It would show how much was really stolen from Apple and NeXt for Win 95.

Where is NeXT? Who the F cares about Mac or Windows?

Don't agree and can't. The "look" of 3.1 was largely Susan Kare's icons - and she was hired by Microsoft to make them. What do you expect the girl to do?

And please don't come and say they're functionally equivalent either - because they are not. Only a complete imbecile would ever compare them and come out claiming they were similar.

I think he meant that Windows 3 was more original, and seeing Windows 95 in comparison would emphasize how much was copied from others AFTER Windows 3.

I think it makes sense to start with System 7 and Windows 95, though, since they are more functionally equivalent. Although time-wise, it would make more sense to start with Windows 3. System 7 was released in a full 4 years before Windows 95 (and only 1 year after Windows 3).

I think the comparo layout is ok until the end. They have
Windows XP vs. OS X 10.2, which is about right, but then,
Windows Vista vs. OS X 10.5.

Actually, Tiger and Vista are better comparisons and more equal on the timeline, especially if you consider when Vista was announced.

I think that Leopard is in a generation all of it's own. To me, it's almost as great a leap from Tiger, as 10.1 was from OS 9.

leopard is nothing more than a service pack

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
leopard is nothing more than a service pack

Am i just not seeing the link in the article above? Not that I'm too lazy to go to gizmodo and find the article, but it sure would be right neighborly of you to put one of them underlined blue text thingies like they often have on the computer internet.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Am i just not seeing the link in the article above? Not that I'm too lazy to go to gizmodo and find the article, but it sure would be right neighborly of you to put one of them underlined blue text thingies like they often have on the computer internet.