by , 8:00 AM EDT, September 7th, 2001
Yesterday we linked to an article at Paul Thurrott's SuperSite for Windows that called Mac OS X and the Linux OS mere copycats of Windows XP's features. A few hours after publishing that story, Mr. Thurrott modified the article to say that Mac OS X and Linux were competitors (as opposed to copycats) of Windows XP, but that both were still copying Windows XP's feature set. Still later in the day, Mr. Thurrott added a sidebar to his article that talked specifically about Windows XP as compared to Mac OS X, his history with Mac OS X and Macs in general, and a bit about Linux. While this may surprise you, this article made us reconsider our opinion of Mr. Thurrott's opinions.
Don't mistake us, this follow up article still has some things wrong, but it was written in such a way that it didn't seem like Mr. Thurrott was a blind Microsoft groupie. Indeed, there was even a bit of praise for Apple in the article. In the end, he stated he regretted having said that Mac OS X was copying Windows XP, but that it was certainly true that both Apple and Microsoft copied each other of late. He closed the new article out by removing Mac OS X from his claim of copying, leaving the bill on the doorstep of Linux alone. From the article:
However, I had the temerity to write the following in my review of this product:
And for the copycat Mac OS X and Linux platforms, where innovation equates to copying the feature set of Windows, the bar has been raised yet again, this time to stupefying heights.
I agree that this was a bit harsh. So a few days after posting the review, I modified it--qualified it, you might say--to the following:
And for competitors such as Mac OS X and Linux, where innovation often has lately equated to simply copying the feature set of Windows, the bar has been raised yet again, this time to stupefying heights.
[...]
With this in mind, I'd like to amend that line in the original review a final time to the following:
And for competitors such as Linux, where innovation often has equated to simply copying the feature set of Windows, the bar has been raised yet again, this time to stupefying heights.
You can read the full article, and there is much more we did not quote, at the SuperSite for Windows.
Let's say you want to change the resolution of the screen. How might you accomplish this in OS X? Holding down the mouse button on the desktop does no good. Choosing View from the Finder menu offers no clue. Choosing Finder Preferences lets you change icon sizes, but not the screen resolution. And so on. How about System Preferences? In System Preferences, the Mac equivalent of the Windows Control Panel, we see a set of icons much like that used in versions of Windows circa two years ago. Let's se [sic]... hmm.... Is it Displays, General, or Screen Saver?
The approach in XP is different. You could still spend some time wandering around, I suppose, though right-clicking the desktop and choosing Properties would work. But if you choose Control Panel from the Start Menu, you will see categories of options, rather than a slew of icons. One of them says Appearance and Themes, and none of the other categories could possibly be misconstrued as a possible choice. When you click this, you are confronted with tasks. One of them is "Change the screen resolution." Done.
Not convinced it's easier? Well, look to Mac OS X 10.1. Apple has changed the System Preferences dialog so that it's arranged by... categories. Here's how Apple describes it: System Preferences are now arranged logically by use, making it even easier to find the panel you need at a glance. You set your desktop picture from System Preferences in Mac OS X version 10.1, instead of from the Finder’s preferences. It's more logical. But then, Microsoft added that to Windows XP over a year ago.
We do not want this article or any follow up comments to turn into a lets-nitpick-Mr.-Thurrott's-article-to-bits piece, but we take great issue with the above passage. First off, if you are a new user in Windows XP, what the heck does Properties refer to? Second of all, if you are a new user in Mac OS X, are you going to go hunting in "Screen Saver" for your screen resolution? That's a weak argument to make.
As for his argument that Apple is copying Microsoft's layout concept for the new System Preferences in Mac OS X 10.1, Mr. Thurrott leaves out that Microsoft copied the idea of control panels from the Mac OS in the first place. Again, this simply shows Mr. Thurrott's biases and experiences (and we all have those) that are rooted firmly in the Windows world. We do not consider Microsoft to be an innovative concept. We don't think the people at Microsoft considers themselves as such either. If they did, Microsoft would not have gone on a huge advertising campaign to convince the world of it. When you believe and live something like that, others usually follow suit.
In any event, Mr. Thurrott's follow up article showed a touch of class in handling his earlier statements.