I mean really. All these clowns are good at is their marketing spin. This parallels every msn experience any has ever had with these redmond bozo's. Ever try using Media Player...? What a joke that is... god-forbid that piece of crap makes it to default living room player. Yikes.

Had a mac!

Would have been interesting to see whether a move to OSX would have been any easier or just as bad.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Would have been interesting to see whether a move to OSX would have been any easier or just as bad.

Why do you make it sound like some big mystery? The answer is yes, of course it would have been easier.

Slower performance with new software on faster hardware? In case you're unfamiliar I can tell you that this does not describe any OS X update thus far.

Never, Never, Never trust a product from MS until at least SP-1. We started installing WinXP after SP-2 came out and it paid off big time. The biggest mistake they made (after choosing Vista that is), was to use the pre-installed OS. We ALWAYS nuked new machines and put in a clean copy without all the crapware that comes OEM. That alone might have accounted for a significant part of their problems.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Would have been interesting to see whether a move to OSX would have been any easier or just as bad.

Having transitioned several users to Mac from PCs I would guess easier. The drivers issue would have been less unless they had some unusual equipment. IP is a no brainer with 10. IE is not an issue as well. And their users had to learn a new environment anyway so Macintosh should not have been any harder to learn.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Would have been interesting to see whether a move to OSX would have been any easier or just as bad.

Hmm, well, Apples and Lemons. If your idea is WinXP to OSX, much more difficult from an enterprise perspective, especially if there is proprietary software involved. But from an earlier OSX, probably much easier. We'll see just how easy with Leopard!

The question was, move from Windows to OS X; not OS X upgrade (ex. jaguar to tiger, panther to leopard, etc.). Cross-platform migrations always pose many obstacles, depending on what software you need and how complex your setup/network is. It is doable (as we know; there is that one blog documenting exactly that), but mileage varies greatly.

Exactly what I thought it would be. Slow, unreliable, annoying, and incompatible.

Move to OSX is not a problem. OSX unlike Windows Vista really works. There is no reliance on IE for web browsing. OSX comes with a web server built in. Check a box in system prefs and it is up and running. Router is automatically seen by the system.
Boot up times are much faster than Windows will ever wish to be. Everything is much more straight forward on OSX than Vista.
Features aren't buried but right where you would expect them to be. No certified baloney!

you have to be to stick your hand into the fire repeatedly and suffer with all horrible problems before they try an alternative.

Jebus, OS X has been kicking the living daylights out of everything in the market for the past 5-6 years. How long
is it going to take them to finally realize it's time to
make the switch to Apple and OS X.

How exactly is this Mac news? Oh wait I see. It's just a typical TMO afternoon story designed to get posts. Oh crap, I just posted!

Quote

Guest wrote:
. . .How long
is it going to take them to finally realize it's time to
make the switch to Apple and OS X.

Fear. Fear of this Battle Station will keep the local systems in place. . .

lol A little Star Wars goes a long way!

. . .the more you tighten your grip, Tarkin. . . the more systems will slip through your fingers. . .

Quote

Biff wrote:
How exactly is this Mac news? Oh wait I see. It's just a typical TMO afternoon story designed to get posts. Oh crap, I just posted!

Why does it have to be Mac news? Oh come on! The world is suffused with computers that aren't Macs and operating systems that aren't OS X. To only concentrate on Mac-only stories would be naпve and not that interesting.

Since no one has said it, I recall migrating form OS 9 to OS X and experiencing some of the problems these Vista adopters describe. Driver issues, speed issues etc. The differences were many, though. For one, OS X came with OS 9 in the event you wanted to use both or stay with 9 for a while. Vista adopters buying new are stuck with Vista, as I understand it. Also, we were told by Apple (and the implication that you got classic with it) that this was a transition not all or nothing, and in fact the new system was not ready to be your 100% OS. MS makes it sound like Vista is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Bottom line, Apple mostly told us what to expect, while MS mostly tells you the opposite.

Recently had my FINAL FILL of BILL and moved to MacBook Pro after years of threatening to go Apples rather than Ape!
VISTA is .... well..... the view of the future. Computing in the DOS world has finally reached then surpassed its final frontier.
'Bout time the rest of the world does the "UPgrade" to MAC!
My secretary didn't share my enthusiasm about 6 weeks ago -- "mine will be the last one we convert, if you're really serious about changing over the office" -- til the dreaded blue screen of death today. Hopefully the back up and a new harddrive will allow recovery of all accounting data .... then .... entre' the MacMini ...... able to leap WinXP in a single flip of the Parallels button.
We're in process to join the real world, intending to PACK IT (Win) and MAC IT (our future!) ....
Hi, all you VISTA folks -- hello .... anybody there? -- difficulty getting my email? -- program in screw mode not use mode? -- sorry. "I'm from MacLand .... what country you from? .... Too bad."

