Counterpoint: Does OS X Really Shine Brighter Than Vista?

InformationWeek ^ | 01/19/2007 | By David DeJean

[Covenantor]

It's not going to matter whether I play DVD's on my Window Home Entertainment Center or not. Vista's DRm will be constantly scanning for copyright protected content, or for whatever it deems to be such and insereing monkey wrenches into the works. The whole scheme negates the very concept of a 'personal computer'. And the reason I'm migrating to Macs. I'll keep one of my 4 Win boxes and give the rest away.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1757910/posts

[aruanan]

The point is this: a UI is something you learn, just like a language — and just like a language, some of it is structured, clear, and consistent, and some of it is simply learned by rote repetition.

Uh huh. I'd still rather learn to read a straightforward alphabetic language like Spanish, than a multi-tonal pictographic language like Mandarin Chinese.

[aruanan]

It's wrong to make the differences between Mac OS X and Windows Vista into a horserace -- each OS is most challenged by its own history, limitations, and possibilities.

Isn't this liberalist multiculturalism applied to computer operating systems? We're all just differently abled. You know, everyone really only wants the same thing, they're just trying to devise different means to that end. You want your money; a robber wants your money; but when it gets down to the fundamentals, we're still just talking about the same thing.

[Doohickey]

That article is complete BS, as I pointed out in the comments. How do I know this? Because I play my unprotected and protected content on Vista every day with no issues.

[Uri’el-2012]

David DeJean:

The purple koolaid please!

[aruanan]

It's the applications, stupid!,

No, it's how often and how completely the applications will crash.

[Swordmaker]

Lets not forget Rosetta to slow things down. :-)

What "things," FreedomGuru? Rosetta is available to run legacy Applications that have not been upgraded to Universal binaries. Most apps have been upgraded.

[Echo Talon]

The superiority of OS X is this quite simple proposition - what Windows Vista sets out to do, and requires at least 2 GB of RAM and massive processor power to accomplish, OS X accomplished 2 years ago and will run nicely on a slower processor with 512 MB to 1 GB of RAM.

Vista does NOT require 2GB of ram... 1GB is Fine and 512MB is the Minimum(but NOT recommended)... FUD is your name.

[Echo Talon]

BTW, you can get an extra 1GB of ram by getting a PC anyhow because they are cheeper. ;)

[Echo Talon]

I ripped some DVD's to my hard drive with Vista... does that help your situation? I ripped Superman Returns, Fantastic4, Cars and some others... Enjoy.. slysoft.com is your friend. ;)

[_Jim]

What's up with that single mouse button, for instance?

Facilitates cloven-hoof use ...

[Spktyr]

1 GB is fine? BS! We just tried this on a 2.5gHz P4HT, and with 1GB of RAM the thing is slamming the page file all the time. Hardly usable.

[jude24]

Vista does NOT require 2GB of ram... 1GB is Fine and 512MB is the Minimum(but NOT recommended)... FUD is your name.

In order to run Vista itself, yeah; 1 GB is the "recommended." However, in order to run more than the OS (even to watch a DVD!), 1 GB is still inadequate. (Source)

All that eye candy in Vista is resource-intensive - and it really doesn't add anything that OS X doesn't already do more efficiently.

It's not "fear, uncertainty, and doubt" to note that the "recommended resources" are inadequate. It's not FUD to note that while WinXP Pro recommends a minimum of a 333 MHz processor and 128 MB of RAM, using it at that level would be quite unpleasant. These "recommended system requirements" are always at least one half to one third what you really need to run the software.

[jude24]

We just tried this on a 2.5gHz P4HT, and with 1GB of RAM the thing is slamming the page file all the time. Hardly usable.

Wow. That's worse than I had thought.

[Poser]

"No, it's how often and how completely the applications will crash."

I haven't had applications crash since Win95 version 1. Maybe it's because I don't run 100 crappy utility applications in the background. (and, of course, I never click on stuff I don't trust)

[jude24]

I haven't had applications crash since Win95 version 1. Maybe it's because I don't run 100 crappy utility applications in the background. (and, of course, I never click on stuff I don't trust)

My BSOD's, and now kernel panics, are most frequently caused by driver crashes.

[Echo Talon]

I have ripped DVD's and a bunch of music cd's with Vista with a AMD 3500+(2.2ghz) with 1GB of ram(With Aero enabled) Using an AGP Video card... ALL WORKED GREAT!

[Echo Talon]

There are some nice Programs for Vista maybe you should look into them, then report back?

Vista Manager

Tweak VIFreeware

Also look at

Advanced WindowsCare v2 Freeware

[antiRepublicrat]

Must be a horrible life to have to use something you so obviously hate everyday just to pay the bills.

Stalking again? I don't hate it. In fact, I've praised c#, .NET 2.0 and VS 2005 Windows development on this board.

[Golden Eagle]

Stalking? I've been busting your BS for years on here, ever since you first showed up and started creating vanity threads praising Democrats as a matter of fact. Not much has changed either.