An exercise in redundancy

>There is no clear winner, as the two platforms address different needs.

Gee, didn't see that one coming.

Hmm...

"Here's another pro-Mac detail. Spaces. Press F8 and you get four desktops to play with. Why can't Windows do that?"

. . .sounds a lot like the workspaces you get on Linux (gnome anyway, haven't tried any of the other desktop environments).

The thing I love about windows (especially XP) is that for every feature that windows doesn't have, there are always 3 more applications that will give you it.

Want a dock? Objectdock.

Want a better Alt + Tab? TaskSwitchXP.

Want a better theme? WindowBlinds/XPize/Anything else google will throw at you.

. . .and the list goes on.

Sidenote: Right now I'm using Debian Linux. I'm finding it much nicer than either of them. (Although I miss my Adobe software)

Also...

Don't forget.

Whatever M$ funded FUD you may read in the tech press...

Every iteration of Mac OS X gets FASTER...

Every Iteration of Windows gets SLOWER...

Office...

@Chris 19 Exactly my thoughts, if you wanted Office compatibility you wouldn't buy iWork you'd buy Office 2008, which I have and works fine...

@magnetik Quicksilver is a fantastic app indeed! One of the first I saw with a 10.6 specific build too

Xcode a fantastic IDE?!

Even the VC Express editions without a resource compiler or profiler urinate all over Xcode from a great height.

It is buggy, often needing a restart to update settings. It has a terrible GUI, taking a scroll and two clicks to see the reason why your build just failed, the icon metaphors are all broken, not something you'd expect from apple; it's as ugly a monster as Borland Builder. It has a naff editor which doesn't recognise preprocessor macros and sticks Mac line endings all over the place, wrecking your diffs. The debugger GUI is terrible, the documentation is fragmented, code completion is lacking and frustrating, the project tree is unintuitive. Its only saving grace is the multi-level, searchable settings dialog.

I agree with Charlie, it's on par with VC6 or Dev-C++, it's a decade behind VC9 or Eclipse, and a long way behind CodeBlocks.

Microsoft keeping everyone happy?

Apple are allowed to keep control of all apps/hardware and they have the final say on how their products are used. Imagine Microsoft decided to produce their own PCs which were the only machines allowed to run Windows. These same machines come with a version of Visual Studio and Office as well as with the usual MS addins they get anti-trust haammerings for (IE and WMP).

Lets see how many Manufacturers of software and Hardware take MS to court (most likely backed by various governments) if that were to happen.

Windows 7 is a good job. I'd compare the experience of it on my 5 year old AMD box to that of using Linux with KDE (and i like KDE).

Yes apple gear is nice and all, but the price ain't worth paying. Why would someone buy an overpriced mac for email internet, photo management and word processing when a cheap windows PC does excatly what is says on the tin?

Fanbois can go fuck themselves. There isn't enough of them to be important in grand schemee of things.....

Sigh...

A good article ruined by dipshit commentators...

"

So yes, it does run better on recent hardware, but have you guys check what happens if you try it on any of those Pentium 2.4mhz 512mb most business run on (Or those Semprons 1.x/2x) XP is here to stay for a long time on those."

And how well does Snow leopard run on a 5 year old Mac. Oh it doesn't?

Mac OS runs well and is reliable, but then when they only have to supports a couple of configs, it's hardly suprising. Windows does an amazing job considering the millions of different configs out they. Most problems with Windows are not the software, but the crap drivers and buggy software that users stick on top. If you put NT4 on a box and left it running, I'm pretty sure it would still be up and running 2 decades later. However this is not always the software writers fault, someone mentioned Cubase etc...

On my Atari Falcon many years ago, neither the Mac or the PC could even come close to it's performance. But it's easier to right a bit of software that supported one processor* with limited add on, Mac are in a similar position now. However Cubase on Windows has to support, diffeernet makes of processor, sound cards (hundreds), hard drive confids (RAID, Non Raid), so it's a far more complex beast.

As a rule if you want software RELIABILITY go with a Mac.

If you want software FLEXABILITY go with Windows.

* I actually butchered my Atari to have an 040 processor & Maths Coprocessor. Some took it much further.

Loving all the Apple fanbois comments...

I use both OS's every single day and I find Windows more intuitive that OSX.

Example 1: Stick an mp3 laden USB stick in a Mac and it asks if you want to import into iTunes. No? Fine....it does nothing.

Example 2: Stick an mp3 laden USB stick in a Win7 PC and it asks if you want to play it, burn it import into library or open the folder to view the files.

Same with photo's.

