In a battle to the death, which would win, the longhorn or the tiger? The Detroit Free Press's Mike Wendland attempts to elucidate the subject, or at least the software version of the subject, by contrasting Microsoft's next major operating system release, Longhorn, to Apple's next generation version of Mac OS X, Tiger.
Mr. Wendland starts his comparison by pointing out that Longhorn won't be on store shelves until sometime in 2006, while Tiger's release is imminent. Despite the time discrepancy, however, such comparisons are likely to be common place, especially among people and companies that are considering major system upgrades.
In that light, Mr. Wendland discusses Longhorn's planned improved portable battery performance, better data exchange between apps, a new desktop, improved navigation, and better security. For Tiger, he lists speed improvements, Spotlight, networking improvements, and new video features.
The biggest bonus for Apple, however, will be that Tiger will be firmly established in the marketplace long before Longhorn is actually released. In addition, he said, Longhorn's biggest competition will be earlier versions of Windows.
"With around 5 percent of the personal computer marketplace," he concluded, "Apple has nowhere to go but up, and Tiger -- capitalizing on the company's new hip status -- is going to generate a lot of buzz. Longhorn, meanwhile, will hit a marketplace already dominated by Windows. Microsoft is going to have to dig into its very deep pockets to convince people that it's worth the hassle."
You can find the full article, which offers a good comparison for Mr. Wendland's mainstream audience, at the Detroit Free Press.
Yes, this is all very true. Us Mac fans will be awaiting the next version of OS X (after Tiger) by the time Longhorn in realisticly released. Come on now Microsoft! Also, I wouldn't buy Longhorn as soon as it comes out, because if I know Micorsoft, there will be really f'ed up with bugs and security problems left and right. I makes me wonder...what the hell does micorsoft do?! It takes like 5 years for a new OS? And its not like it will be great anyway. We OS 10.3 users have been using "Longhorn" technology from like 2 years now. It just makes me think that Microsoft just puts together everything at the last hour.
"Apple _______ stink because _________ . Jobs is ___________ to ___________ and think ____________ will ____________ us all. Read this ___________ article about how much better ____________ is than Apple."
Once you join the Apple Borg, you're forced into buying pricey yearly OS updates from Apple. Yes, forced if you want to keep a secure computer, the last two security updates were only for Panther. Truly reprehensible.
Guest wrote: "Apple _______ stink because _________ . Jobs is ___________ to ___________ and think ____________ will ____________ us all. Read this ___________ article about how much better ____________ is than Apple."
CloseViewName:jimothyPosts: 581Joined: 04 Jun 2004 Thu Mar 31, 2005 5:13 pmSubject:
Quote
Guest wrote: It takes like 5 years for a new OS? And its not like it will be great anyway.
No doubt! And this is a company many times the size of Apple. Apple can put together a solid and significant upgrade in a year and a half, while Microsoft's much larger development army needs five years.
Quote
Guest wrote: It just makes me think that Microsoft just puts together everything at the last hour.
I guess they kinda gotta wait until the last hour. I mean, they need to wait for Apple to release something before they can copy it!
It's late. It's feature set is cut back just to make to market. It must be true, Windows has grown in such an ad hoc way to an OS with so many million lines of code that even Microsoft doesn't understand the code any more.
This is not new at Redmond- once upon a time they talked about moving Exchange from the Jet database engine (read glorified Access) to a SQL Server based one. That got quietly shelved as being in the too hard basket. Unfortunately for MS they can't afford to do that with Windows...
Now you're objecting to paying for a secure OS?!!
As opposed to WHAT?!! Windows? hahahahahaha.... you won't be able to steal a copy of Longhorn either, RC.
With Longhorn, MS is making sure that little boys with pirated copies of Windows won't be getting any "free" upgrades any more. I think that MS will get a rude awakening when they find out that the percentage of customers willing to actually pay for Longhorn is far smaller than they predict! XP adoption rates didn't meet expectations either... remember that these much-touted market share numbers include ALL versions of Windows, including the millions of PCs still running Win95 (or lower!).
But I suppose you'll be eagerly camping out in front of CompUSA for Longhorn anyway. Oh yeah, thise lines will be sooooo long!
-Ken P
(Apologies for a rare "feeding the troll" lapse of judgement, but this was just too weird to resist a response. So sue me.)
How many leaps and bounds ahead of MS do you suppose Apple will be by the time Longhorn actually SHIPS. OS X has been getting better and better, whereas MS has been scaling back Longhorn more and more. By the time Longhorn finally rolls around, we'll probably already be beyond Tiger and into 10.5 (cougar? Leopard?), and MS will have cut back even more feaures.
The fair comparison is Panther vs. XP. Those are available now. Soon the fair comparison will be Tiger vs. XP. Longhorn is too theoretical and poorly defined to be compared to anything but Bigfoot.