Apple people sucks...

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
Apple people sucks...

Maybe so, but we have good grammar (unlike some).

No, not really? a mac gossip site, looking for "news" stories to bash a microsoft product. that's not commmon at all! /sarcasm

man, this article is so full of $#!% it does not justify a retort.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Apple people sucks...

Quote

Guest wrote:
No, not really? a mac gossip site, looking for "news" stories to bash a microsoft product. that's not commmon at all! /sarcasm

Quote

Guest wrote:
man, this article is so full of $#!% it does not justify a retort.

I was wondering when the Win Fanboys would show up.

Reminds me of the quote from Harry Truman
Reporter: Are you gonna give 'em hell Mr President?"
Truman: "No I'll just tell the truth. They'll think it's hell"

Seriously, from a completely non-biased point of view, Vista is slow, has a lot of quirks and bugs, and is still insecure, annoying, and still doesn't look as good as Mac OS X

I pity all the poor PC users out there.

That sounds odd.

Seems like whoever put that system in didn't test it. Kind of odd, since large businesses generally has a testbed.

This smells like crap.

This is bull. If they "did everything right" then there wouldn't even be a problem in the first place. This company didn't do ANYTHING right. And apparently, these folks didn't feel the need to train they're IT people (which I find to be the problem everytime).

As for the Linksys router connection problem, that isn't Microsoft's fault; it would be Linksys's problem. But do the people who don't know any better ever think to blame the third party company's who give shoddy support to something that they claim to work with Vista? No, of course not.

"Microsoft, this NVidia graphics card doesn't work with Vista even though it says it does, why?"

"Well little Timmy, that would be because NVidia sat on their asses for several months and didn't make sure it would work with our new OS."

You Apple fanatics are no better then the Microsoft fanboys, because you live in this condeluded world where you think that OSX is so much more secure and safer then Vista. When, in reality, you are no better off. If virus writers and hackers cared, they would take over your machine in a pinch. The only reason they don't is because that it doesn't pay for them to waste their time. Hackers create botnets of Windows PCs because they can create a huge amount of revenue with spam and whatnot. If they wasted their time on Macs they would earn nothing. They only way to keep your precious Macs safe would be to tell people to NOT switch so you can keep it all to yourself. If Apple were to gain the dominant market share, then all the virus writers and hackers will have no problem switching gears and finding every single vulnerablity inside those little, white Apple boxes.

i love my lenovo tablet pc with vista, no problems here

Microsoft Vista is utter CRAP

I agree with one of the first post - reinstall from scratch. I recently had the unpleasant experience of working with a brand new Lenovo laptop. It came with loads and loads of crappy lenovo-software, and after just one month the lenovo auto update seized to work, a winlogon process that hogged 40% CPU (which is almost one full core in a dual core laptap...), and it was no longer possible to do a proper shutdown.

Do not trust vendor software that ties in that closely with the OS. Lenovos tried to replace the login system, the wireless network finder and many things. No good. MS's developers may not be the sharpest knifes in the box, but Lenovos are even worse.

Seriously, there's nothing worse than some crappy pro-OS blog trashing the competitor. It holds no value. This article was submitted to Digg.. I said damn near the same thing I just said now, and within a couple minutes it was removed from the front page. Did my comment have an impact? I don't know. But either way, other people didn't have much respect for your opinion.

In the future, why don't you try to hype up the OS you love instead of bashing the one you hate.

I don't like Vista either, but coming from a place like this, the opinions are worthless.

companies out there are already attempting to move to the mac, even ones with propietary software-- check this article:

http://searchcio.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid19_gci1251637,00.html

Quote

LaurieF wrote:
Why does it have to be Mac news? Oh come on! The world is suffused with computers that aren't Macs and operating systems that aren't OS X. To only concentrate on Mac-only stories would be naпve and not that interesting.

The Mac Observer. You'll get your Mac news here from now on.

Why should a story about some guy purchasing a new computer with Vista pre-installed be considered interesting? Ah okay, the experience was allegedly horrible but is it representative, does it matter? And how would you respond to the same story if it was about Mac OS X, the iPod or some other Apple product?

