I originially posted this on Chris Sells website. Re-posting here for the benefit of Mac zealots.
Ok. Y'all Mac zealots need to get these points in to your heads.
Where MS beats fair and square the rest of the world is in it's API. Read on :
* for non-technical user Vista's Aero might look similar to OSX. But, under the hoods, Vista's XAML is way more advanced, "infinitely more productive" than anything Cocoa has to offer.
* The kind of interop one can do between various disparate Vista components ( UI and non-UI) is simply mind boggling.
* You don't have anything in OSX even remotely matching the sophistry and productivity offered by Vista's Indigo.
* For business users, the Workflow foundation is simply awesome. Again the same deal. Better productivity. Imagine business analysts simply creating real apps on the fly. Pray tell me which non-MS technology is capable of doing that ?
* They took out that Storage component but you can bet your bottom dollar that some team inside MS will cook it really nice for the next upgrade of Vista.
Some of you might argue that how this under the hood stuff really matters. Well, that's the trick. As more consumers and Businesses get Vista, the range of apps is only limited by developer imagination but definitely not by time ( because of Vista's productivity).
So y'all Mac zealots need to chill out. Under the hood Vista is way more advanced than OSX has ever been or ever could be.
-
-
sirhomer wrote:
That's nice. Did you read my post yet ?
-
rjdohnert
You will never know success until you know failure
And who really cares. Most Mac zealots are overdramatic all the time, so it really doesnt bother me what they have to say anyhow. They like Linux zealots have no lives, 9 out of 10 times unemployed, living in their parents basement downloading internet X- Rated material. USELESS to try and have any kind of conversation with em.
-
Hahahaha well I will just get this out right now: I'm an OS X user, but I've used Windows for much longer.
I have to say, I just like OS X more. Plain and simple. I like using it, I like programming on it, everything, more. I would take it over Windows easily.
That said, I don't think Windows is all bad. Vista has a lot of great technology at work. I'm not going to say this or that was copied from OS X or Linux or anything. If something was copied, its probably because its a good feature, so everyone wins, right? Vista has lots of tech OS X doesn't and the reverse is true as well.
Flame wars are for children
-
PaoloM
Hypermediocrity
sirhomer wrote:* for non-technical user OSX's Aqua might look similar to Windows. But, under the hoods, OSX's Display Postscript is way more advanced, "infinitely more productive" than anything .NET has to offer.
That would be nice, and maybe true, if OSX actually used Display Postscipt, but it does not, so...
sirhomer wrote:* The kind of interop one can do between various disparate OSX components ( UI and non-UI) is simply mind boggling.
Such as? Something specific, please.
sirhomer wrote:* You don't have anything in Windows even remotely matching the sophistry and productivity offered by OSX's IPC architecture.
Again, such as? What's different in OSX from Windows or Linux?
sirhomer wrote:* For business users, the OSX's NeXT foundation is simply awesome. Again the same deal. Better productivity. Imagine business analysts simply creating real apps on the fly. Pray tell me which MS technology is capable of doing that?
Unfortunately, nobody is using this "OSX's NeXT foundation", so it may be the best thing since sliced bread but it's useless if you can't use it.
In the meanwhile, Excel macros contain 80% of the world's financial knowledge.
sirhomer wrote:Some of you might argue that how this under the hood stuff really matters. Well, that's the trick. As more consumers and Businesses get OSX, the range of apps is only limited by developer imagination but definitely not by time (because of OSX's productivity).
Give us a number. How much more productive? Compared to what?
While you're there, please define "productivity" in terms that everybody can agree upon.
sirhomer wrote:So y'all Microsoft zealots need to chill out. Under the hood OSX is way more advanced than Windows has ever been or ever could be.
Uh, yeah...
Give me a call when OSX implements stack canaries, ok? -
stevo_
Human after all
sirhomer wrote:...some crap...
Delusional some?
I don't think theres many people in the world that understand each OS enough to really make any radical statements about each being x factors above the other.
Comments like yours are more out of frustration and what I believe is called 'fanboyism'.