But hey, go ahead. Tiger and Panther stand up perfectly well even against Microsoft's promises for the future.
How can you compare the most advanced OS on the planet to vaporware? Tiger is here. OSX has been here for years. Longhorn is vaporware - at least as MS initially planned it. They've cut out most of the significant improvements and STILL can't ship.
And when "Longhorn' does ship, mark my words, it will be nothing more in truth than XP SP3.
CloseViewName:Guest Thu Mar 31, 2005 6:35 pmSubject:
"Once you join the Apple Borg, you're forced into buying pricey yearly OS updates from Apple.
Yes, forced if you want to keep a secure computer, the last two security updates were only for
Panther. Truly reprehensible."
Once you join the Reality Check Collective, you become a compulsive liar unable to recognize the facts that are hitting you in the face. If Apple forces people into upgrading so that they can keep a secure computer, then that implies previous versions of OS X are insecure. But they aren't. Whoops. Where's the spyware for the original version of OS X? Where's the viruses? Where are the torjans? Where's the malware? Nowhere. That's because even the first version of OS X is more secure than the latest version of Windows.
And by the way, when I read you saying that I'm forced into upgrading, I looked to my left so I could se my nice shiny Mac running OS 7.6.1. I knew you were wrong already, but making it even more obvious was fun.
I think there is a more basic fact being ignored in the whole, "OS X is better than Longhorn" chanting.
Most people don't buy a computer because of an operating system. They buy a Dell, or a Compaq, or a Sony, or an Apple - not a Microsoft XP or an OS X.
I'm not saying Tiger isn't going to rule. I'm not saying that it isn't going to be a major cash cow for Apple because of the number of users who will be salivating for the upgrade. I'm not even saying that the operating system isn't a major selling point for most of these computers, but I have found that most people are more interested in the machine - not the OS.
In the end, Longhorn's success will be based on sales of new PCs, and the system requirements to run Longhorn will be a major factor in which PCs will have it. Ditto for Tiger. I have not yet heard anything about what my 700mhz eMac will be like running the latest and greatest, but it wouldn't surprise me if I heard I would be better off sticking with Panther.
Windows XP owns the market share right now because the most popular computer brands being sold have Windows XP installed on them - not because it's the best OS out there.
Longhorn's success will be based on the exact same thing. Sure, we're getting Tiger in a month (hopefully), and we'll be playing around with stuff that is still deep in Microsoft's pipeline, but when Longhorn comes out, it's not like Dell is going to scratch it's head and say, "This sucks - let's put something else on our boxes."
Will the public change their minds and start considering Apple instead of Dell and Acer? Perhaps. I hope so. OS X is pretty persuasive these days, but Apple has to beat everyone else out to win a customer. Microsoft just has to beat Apple.
What Longhorn strikes me as most like an Apple effort is Copland--the original project that was to be System 8.
Apple promised the sun moon and stars, then as they got deeper into it, the ship date kept slipping and the features kept getting cut. Ultimately, the entire project was scrapped, and they bought NeXT. The rest is history.
MSquish will likely find themselves in a similar position before Longhorn ships, then comes the avalanche.
DocRoss wrote: What Longhorn strikes me as most like an Apple effort is Copland--the original project that was to be System 8.
Apple promised the sun moon and stars, then as they got deeper into it, the ship date kept slipping and the features kept getting cut. Ultimately, the entire project was scrapped, and they bought NeXT. The rest is history.
MSquish will likely find themselves in a similar position before Longhorn ships, then comes the avalanche.
So to ensure that history repeats itself both as tragedy and farce, Microsoft should kick out Bill Gates, who then founds a new company, "SuCCESSOR", to carry out his visionary ideas, which involve personal computers with no more than 640KB of memory and using a "Bob"-like interface, and featuring close integration with SPOT gadgets.
Microsoft then goes through a series of replacements, including Carly Fiorina, losing marketshare to Apple and Linux. After a flirtation with Palm and its Be techonology, it buys SuCCESSOR to use its OS as the basis for a next-generation system.
swtzrs wrote: I have not yet heard anything about what my 700mhz eMac will be like running the latest and greatest, but it wouldn't surprise me if I heard I would be better off sticking with Panther.
And by the way, when I read you saying that I'm forced into upgrading, I looked to my left so I could se my nice shiny Mac running OS 7.6.1. I knew you were wrong already, but making it even more obvious was fun.
RealityCheck wrote: Once you join the Apple Borg, you're forced into buying pricey yearly OS updates from Apple. Yes, forced if you want to keep a secure computer, the last two security updates were only for Panther. Truly reprehensible.
You mean like the new version of IE that only runs on XP?