@Ty: Yes you can only run both OS's on a legally on Apple hardware, but this isn't about hardware is it, it's about the OS. Beige boxes? Clearly you got left behind around 1994....

Which is the only OS you can install on ANY intel computer legally? Windows victory there.

Also, why on earth do the Macbois insist you can do *everything* on a Mac that you can do in Windows? Try burning a data DVD on a vanilla OSX machine without installing a third party burning application. MacFAIL.

I love my MacBook Pro which runs Win7 and OSX quite happily....but I despise the arrogant oh-so-superior Mac fanbois that still use arguments from the 1990's to insist "Windoze" (yawn) is buggy crap and MacOS is a utopia of flowery technical wonderfulness.

You guys make it impossible for me to praise Apple in pubic and only repel people from the brand....because you give the impression that ALL apple users are arrogant gits with superiority complexes.

@DT

I run XP on my Mac, but only because my wife who has had nasty experiences with pre OS X Macs at the research labs where she worked. She just prefers to use Windows as it's something that she knows well, and isn't willing to change or actively learn a new slightly different way to use a computer.

It's worth noting that XP is much snappier on my Mac Mini than it is on my work PC.

Mind you; she's grown very fond of the iLife bundle that came with the Mac for video and photo editing. And has even grown accustomed the odd menu/window behavior when compared to Windows, in Leopard.

As a programmer; I use Windows for some coding related things but for day to day stuff, I prefer using OS X. Spaces might not be a new concept, but it works bloody well and is something I miss when having to work in Windows.

T'was a good, well balanced article on the merits of both OS's but not enough to justify my buying a copy of Windows 7. Microsoft have screwed the pooch as far as I'm concerned with the whole Vista debacle, and I'm really more than happy using OSX for all my home needs.

tl;dr

Not really.. but seriously...

I will not pay the apple tax ever, I dont own an ipod or an iphone so I don't need a matching (h)iprice.

As for Windows 7? The only way I will ever use it is if/when XP no longer does everything I need it to, or if I have to replace either my laptop or desktop and have to pay the microsoft tax on the new box.

Even then I'll take another good look at free alternatives first.

OPEN XML

I loved the line ...

'Microsoft's Open XML is best avoided in mixed environments.'

Doesn't that defeat the purpose of an 'open standard'

Be damned Microsoft and embrace the ODF

@Bravo - Fair and Balanced

To all the people who say that Apple has the advantage because the only machine both os's run legaly on is a mac... I don't really understand. Surely the fact that you can't choose what hardware to run your os on isn't an advantage? If windows can run on custom boxes AND macs, but sl can't. Surely that's a win for windows?

Another thing I have to say is regarding all the "spit and polish" that mac has, along with all the magic new folders windows has introduced. If the functionality is the same then after a month does anyone even remember that the "cool" bits the ui introduced? All these libraries, smart folders, and all the other marketing gadgets seem to be so much fluff too. Having tried similar things to everything mentioned I can safely say I'll stick with the least intrusive, simple configuration that gives me the functionality I need. I suppose this is why we have articles taking into account end users as oppose to just nerds like us though.

Tux 'cos I don't mind too much either way, I won't be using either of these.

Public Folders

Not being able to access public folders is, to be fair, going to be less of an issue as time goes on. Exchange 2007 has 'de-emphasised' Public Folders and won't offer them at all in future versions. It may be more relevant to look at how well Safari deals with Sharepoint...

Anyway, thanks for a well-balanced article.

Not hard

"I click and drag an icon down to the Dock to perform a task, but no, the target icon wanders all over the place as I scrub around trying to find it, muscle memory wasted. No magnification is the way to go, but the scaling as one seeks The One True Dock Size matches all the praise in the article."

Eh? What you're trying to do is a piece of piss.

Please differentiate between the OS and paid for apps.

Why are you comparing Word and Pages, in an OS comparison? Why would you do this anyway, when Word is available on both systems?

The same goes for mail clients. Outlook isn't cheap, and most people who buy Office for Word and Excel buy the home/student version, which doesn't even include it. OK, it's a great app, but for comparison purposes it might be fairer to mention that out of the box, Mac OS X includes a mail and calendar client with Exchange support that matches maybe (number from out of my ass here) 80% of the functionality of Outlook, whereas Windows 7 doesn't include a mail or calendar client at all, not even a pop3 client.

I look forward to a more indepth comparison later, presume you will do one.

Windows 2000 users

For those of us forced to like XP having found Windows 2000 perfectly sufficent, Windows Vista is just pointless and broken. Windows 7 has had the glazier in and everything is now mended and clean.

