Apple Vista? | The Coffeehouse

Ray6

I've put off upgrading my Powerbook mainly because I don't install the first release of any upgrade; I usually jump in at the .2 release.

Well, from what I've been reading, this may not be the wisest course of action.

Jason O'Grady is looking into some of the troubles that Mac users are working through, that has caused them to dub 10.5.2 as Apple Vista

Here's my favourite quote

Rabid Mac fan wrote:

If I wanted to run on a buggy crappy operating system, I’d pickup a PC running Microsoft Vista. I don’t expect this from my Mac. Mac OS 10.4.11 (Tiger) ran great whereas Apple Vista just appears to be immature and needed more time to cook.

A fascinating demonstration of the skewed reasoning that can result when some people find disappointment with the platform they have chosen to deify.

First, cry on line like a baby, then try and make yourself feel better by running down the operating system, the alleged crappiness of which, you are secretly beginning to doubt.

Perhaps it would be better to just report your problem to Apple and help them to help you? I dunno, just a thought.

Anyway, it is hard to prove how widespread these problems are; Apple's desire to cast itself as perfect, does mean that problems like this are talked up out of all proportion. And the problem that this chap seems to be having, look as if they are related to an EFI update that went wrong, rather than a problem with the OS itself.

Still I have to say, I'm a little worried that Apple's software quality control may be slipping, without Avie Tevanian's steady hand to guide it.

Dovella
Go Microsoft !!!!!!!

Apple work in " monohardware"

Windows Vista work in "multi combination hardware"
GPu
CPu
Video card
Audio
motherboard
ram
hard disk

for this , is not eligible see errors system on computers apple

stevo_
Human after all

Problem with windows is that everyone wants and gets part of the cake (software, drivers and hardware creation), yet not all of them take the responsibility..

Even worse is that even those that do take responsibility, windows still gets the blame, as windows is seen as the entity you work on..

Even people who really understand it isn't the fault of windows will sometimes blame it (think linux extremists who have double standards about linux to windows).

Maddus Mattus
Do, or do not. There is no try. - Yoda

I agree with Dovella and stevo_.

Microsoft seems to me to be a more open partner organisation, where Apple choses the partners it wants to do business with more selectively and keeping it's platform more closed.

In the past I have always been very content with Microsoft hardware (mouse, keyboard, sound system, game controllers). Isn't it about time that Microsoft would make it's own line of PC systems? With a couple of pre-selected partners perhaps? And still keep the door open to the rest of the world?

Or would they rub many partners the wrong way?

Ray6

Maddus Mattus wrote:
I agree with Dovella and stevo_.

Microsoft seems to me to be a more open partner organisation, where Apple choses the partners it wants to do business with more selectively and keeping it's platform more closed.

In the past I have always been very content with Microsoft hardware (mouse, keyboard, sound system, game controllers). Isn't it about time that Microsoft would make it's own line of PC systems? With a couple of pre-selected partners perhaps? And still keep the door open to the rest of the world?

Or would they rub many partners the wrong way?

I think that it would definitely rub partners the wrong way. And I'm not even convinced it would bring any real benefits. Apple controls the stack from top to bottom, and it still hasn't stopped the same incompatibility problems that plague Microsoft. At the end of the day, there is nothing special about Apple kit, and there would be nothing special about MS kit either. You can start off with a system that is rock solid, but five minutes in the user's hands and all bets are off.

dentaku

Maddus Mattus wrote:

Or would they rub many partners the wrong way?

Yeah, that would certainly cause major problems.
the first thing that has to be worked on when it comes to partners is to make sure that OEM systems don't come with useless "shovelware" that replaces things that are already built into the OS.
Just doing this would be a major accomplishment but I'm sure it would also make hardware manufacturers feel like MS is twisting their arm.

As it is right now, most big computer manufacturers sabotage their own machines by filling them with useless garbage and in turn making Windows look bad even though it has nothing to do with Windows.

Maddus Mattus
Do, or do not. There is no try. - Yoda

I agree with you on the bloatware, first thing I do with an OEM system is insert the Windows DVD. I still cant grasp why OEM's think they can do a better job than the Windows programmers.

For instance, my IBM laptop took 5 minutes to cold boot with the supplied Vista image. I deinstalled all the IBM cr*p and it's going like a bat out of hell.

On the side of PC being an open architecture, all that openness and compatibility has got to come at a price. In PC hardware architecture and in PC software. I really think we could do so much better,.. Look at dedicated gaming hardware (consoles) for instance. They have awesome tuned hardware and software!

It's 2008! We should be at warp speed, not still flying on impulse power.

Sven Groot
My name has 9 letters. Coincidence? I think not...

Maddus Mattus wrote:
I still cant grasp why OEM's think they can do a better job than the Windows programmers.

It's more a matter of publishers paying OEMs to include their crap with systems.

Maddus Mattus
Do, or do not. There is no try. - Yoda

Sven Groot wrote:

Maddus Mattus wrote:I still cant grasp why OEM's think they can do a better job than the Windows programmers.

It's more a matter of publishers paying OEMs to include their crap with systems.

You mean the free trail versions of software that expires afther two weeks of use?

This is one of the reasons why I always buy custom built PC's.

Ramble

Maddus Mattus wrote:

You mean the free trail versions of software that expires afther two weeks of use?

This is one of the reasons why I always buy custom built PC's.

This is why I always build mine, much better way.

Apple software is generally awful anyway, it only seems to work well in their own OS. Personally I think iTunes and Quicktime are worse than realplayer (and I haven't let either touch my system in years).

Bass
www.spreadfirefox.com/5years/

Calling an OS "Vista-like" is like the worst possible diss you can put on an OS these days.

Ray6

Ramble wrote:

Maddus Mattus wrote:
You mean the free trail versions of software that expires afther two weeks of use?

This is one of the reasons why I always buy custom built PC's.
This is why I always build mine, much better way.
Apple software is generally awful anyway, it only seems to work well in their own OS. Personally I think iTunes and Quicktime are worse than realplayer (and I haven't let either touch my system in years).

Well it's fine on their own OS, but yes, when it comes to writing Windows applications, Apple has turned out some of the worst crap I have ever seen.

Maddus Mattus
Do, or do not. There is no try. - Yoda

I deinstalled QuickTime when it asked me if I wanted to install the QuickTime updates Safari and iTunes.

JChung2006

10.5.3 is already in the works, according to MacRumors.com.

Simo
With me it's a full-time job.

Maddus Mattus wrote:
I deinstalled QuickTime when it asked me if I wanted to install the QuickTime updates Safari and iTunes.

Same here. Had it removed from all PCs at work as well. (should count themselves "lucky" they had it in the first place)

Maddus Mattus
Do, or do not. There is no try. - Yoda

Simo wrote:
(should count themselves "lucky" they had it in the first place)

BOFH!

Dovella
Go Microsoft !!!!!!!

Vista SP2 already in the works ??

or

Vista sp2 = 7 ??

Shining Arcanine

Dovella wrote:
Vista SP2 already in the works ??

or

Vista sp2 = 7 ??

If there is an actual SP2, it will be the last one. Microsoft's commitment to release annual service packs (or service packs period) went out to pasture a long time ago. Whether or not a SP2 is released for Vista will probably depend on the question "will people sue?" more than anything else.