Last report it was 3%, but more recent numbers say 1.8%, but it varies on who you talk to. But it's not 5%. They have a lot of work to do in Customer Relations to get to 5%.
And by the way, when I read you saying that I'm forced into upgrading, I looked to my left so I could se my nice shiny Mac running OS 7.6.1. I knew you were wrong already, but making it even more obvious was fun.
Guest wrote: "(cougar? Leopard?)"
those are smaller cats than the tiger. I guess the only bigger cat left is Lion.. no? what comes after that? anyone feeling creative?
Apple won't touch "Lion." "Lion" is what Microsoft's been doing with its false promises.
Guest wrote: Last report it was 3%, but more recent numbers say 1.8%, but it varies on who you talk to. But it's not 5%. They have a lot of work to do in Customer Relations to get to 5%.
10% of coputers IN USE are Macs. 18% of software sold is Mac software.
Generally speaking, lions have more developed forequarters and stand taller (they typically do a lot more fighting), but tigers are longer and heavier, with more developed hind legs (for predating). So it's tough to say which is really the larger cat. Just some useless trivia for you this morning.
Perhaps Apple will move on to another animal family for OS 10.5?
Yeah, that's right, I've got a Mac running OS 7.6.1. If you don't like how that debunks Reality Check's lie that Mac users are forced into upgrading, then I guess you can't do anything about it, huh?
Yeah, that's right, I've got a Mac running OS 7.6.1. If you don't like how that debunks Reality Check's lie that Mac users are forced into upgrading, then I guess you can't do anything about it, huh?
OK, just go ahead and keep on resarting your computer when you get the usual Type negative error or Java freezes your system! Try to do better to keep up with the times, System 7 junkie.
"OK, just go ahead and keep on resarting your computer when you get the usual Type negative error or Java freezes your system! Try to do better to keep up with the times, System 7 junkie."
Java? You must have me confused with an idiot. I don't install Java on my Macs. I'm not sure what you mean about "negative type error", though. After I stopped using Netscape, it's been along time since it's had problems.
Cougar is sort of out, as 10.1 was nicknamed, "Puma." (10.0 was "Cheetah.") Puma, cougar, and mountain lion are pretty much the same cat--it depends upon where one is.
10.5 might be "Lion." By the time we get to 10.8 or so, it might be, "Tabby." Of course, they could use extinct cats, like Smilodon. While not very fast, Smilodon was rather fearsome.
CloseViewName:Guest Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:47 amSubject:
Quote
Anonymous wrote: "OK, just go ahead and keep on resarting your computer when you get the usual Type negative error or Java freezes your system! Try to do better to keep up with the times, System 7 junkie."
Java? You must have me confused with an idiot. I don't install Java on my Macs. I'm not sure what you mean about "negative type error", though. After I stopped using Netscape, it's been along time since it's had problems.
"TYPE NEGATIVE" error. I'm sorry for using System 7. I'm afraid that I won't be able to use MoviePlayer and SimpleText if I upgrade to OS X.
CloseViewName:Guest Sat Apr 02, 2005 8:10 amSubject:
Actually, before people started buying Dell or Sony PCs, there was a point where a lot of people DID care about what O/S their computer was using - that's how Windows became so big. To be fair, most of them couldn't have told you what an Intel processor was, or what an O/S was - they just saw it as a format, like VHS, and wanted to make sure they didn't get the Betamax.
CloseViewName:rascalPosts: 15Joined: 19 Feb 2005 Sat Apr 02, 2005 8:20 amSubject:
wtf Tigers are clearly much larger cats than lions.. Lions just look bigger cos they have a big mane.. compare a female lion with a tiger.. tiger is like twice the weight
Quote
mrhooks wrote: Generally speaking, lions have more developed forequarters and stand taller (they typically do a lot more fighting), but tigers are longer and heavier, with more developed hind legs (for predating). So it's tough to say which is really the larger cat. Just some useless trivia for you this morning.
Perhaps Apple will move on to another animal family for OS 10.5?
CloseViewName:Guest Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:20 pmSubject:
""TYPE NEGATIVE" error. I'm sorry for using System 7. I'm afraid that I won't be able to use MoviePlayer and SimpleText if I upgrade to OS X."
"Negative type error" or "type negative error", I still don't have a clue what you're talking about. I haven't seen an error since I stopped using Netscape on it. SimpleText? MoviePlayer? I don't use it to play movies and I prefer BBEdit. Your psychic powers are in question.
CloseViewName:greybeardPosts: 16Joined: 07 May 2004 Sun Apr 03, 2005 7:40 amSubject:
Quote
gslusher wrote:
Quote
Mikuro wrote: (cougar? Leopard?)
Cougar is sort of out, as 10.1 was nicknamed, "Puma." (10.0 was "Cheetah.") Puma, cougar, and mountain lion are pretty much the same cat--it depends upon where one is.