Quote

burrito wrote:
companies out there are already attempting to move to the mac, even ones with propietary software-- check this article:

http://searchcio.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid19_gci1251637,00.html

I like this one better, the CIO of the largest automobile processing company in North America considering an enterprise-wide switch from Windows to the Mac despite the use of an application built on Microsoft's SQL server to run his business. Plus Gartner's take on OS agnostic apps, virtualization, etc. Far more informative and balanced IMHO.

and I took the one all my friends and family did, I chose Windows.

And I was forever sorry.


Two options stare these people in the face; one, slightly more expensive but easy to use, is the Mac. The other, much more technical but free, is *nix.

Why anyone would use Microsoft $#!% is beyond me.

I am by no means a Microsoft Fanboy, or a Mac fanboy. I'm a neutral, one that has seen and used many operating systems in his time.

This company obviously have SERIOUS IT tech issues if they're having to call up microsoft. If you see the digg page for this post - http://digg.com/microsoft/The_Full_Horror_of_Vista
You'll see that many people (Including me) have had ZILCHO wrong with Vista since it installed. A problem with slow boot usually means that some numpty in the IT department has installed wrong drivers - most likely XP drivers.

And seriously...you can see a post like this on a site called 'Mac Observer' and NOT hear the BS detector ringing? I LOVE Macs, I use my bro's all the time when I'm at home and it's awesome, but seriously, some of you fans are so far up Apple's arses, you'll take any news to do with microsoft and throw it in everyone's faces.

Vista hasn't crashed on me yet, and neither has it for 3 of my housemates, because we know how to use computers and configure them correctly.

But I've had many more crashes with OSX 10.4 than I've had with Windows XP. Primarily those had to do with using multi-button mice not designed specifically for a Mac (but which claim to have available drivers) or Firefox extensions which don't play nice with Mac Firefox.
But these kind of failures on the Mac mean I have to do things very differently -- no multi-button mouse seems like a BIG step back for me.
With XP, I've grown used to simply doing stuff. Change it, reconfigure it, bingo, done. If they screwed that up in Vista, then I won't be switching.

Let's see....
Which is MORE indicative of blind fandom?

A platform dedicated sight discussing the drawbacks of the competition?

-OR-

People cruising competition dedicated sights to defend their preferred platform from criticism?

I am a desktop support technician at a medical college/hospital supporting mainly the college/research Mac user community. I do get to regularly work on PCs in the hospital, and really dread it. I had the chance to use Vista on my Intel iMac when it was RC2, and I must say that I was not impressed. The Apple commercials hit the nail on the head, and I found executing simple tasks to be problematic at best. Speed wise, I did not notice any significant issues, but overall, it was an unpleasant experience. I recently heard that our infrastructure team was working on plans to move us from XPSP2 to VistaSP1 when it is available. I pain at the thought. We have enough fun supporting our Dell hardware base, but to add Vista on top of it? That just scares me thoroughly. Then again, it IS job security!

Quote

Guest wrote:
But I've had many more crashes with OSX 10.4 than I've had with Windows XP. Primarily those had to do with using multi-button mice not designed specifically for a Mac (but which claim to have available drivers) or Firefox extensions which don't play nice with Mac Firefox.
But these kind of failures on the Mac mean I have to do things very differently -- no multi-button mouse seems like a BIG step back for me.
With XP, I've grown used to simply doing stuff. Change it, reconfigure it, bingo, done. If they screwed that up in Vista, then I won't be switching.

I have run into the occasional kernel panic you describe, even on my own machines, but I have run into infinitely more Blue Screens Of Death (BSOD), from Windows 95 to XP. I am using an Intel iMac with a Dell optical mouse right now, and I have NEVER had a kernel panic on this computer. I regularly use Logitech mice on my Mac computers with no problems. Ironically enough, I think computers are like cars, and a combination that does not work for one person may work for someone else...and hard core (excuse the pun) Apple fans tend to trash their PC/Wintel counterparts, and vice-versa. I really do not care if the two ever get along, but I am seeing a growing middle ground. This middle ground is full of objective, intelligent individuals who just want the most out of there technology equipment, whether it has an Apple on it or Dell, Lenovo, HP, Compaq, Micron, etc. They are willing to have intelligent conversations without finger-pointing and accusations. I have glimpsed it here, and I hope this group continues to grow and have more intelligent conversations and debates. That is what makes the discussion worthwhile!

Quote

Guest wrote:
This is bull. If they "did everything right" then there wouldn't even be a problem in the first place. This company didn't do ANYTHING right. And apparently, these folks didn't feel the need to train they're IT people (which I find to be the problem everytime).