New users are probably better off with a Mac but if you need Windows then Windows 7 is good news. I stuck the beta on a P4 with 512 RAM and it was fine, faster than XP SP2.

So if you can switch from Windows you should, but you don't have to any more.

@Ty

Who the fuck needs to waste money on Apple hardware!!!?? All made in the same sweat shops as the rest and it is only a PC clone now.

If you need to suffer OS X then use a Hack and forget the over-priced and over-rated apple hardware.

As usual, Macturds been sniffing Jobs underwear again to get high.

@Ty

Just out of curiosity; when whas the last time you saw a beige computer. The last one I can remember seeing had a pentium II in it. It's just a shame that such specious emotive crap should be spouted in the first comment on an article. That amazing Mac you are talking about is the same generic hardware you'd find in any 'beige box'. You know Apple don't make their own hardware any more, right?

Disclaimer - before anyone rants at me and accuses me of being some sort of Microsoft shill, I'd like to make it clear that I have no love for zealots from either the Redmond or Cupertino camps. Both are large, soulless corporations and as bad as each other. That's capitalism for you, so get over it.

Voice of experience

@ John Sanders - Funnily enough I write this comment on a Dell Latitude D620; Intel Centrino Duo 1.86GHz (x86), 2GB DRR2 RAM and an 80GB HDD, running the Win RC in the office. It's about 4 years old and runs like a dream, it surprised even me!

@ Mad Hacker - IMO Win7 IS faster than XP or at the very least as fast as XP.

I'm very impressed with Win7 but I'm well aware that statement is a bit of a contradiction as all Win7 is merely Vista but working! Nevertheless a good result from MS, I'm just waiting for the day mainstreaming gaming comes to the Mac so I can see how the other half live!

Good atricle, as others have said it's good to get one like this that isn't dripping in fanboy goo

dock vs. taskbar

gnome-do

I'm glad..

..the dockbar zooming thing can be turned off - it's always made me feel a bit dizzy and sick.

And at paul brain I thought exactly the same when I saw the openXML comment - not that any of us could've predicted that we'd be in exactly that situation. ECMA deserve one big slap!!

Also nice to hear apple have gone with the F8 thing - been using ctrl-alt-fkeys in linux forever to get extra logins - always handy if X decides to have one of its moments.

re: Loving all the Apple fanbois comments...

"Also, why on earth do the Macbois insist you can do *everything* on a Mac that you can do in Windows? Try burning a data DVD on a vanilla OSX machine without installing a third party burning application. MacFAIL."

So I take it, you're ignoring OS X's built-in Disk Utility (on my Mac, it's the only thing I use to burn data discs) or don't know quite as much as you like to think you do....

@Mounting disks onto directories etc

MS-DOS used to do this as far back as 3.2, maybe even 3.1 (1985). But then, MSDOS (and NT) were developed on Xenix, so you would expect Unix-like behaviour. ;-)

Well-balanced article. I use Mac at home, Linux/Solaris at work. Used Windows up to XP.

Why do I get this horrible feeling...

That I want to spend about £1000, on a tablet Macbook that can run Windows 7....

It needs at least 2 USB ports and VGA out, and I think I'm sold.

Sucks to be me.

Multiple desktops on Windows

Multiple Desktops have been available since XP, using the PowerToy.

http://www.snapfiles.com/get/msvdm.html

Nice!

Great article, well balanced, and a refreshing change from the normal fanboy-baiting stuff. Well done.

Speed

"Windows Vista machine actually runs faster once upgraded"

Wow! (sarcasm intended) - In other words, changing from the World's Worst Operating System to the World's Second-Worst Operating System is an improvement. Who'd have thunk it...?

I know it seems churlish after all your effort, but what most of us want to know is whether it is an improvement on XP, and will it be as fast on the original hardware (as opposed to some glossy, just-unwrapped sextuple-core box with a Terabyte of RAM)?

blame the OEMs\end users for W7 dis-experience?

Is the delay with Windows 7 anything to do with it being a buggy first version ? The whole tone of this advert er .. article smacks of nothing but me-too-ism. The not-out-yet Windows 7 is as good-as Snow Leopard and if W7 doesn't impress then blame the OEMs .. there ... didn't take as long to say ...

"Windows works better when properly managed, which is why a skilled business user gets a better experience than the hapless crapware-laden consumer"

Yet more blame the OEMs/endusers waffle .. shame on you elREG

"Malware is also a factor, since Windows is by far the most popular target"

translation: Malware isn't caused by any intrinsic defects in the Operating System

Could have been piped in directly from Redmond ...

Why not just label this whole thing ADVERTISING ...

@Dave 142

Was switched off in Windows some time ago.