But before you confuse my comment as the same, note that I like OSX and Windows for their own reasons, I think they can learn a lot from each other. Where as Linux can can sit running apache and all the other crap that people will forget over time until it disolves into an even more undefined mess.
-
z2bass
AH!
sirhomer wrote:
* For business users, the OSX's NeXT foundation is simply awesome. Again the same deal. Better productivity. Imagine business analysts simply creating real apps on the fly. Pray tell me which MS technology is capable of doing that?
Some of you might argue that how this under the hood stuff really matters. Well, that's the trick. As more consumers and Businesses get OSX, the range of apps is only limited by developer imagination but definitely not by time (because of OSX's productivity).
So y'all Microsoft zealots need to chill out. Under the hood OSX is way more advanced than Windows has ever been or ever could be.
1) I bet Steven Jobs couldn't even spell "advanced"
2) Well, looks like you don't use C# or VB
3) C++ is the ONLY language on Mac
4) The only think OSX has over Windows AND EVER WILL is their "UI"
5) I bet ur unemployed, living in your mothers basement, and download stupid stuff and be like "well I'm not screwing Mac over, but Microsoft's a good target"
So, I say to you, why don't you go try a Windows machine! -
Another_Darren
... than you can shake a stick at
PaoloM wrote:
sirhomer wrote:* for non-technical user OSX's Aqua might look similar to Windows. But, under the hoods, OSX's Display Postscript is way more advanced, "infinitely more productive" than anything .NET has to offer.
That would be nice, and maybe true, if OSX actually used Display Postscipt, but it does not, so...
sirhomer wrote:* The kind of interop one can do between various disparate OSX components ( UI and non-UI) is simply mind boggling.
Such as? Something specific, please.
sirhomer wrote:* You don't have anything in Windows even remotely matching the sophistry and productivity offered by OSX's IPC architecture.
Again, such as? What's different in OSX from Windows or Linux?
sirhomer wrote:* For business users, the OSX's NeXT foundation is simply awesome. Again the same deal. Better productivity. Imagine business analysts simply creating real apps on the fly. Pray tell me which MS technology is capable of doing that?
Unfortunately, nobody is using this "OSX's NeXT foundation", so it may be the best thing since sliced bread but it's useless if you can't use it.
In the meanwhile, Excel macros contain 80% of the world's financial knowledge.
sirhomer wrote:Some of you might argue that how this under the hood stuff really matters. Well, that's the trick. As more consumers and Businesses get OSX, the range of apps is only limited by developer imagination but definitely not by time (because of OSX's productivity).
Give us a number. How much more productive? Compared to what?
While you're there, please define "productivity" in terms that everybody can agree upon.
sirhomer wrote:So y'all Microsoft zealots need to chill out. Under the hood OSX is way more advanced than Windows has ever been or ever could be.
Uh, yeah...
Give me a call when OSX implements stack canaries, ok?
I notice that you don't ask for specifics or facts or proof from the original poster. Maybe MS groupies don't need proof, all they need is a healthy pile of FUD and paid for studies?
-
Another_Darren
... than you can shake a stick at
z2bass wrote:
1) I bet Steven Jobs couldn't even spell "advanced"
2) Well, looks like you don't use C# or VB
3) C++ is the ONLY language on Mac
4) The only think OSX has over Windows AND EVER WILL is their "UI"
5) I bet ur unemployed, living in your mothers basement, and download stupid stuff and be like "well I'm not screwing Mac over, but Microsoft's a good target"
So, I say to you, why don't you go try a Windows machine!
1) You sound like a fanboy
2) And neither do a lot of business critical business system .....thankfully
3) You don't know much about OS X considering the rubbish your spurt out. The main dev language for the Mac is Objective-C, but you can use C++, Java, Mono, Ruby, Python, and so on.
4) See 3. You can't compare Apples and Oranges if you've never tasted an Apple.
5) Were you writing this whilst looking in a mirror?