Looks like another Windows fanboy who failed at grammar. It's "their" not "they're".

Why is it Windows fanboys don't know grammar?

Quote

Guest wrote:

Quote

Guest wrote:
This is bull. If they "did everything right" then there wouldn't even be a problem in the first place. This company didn't do ANYTHING right. And apparently, these folks didn't feel the need to train they're IT people (which I find to be the problem everytime).

Looks like another Windows fanboy who failed at grammar. It's "their" not "they're".

Why is it Windows fanboys don't know grammar?

Because they know technology instead. When you study engineering, math, science, etc. Common English typos can be more common. But, that's also why we choose not to buy a Mac. We're too technical to be put into a trance by good marketing and a shiny box. When it comes to choosing based on technology, the choice is clearly not a Mac. Go ahead though, focus on the grammatical impurity of this post, it feels better than focusing on the performance vs. price ratio that a Mac has when you just shelled out too much money for overpriced hardware.

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
Because they know technology instead. When you study engineering, math, science, etc. Common English typos can be more common. But, that's also why we choose not to buy a Mac. We're too technical to be put into a trance by good marketing and a shiny box. When it comes to choosing based on technology, the choice is clearly not a Mac. Go ahead though, focus on the grammatical impurity of this post, it feels better than focusing on the performance vs. price ratio that a Mac has when you just shelled out too much money for overpriced hardware.

OTOH, I prefer a computer that just does what it is supposed to do, without the need for technical expertise every other mouse click.

I certainly CAN do the technical part, as I make my living doing so. At work I spend approximately 60% of my time supporting Windows problems, which comprise about 20% of the computers I service.

When I use a computer, as opposed to trouble shooting problems, I vastly prefer the Mac OS. Not that Macs are completely trouble free, but the differences are rather profound. Les time trouble shooting (ie: being "technical" means more time doing what I need (or want) to do.

But if trouble shooting on a daily basis (other than as a paid job) is fun, then by all means, Widows is your OS to use.

[quote="zewazir"]

Quote

Anonymous wrote:

I certainly CAN do the technical part, as I make my living doing so. At work I spend approximately 60% of my time supporting Windows problems, which comprise about 20% of the computers I service.

Perhaps you are not very good at fixing the problems?

Don't feed the troll.

Quote

Guest wrote:

Quote

Guest wrote:
This is bull. If they "did everything right" then there wouldn't even be a problem in the first place. This company didn't do ANYTHING right. And apparently, these folks didn't feel the need to train they're IT people (which I find to be the problem everytime).

Looks like another Windows fanboy who failed at grammar. It's "their" not "they're".

Why is it Windows fanboys don't know grammar?

Well, thank you for studying every word in each comment, so you could make an attempt to attack me. But just because I didn't check to see what I typed matched what I meant, doesn't mean I don't know grammar. It means that it was almost 3 in the morning and I was tired.

Why are Apple fanboys ignorant pricks?

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
Perhaps you are not very good at fixing the problems?

LOL Just what I would expect from someone too lazy (or is it cowardly?) to register so we can tell one braindead troll from another.

I fix problems just fine.

It has been a fact since before OS 9 that wintel boxes require more man-hours per unit in maintenance and trouble shooting than Macintosh. The disparity has only increased since OS X.

But you already know that. That's why Windows users "know technology". They have to know just to keep their systems running.

OTOH, my 4.5 Y.O. daughter can run her Powerbook using 10.3 without any help - or need for maintenance - unless I need to read gaming instructions for her. I only had to show her once how to download and install updates when prompted.

Quote

zewazir wrote:

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
Because they know technology instead. When you study engineering, math, science, etc. Common English typos can be more common. But, that's also why we choose not to buy a Mac. We're too technical to be put into a trance by good marketing and a shiny box. When it comes to choosing based on technology, the choice is clearly not a Mac. Go ahead though, focus on the grammatical impurity of this post, it feels better than focusing on the performance vs. price ratio that a Mac has when you just shelled out too much money for overpriced hardware.

OTOH, I prefer a computer that just does what it is supposed to do, without the need for technical expertise every other mouse click.

Sure, as long as you don't want something that can handle the latest & greatest technology and don't mind over paying for it, the go for it. Of course, your description there perfectly sums up my experience with Windows. I know what it's supposed to do and it always does it when I ask it to. But Apple is into a closed system where you are only allowed to do certain things, and if that's all you want to do and have extra cash to blow, Mac might be for you. If you want to do more and have more flexibility and spend less money, then avoid Apple at all gains.

