what in the world people are doing with their computers, but I've never had stability issues on XP either, yet I continually hear this argument against Windows too. It used to be true, no doubt, but it simply doesn't hold today. Like Windows or hate it, but at least find a valid reason instead of echoing the fanboy crap. It's extremely trite and old.
- noamsml, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I can kind of get the motivation behind it, but it's still kind of sketchy. When someone buys a mac, they usually buy it BECAUSE they want OSX. Otherwise, the insane price just isn't worth it.
- JeremyCade, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7Here's my case scenario: Currently runing xp on a ibm thinkpad.. Which is about 12months old now.. I tend to upgrade my hardware every 18 months or so.. Now for me, not having windows is a bitch.. I' do a lot of development in .net languages (i dont care if java/c/php is better blah blah blah).. I can't afford to purchase two or three computers to run three seperate OS's.. But buying one new macbook in 6 months time is possible.. Along with a brand new spanking version of OSX.. I'll still have to use XP for dev work.. But hey.. I'll have OSX for everything else I do..
THANKS APPLE! You've made my choice of hardware a hell of a lot easier.. And lets face it.. Apple is a hardware company.. Not a software company.. - rino, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9What are you babbling about? The cost of a Mac 5 years ago? This kind of tripe died a while back, do the numbers and live!!!
I'll grant that Apple is not in the sub-600$ space, but although Dell advertises as such typically in my experience consulting people they wind up buying just a little bit more and spending closer to 1000.00$ on that new Dell which by the way puts them in range of the very competitive iMac.
My point is, cost is a tired canard to hoist your argument upon. - moisie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Mac users aren't excited about running XP. They're excited about being able to run XP on their macs when they absolutely have to rather than having to use another box.
- scottpatricks, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6I believe a lot of the stability issues from a pc result in users trying to use their 1992 machine with a new copy of XP, whereas OS X users typically recycle their machines faster than PC users do. Working in IT I've noticed this on many occasions: people running OS X are usually running hardware that is 1-2 years old, where people running XP are usually running hardware 3-4-5 years old. Obviously this is always the case (I know), but it is more typical.
- krahzee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I agree. It seems like digg is divided into two fanatical factions lately: Apple/Linux vs. Windows
Say something negative about an Apple product simply because you don't like it or are trying to point out a short comming it has (like the ipod's lack of compatability out of the box with non itunes music services for example) and get flammed.
Same thing for Windows. (think anything to do with Bill Gates, Vista, Origami, Ect....)
It is possible to dislike a product, piece of software, a corporate policy, Supercuts haircuts or black turtlenecks without making it personal guys.
Sad thing is, we still have to read through all of the fanboy ***** from both sides to see some honest unbiased views on things. - ThinkBox, on 10/12/2007, -7/+9Next time try saying something imformative, interesting, funny.. or just try to contribute rather than type whatever your first inclination is..
- pigdart, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4No stability issues here...So what planet are you from mictester?
- Sottozero, on 10/12/2007, -7/+9Windows on OSX is the new Classic environment. You use it until you realize that OSX is way better, and eventually you find your need for Windows wanes.
Except for games, of course. Windows is a great OS for gaming. Is that what MS wants? To have a gaming OS?
Hey, whatever sells copies, I guess. - j_bellone, on 10/12/2007, -9/+11Wow. So when there is problems with the application or network its not Apple's fault? But when third-party OS drivers crash XP DAMN THAT MICROSOFT!
- dipswitch, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Actually you can play 3d games in VMware. One method is to let the game connect to the hosts X server (it will need to have tcp enabled), another method is to use the experimental D3D support:
http://www.vmware.com/support/ws5/doc/ws_vidsound_d3d.html - heydigital, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Notice how the demand is to get Windows on the Mac, and not the other way around. Where are the cash prizes to get OSX86 to the PC? Even Apple wants Windows on their hardware.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I find it funny listening to people say that people who will buy a Mac now, because it can run Windows will see the MacOS and just say to heck with MS.
Most people that will by a Mac because of Bootcamp already know about both OSs. They want the quality hardware of Apple with the quality/diversity of Windows. In fact I see in the near future Macs being sold with both OSs installed. Its a win win for all, except the fanboys.
Its also cool that MS can now say that Windows can run on 100% of all PCs on earth. - hunchback, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Well, what else is MS (or anybody for that matter,) suppose to say? This a great opportunity for a little PR, isn't it kind of predictable?
- Salvo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4@ThinkBox
It's not that he's Acting like current Mac users aren't interested, It's that he's assuming that current Mac users aren't interested
@pu-z
There are some proprietary programs which are only available for Windows. We use a cataloguing program called MicroCat which only runs on Windows, using a random combination of Function calls from Win16, Win32, .NET and even VisualBasic. It obviously only runs on a 32-bit version of Windows, but requires .NET, and 16-bit emulation at the same time. There is no alternative due to Proprietary Copy Protections of the Database Files. I'm sure other people suffer through other monstrosities.
Obviously, it is - pu-z, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5I'll give XP one complement; it is more stable than its older siblings. But it is not, by far, as stable as my Mac. Programs on Windows misbehave a lot more than on the Mac for some reason too. This does not exactly help the reputation of Windows.
- j_bellone, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Why? They don't sell hardware.
- KaosX, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6Pne program that I personally like from MS is Visio, I find it easier to use for visual network documentation than OmniGraffle
- pu-z, on 10/12/2007, -12/+13Windows is absolutely not stable; here's my story: We set up a big screen plasma to display some web pages with a rotating script to see uptime etc. generated. Now, on two separate computers, with XP SP2 all updates installed, the machine can only run for 3,5 days without crashing. The crash is caused Internet Explorer, but I do as Bill does and regard that as a part of the operating system. If we run Firefox , it will work for two or three minutes if the cache is on, or ≈ one week if the cache is turned off all together. Now, I have this little Mac mini... It can run the same JS, without crashing, for several weeks with small hacks like Saft to make it a kiosk machine. After using Safari, I honestly did not expect this, but it surprises.
Windows XP is cool and all for home users, but not in a production environment like the one I use. We have switched some over to Mac and more are coming over as time goes by. If they switch to Mac, they lose support from IT but a lot less support is needed after going over so it is more or less the same for them. -
Show 51 - 100 of 133 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is