-
Ion Todirel
buuu
how about Java, Objective C and even C#?z2bass wrote:3) C++ is the ONLY language on Mac -
Another_Darren
... than you can shake a stick at
stevo_ wrote:...said even more crap...
And apparently you only get fanboys on Linux and OS X. You get groupies on Windows.
-
stevo_
Human after all
Another_Darren wrote:
stevo_ wrote:...said even more crap...
And apparently you only get fanboys on Linux and OS X. You get groupies on Windows.
Don't bother quoting me you ironic sod, just looking at your post history makes me laugh my socks off.
-
stevo_ wrote:
Another_Darren wrote: stevo_ wrote: ...said even more crap...
And apparently you only get fanboys on Linux and OS X. You get groupies on Windows.
Don't bother quoting me you ironic sod, just looking at your post history makes me laugh my socks off.
Alright, keep it clean guys. Debate = good, insults = lock. -
Xaero_Vincent
Sexy me
z2bass wrote:C++ is the ONLY language on Mac
Heh, don't you just love ignorant trolls who make fools of themselves?
Regards,
Vincent
-
z2bass
AH!
Ion Todirel wrote:
how about Java, Objective C and even C#?z2bass wrote: 3) C++ is the ONLY language on Mac
C#????????? OK, WPF /E... but not C# under .net 2.0 -
CannotResolveSymbol
Microsoft: Who do you want to execute today?
z2bass wrote:Ion Todirel wrote:
how about Java, Objective C and even C#?z2bass wrote: 3) C++ is the ONLY language on Mac
C#????????? OK, WPF /E... but not C# under .net 2.0
C# via Mono, which implements the .Net framework. In fact, the same binaries can be run on Mono as on the Windows .Net framework, provided the libraries it needs are implemented (Mono isn't completely finished yet). -
PaoloM
Hypermediocrity
Another_Darren wrote:I notice that you don't ask for specifics or facts or proof from the original poster.
You are right, I saw this thread late and just wanted to comment on some basic FUD.
Another_Darren wrote:Maybe MS groupies don't need proof, all they need is a healthy pile of FUD and paid for studies?
Most of the FUD in this thread is from "other" camps
But yeah, guys, if you don't know what you're talking about, please be quiet. This goes for everybody. -
odujosh
Need Microsoft SUX now!
Ok I am playing devils advocate here:
Srikanth_t wrote:I originially posted this on Chris Sells website. Re-posting here for the benefit of Mac zealots.
Ok. Y'all Mac zealots need to get these points in to your heads.
Where MS beats fair and square the rest of the world is in it's API. Read on :
* for non-technical user Vista's Aero might look similar to OSX. But, under the hoods, Vista's XAML is way more advanced, "infinitely more productive" than anything Cocoa has to offer.
But Aero doesn't use WPF. Its unmanaged code.
* The kind of interop one can do between various disparate Vista components ( UI and non-UI) is simply mind boggling.
Isn't this a disadvantage:P I don't want interop to be mindboggling.
* You don't have anything in OSX even remotely matching the sophistry and productivity offered by Vista's Indigo.
sophistry is not a word nuff said.
* For business users, the Workflow foundation is simply awesome. Again the same deal. Better productivity. Imagine business analysts simply creating real apps on the fly. Pray tell me which non-MS technology is capable of doing that ?
You should try to work with it under that hood you keep talking about:) Man does on need a PHD degree to figure out that API.
* They took out that Storage component but you can bet your bottom dollar that some team inside MS will cook it really nice for the next upgrade of Vista.
Possibly. Empty promise a advantage not made.
Some of you might argue that how this under the hood stuff really matters. Well, that's the trick. As more consumers and Businesses get Vista, the range of apps is only limited by developer imagination but definitely not by time ( because of Vista's productivity).
So y'all Mac zealots need to chill out. Under the hood Vista is way more advanced than OSX has ever been or ever could be.
##
And I close with an informative video done to 'innovative' audio at the past PDC:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QdGt3ix2CQ
Yes thats OS X.
Thread Closed
This thread is kinda stale and has been closed but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums,
or Contact Us and let us know.