Quote

zewazir wrote:
It has been a fact since before OS 9 that wintel boxes require more man-hours per unit in maintenance and trouble shooting than Macintosh. The disparity has only increased since OS X.

I love how the internet allows anyone to invent the facts that they like. This fact was definitely not the experienced by the IT staff at my school where it took them over a month to get an iMac to connect to the internet. We also had a split lab, half Windows & half Mac. After about 6 months the Mac's that were connected to scanners and had adobe products installed slowed to a crawl to become unusable. They moved all the scanners over the Windows side. This was on NT4 mind you which wasn't any near as maintainable as Windows 2000. That is a fact!

Quote

Intruder wrote:
Don't feed the troll.

LOL, thanks, we'll keep the food away from you.

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
Sure, as long as you don't want something that can handle the latest & greatest technology and don't mind over paying for it, the go for it. Of course, your description there perfectly sums up my experience with Windows. I know what it's supposed to do and it always does it when I ask it to. But Apple is into a closed system where you are only allowed to do certain things, and if that's all you want to do and have extra cash to blow, Mac might be for you. If you want to do more and have more flexibility and spend less money, then avoid Apple at all gains.

"close system"? Does that mean Windows is open source?
Or how about Widows Media Player? WMA anyone?

"only allowed to do certain things"?
First, I get word processing, spread sheets, data bases (admittedly a bit limited, but still reasonably functional). And, of course, there is email and web browsing with an integrated address book and events calendar that can be synchronized with most PDAs as well as other computers without additional drivers. Then we have photo editing, albuming and archiving, movie editing, music composition, DVD building and burning all of which are fully integrated with each other. (You should see the amazing movies - with home-written scores - that come out of the 7th grade Info Skills class!)

And that's just what comes with the OS. For fun a couple of games are thrown in there, too. Chess is pretty challenging when set to its highest level. And the kids LOVE Tony Hawk's skateboarding.

Then, of course, are any and all pro applications one wishes to purchase.

Should I mention that includes the ability to run ANY and all Windows platform application?

Gee, I never knew I was so limited.


What applications come as a standard install with Wind-blows? I know of a whole multitude of demo stuff that comes preinstalled, but fully licensed applications? Last batch of wintel boxes we installed, I distinctly remember purchasing the MS Office licenses separately. Have things changed?

Didn't think so.

Quote

This fact was definitely not the experienced by the IT staff at my school where it took them over a month to get an iMac to connect to the internet.

Then they are FREAKIN' IDIOTS!!!

Quote

Anonymous wrote:

Quote

zewazir wrote:
It has been a fact since before OS 9 that wintel boxes require more man-hours per unit in maintenance and trouble shooting than Macintosh. The disparity has only increased since OS X.

I love how the internet allows anyone to invent the facts that they like. This fact was definitely not the experienced by the IT staff at my school where it took them over a month to get an iMac to connect to the internet. We also had a split lab, half Windows & half Mac. After about 6 months the Mac's that were connected to scanners and had adobe products installed slowed to a crawl to become unusable. They moved all the scanners over the Windows side. This was on NT4 mind you which wasn't any near as maintainable as Windows 2000. That is a fact!

Anyone that takes a month - or even an hour - getting an iMac connected to the internet needs to leave the IT profession and go serve french fries.

We have had a dual platform school district for longer than the ten years I have been working here, and to date no one in the tech dept. has ever had a problem getting ANY computer, Mac or Windblows, on our network that was not due to a hardware fault.

On average, including driver installs and/or updates, (not to mention installing fully licensed versions of application software over the demo versions) a Windows machine fresh out of the box takes about 20% longer to install and configure. Back in the days of Win 2000 vs OS9, the difference in set up times was about 2-1. OSX, though a much better OS than 9, is also a lot larger and takes more to configure.

Then there is the sad fact that we need to make sure all of our Windows' anti-malware apps are kept up to date. Even with everything set as automatic as it can be made, this still involves a significant chunk of time weekly dealing with technophobes and nubees who manage to mess things up.

Macs: no problem. Only protection we need is against MS Word macroviruses leaking in from home computers.

But that is not the main reason Wintel boxes take more man hours. As any IT tech knows, most problems involve user error. New users (ie: little to no experience on either platform), on average screwup and get more confused operating in a Windows environment than on Macintosh. And the most common reaction I get when showing an experienced Windows user how something is done on the Mac is "I didn't think it would be that easy."