[Swordmaker]

". . . one button mouse . . ."???

Obviously David deJean did little or no research on modern Macs.

" a comparison of the number of mouse clicks it takes to discover the network address being used by your computer — three for the Mac, six for the PC. Actually, a fluent speaker of Windows can do it in three steps, too:

1. Click on the Vista icon
2. Type "cmd" in the search box and click on the entry for "cmd.exe" that's highlighted in the results list, or just hit Return
3. At the command line, type "ipconfig" and hit Return.

Amazing how "three mouse clicks" is converted to "Windows can do it in three steps." I actually find thirteen discreet movements, counting keystrokes, in the Windows "three steps". It's still 3 clicks on the Mac.

'And is an unlabeled icon shaped like an apple really any more intuitive than a button labeled "Start"?'

Apparently it is... because Windows Vista has replaced the button labeled "Start" with an unlabeled icon shaped like a circle with a Windows logo in it (is that the "Vista icon"?).

[Swordmaker]

Windows fan rebuts pro Mac comparison of OS X and Vista... PING!

Make that "clueless Windows fan" who still complains about the Mac's one button mouse...

If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.

[6SJ7]

Why should we ever need to know or care what IP address our computer is using? The fact that OS X users can discover it in three clicks may simply be the sad result of needing to know it more often than Windows users.

Huh? What is the writer taking about? He never does suggest why a Mac user would need to reference an IP address more often. (For that matter, many networks run DHCP, so who cares what the IP addresss is of the machine).

That, and the business about dumping the ipconfig file in Vista. Now that's what I'd call user hostile!

[Tribune7]

Actually, a fluent speaker of Windows can do it in three steps, too:

I too was going to bring that up. I was going to be generous and give them six steps (counting the typing as single steps).

[Tribune7]

If I had thought about migrating to Vist this-- this from an apparent Vista apologetic -- would kill it for me:

More problematic are Microsoft's efforts to make Windows Vista a more secure operating system. Security has never been something Microsoft did well. It has always subordinated practical measures for protecting users of its products against malware to, say, an ideological dedication to the cross-application scripting of Active X controls.

With Vista, the company seems not so much to be building in security for users as deniability for itself by explicitly making the user responsible for security wherever it can — and applying a definition of "security" that seems to confuse the safety of its customers' computing environments with its own interests in digital rights management (DRM).

Vista extends the discomfort of Microsoft's existing Windows Genuine Advantage anti-piracy intrusionware with its Software Protection Platform, which requires even more validation of the software's legality. At the same time, Vista doesn't seem to do much more to protect users' PCs and data from malware attacks than XP. The "OS X Shines" article may be overly strident about whether the new User Account Control (UAC) represents "authentication" or "approval," but it is correct about the result: UAC is certainly annoying.

[jude24]

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.

[Doohickey]

I can do it in four: Right-click network (either on the desktop or from the system tray - you pick). Properties. Status. Detail.

[Mr. Jeeves]

OS/X is a rock-solid, beautifully designed, 500-foot-tall skyscraper.

Vista is a modest suburban home, with a sprawling, ten story industrial plant stacked on top, capped by an impressive glass and steel spire that rises 1,000 feet in the air but has occasional problems with windows falling out.

Vista's advocates like to brag that Vista is a lot taller than OS/X and thus can hold many more people (support many more applications). Corporate America, being dependent on those applications, has no choice but to lease space in Vista.

But which building would you rather live in? ;)

[theFIRMbss]

>Does OS X Really Shine Brighter Than Vista?

------------------------------------------------

Searching by Color Label

Besides the visual benefits of having certain files tagged with a Color label, there’s a hidden benefit: You can search for files by their color. For example, let’s say you misplaced an important file for a project you were working on. You can press Command-F to bring up the Find function, and from the top-left pop-up menu, choose Color Label.

Then, click on the color for the files you labeled in that project, and it will instantly find and display all the files with that color. Searching by color—only Apple is cool enough to come up with a search like this!

------------------------------------------------

Apple's cool because
Apple tells you they are cool!
NOTHING else matters!

[Doohickey]

Apparently it is... because Windows Vista has replaced the button labeled "Start" with an unlabeled icon shaped like a circle with a Windows logo in it (is that the "Vista icon"?).

I think it's referred to as the 'jewel' (whatever that means). But, of you mouse over it the tooltip says "Start". Users who don't appreciate irony have always had the option of using Alt+F4 to shut down their computers.

But really, who, aside from mobile users actually turns their computer off anymore? I've got three desktops and four laptops lying around here. Not a single one of them is ever turned off except the one I travel with. The rest quietly go into thier S3 state when not in use and woken up when needed.

[Poser]

When will everyone learn?

It's the applications, stupid!

[antiRepublicrat]

The point is this: a UI is something you learn, just like a language

Uh, NO! The whole point of a GUI is to do away with arcane learning curves and make using the computer intuitive.

And if you want to go that way, in OS X you can go to Applications, Utilities, Terminal to open a terminal, and type "ifconfig". Windows' ipconfig is just a later DOS version of this ancient UNIX command.

Windows XP was released the same year, and embodied changes as major as those in OS X. It incorporated the 32-bit NT kernel, and radically reworked the Windows UI.

Sorry, but throwing a Crayola theme on top of Win2K is not a radical reworking of the Windows UI.

[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.

[_Jim]

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

Facilitates cloven-hoof use ...

[SunkenCiv]

I was in Best Buy today. The shelves seemed a little bare. They had just five CPUs in stock, the Vista stuff is imminent. :')

[Texas_shutterbug]

Yeah, that was a pretty stupid argument.

I did throw away the mickey mouse-mouse, however, and got a regular mouse to go with my mac.