10.5 might be "Lion." By the time we get to 10.8 or so, it might be, "Tabby." Of course, they could use extinct cats, like Smilodon. While not very fast, Smilodon was rather fearsome.
I think Sabertooth would be more reconizable to the public. However, I doubt that Apple would use an extinct cat for its next code name. Consider the cheap shots from the Windows fanboys. I do enjoy the paleontology reference.
CloseViewName:Guest Sun Apr 03, 2005 11:53 amSubject:
Quote
Anonymous wrote: ""TYPE NEGATIVE" error. I'm sorry for using System 7. I'm afraid that I won't be able to use MoviePlayer and SimpleText if I upgrade to OS X."
"Negative type error" or "type negative error", I still don't have a clue what you're talking about. I haven't seen an error since I stopped using Netscape on it. SimpleText? MoviePlayer? I don't use it to play movies and I prefer BBEdit. Your psychic powers are in question.
Stop bugging the guy (or gal). If he/she doesn't want to upgrade beyond System 7, and it works fine for his/her needs, then fine. That was the point. You don't have to upgrade a Mac's OS unless you want to.
Anonymous wrote: Stop bugging the guy (or gal). If he/she doesn't want to upgrade beyond System 7, and it works fine for his/her needs, then fine. That was the point. You don't have to upgrade a Mac's OS unless you want to.
Credibility is lost when the person says that he/she has never of a type negative error, like "Type -14."
CloseViewName:Guest Sun Apr 03, 2005 3:49 pmSubject:
"Then you obviously don't use System 7."
I don't? That's funny. So what's that thing running on the 700/80av Power Macintosh sitting about nine feet to my left, that's been calling itself System 7? I guess you're having a hard time believing me because it doesn't suffer errors, so I'll tell you my amazing secret to keeping a crash-free System 7 Mac... I don't use software that crashes it. I know, I know, that's one far-out concept.
CloseViewName:Guest Sun Apr 03, 2005 4:05 pmSubject:
"Credibility is lost when the person says that he/she has never of a type negative error, like "Type -14.""
Wishfull thinking. Does it annoy you that a Mac that's older than dirt in the technological timescale is still a perfectly usable computer? Or does it annoy you that older Mac systems made advencements that Windows still hasn't made, and unfortunately ones that OS X has lost?
CloseViewName:Guest Sun Apr 03, 2005 4:08 pmSubject:
Quote
Anonymous wrote: "Credibility is lost when the person says that he/she has never of a type negative error, like "Type -14.""
Wishfull thinking. Does it annoy you that a Mac that's older than dirt in the technological timescale is still a perfectly usable computer? Or does it annoy you that older Mac systems made advencements that Windows still hasn't made, and unfortunately ones that OS X has lost?
Advancements? Global Village? NuBus? Just admit that the sucky Type negative errors exist on System 7, and we can drop this.
CloseViewName:MacePosts: 9163Joined: 07 Aug 2003 Sun Apr 03, 2005 6:06 pmSubject:
The article gave a fair view of the situation.
After Tiger (king of the jungle), the only better cat is Lion (king of the animal). The next release after Tiger is a better release for sure but is it a worthwhile release to justify calling it Lion?
I agreed with the author that said "success of Longhorn depends on the number of new PCs sold". The potential upgraders has a conundrum . Hopefully, Allison can lure these guys into the Mac world.
CloseViewName:Guest Sun Apr 03, 2005 7:02 pmSubject:
"Advancements? Global Village? NuBus? Just admit that the sucky Type negative errors exist on System 7, and we can drop this."
The file system, the moduler extensions and controll panels, resource forks, the abbility to set RAM allocation for each program, the ridiculous ease of changing icons and the abbility to apply multiple unique icons to files of the same type, the fact that I can safely delete a program without fear that it'll permanently cripple my system because several other files happen to reference it, the fact that uninstalling something is easy as dragging it and its support files into the trash, and the fact that installing something is easy as dragging it and its support files into a folder on the harddrive.
Some of that carried over to OS X, and some of it didn't. But none of it has been adopted by Windows, unless you count some piss-poor, half-assed attempts and the increasingly rare exception of a Windows program that doesn't have to be installed in several different folders, won't throw a fit if it doesn't find a file it's associated with, and can be uninstalled by getting selecting and hitting the delete key.
You're asking me to admit that my System 7 Mac has a problem with errors? Then you're asking me to lie.
CloseViewName:Guest Sun Apr 03, 2005 7:11 pmSubject:
And I forgot, the abbility to move a program from one folder to another and have it still function. When I want to move a Windows program, most of the time I have to re-install it to a new folder, or go into some config file and edit the path-names to point to its new location.
. Hopefully, Allison can lure these guys into the Mac world.