Has the Apple nearly ripened?

Started by The Geostation, February 15, 2007, 11:42:46 am

Previous topic - Next topic

Dark Fire

Quote from: Oshyan on February 19, 2007, 04:18:55 pm
MS probably saw it as too risky, but I think it would have been fully worthwhile and justified. And I at least would finally have a good reason to upgrade to Vista! I'm sure a lot of other people would welcome a good excuse as well and *won't* be buying otherwise, at least for a while. So they might have even come out ahead. :D

- Oshyan

Considering the fact that a lot of home computers simply don't meet the requirements of Vista, I agree that it would have been a good opportunuty for Microsoft to release a 64-bit-only OS. However, Microsoft would never do something as bold as that because compatibility, no matter how limited, with just about everything, is a Microsoft tradition. They are also afraid of loosing their dominant position to Apple, who have set out to lie to the world about how good Mac OS X is...

Quote from: fREeCYCLE on February 19, 2007, 05:44:21 pm
Just my two cents ... but Vista looks so terribly bad in so many respects, that I've commited to removing every windows box from our corp before it's too late to get out.

Only 4 of 68 left in administration;   two as of 3/5;   none as of asap.

Production is next.



Wow. You clearly hate Windows. Are you replacing them with Linux boxes?

fREeCYCLE

To tell me I hate windows is a bit over the top.   Believe that I will say what I mean in direct fashion, but that wasn't it.   We have made a calculated decision based on real world circumstances.   

Vista is not heading in a direction appropriate for our business needs, nor does it compete in a cost of ownership venue on light duty workstations, such as office machines.   Such machines comprise a large number of the stations we must maintain.

We have no existing core-system or group-ware entanglements with MS and are thus free to migrate our client-base as we choose.   This migration *could* of course, be very painful or expensive in situations where mission-critical dependency on proprietary backbones preexists.

Low-end stations, terminal clients or general duty machines are easily replaced with Linux variants, especially those not subject to regulation under sarbanes oxley for publicly traded corps.    Those which require some measure of commercial interoperability are macs.  This is by preference of user interface, application service policies and the ability to dual boot windows on the fly if mandatory. 

In our situation, macs/linux prove useful in a number of practical respects.   Many, if not all of the services we might care to use are available or present in all three aforementioned OS's.   Windows is the only one who sets arbitrary limits on common things like .. how many people can use a service simultaneously and in what capacity without additional server licensing for a potentially menial subsystem .... and it goes on for a country mile.

I personally find the freedom of using our equipment and software in the manner that we want to .. to be more valuable than interoperability with every gadget and nick-knack available over the fence.   

Would I pay for a vista station if it were the only way i could run TG2 or other 3d softs I'm into?    You Betcha.  But that would be a specialty rig having nothing to do with running a corporate environment.

There are compelling arguments for open-source adoption in corporate environments, if not infrastructures.   These are by no means iron clad and have hurdles / caveats like anything else.
   
They are generally technical 'hurdles' or 'deficiencies'... rather than expansive, deliberate licensing blockades to otherwise good solutions.  How many of us have actually Read and Understood the full legal implications of any given eula, let alone vista's or osx's?   I'm no manner of legal expert, but I know when I've been told that I have no rights when push comes to shove.   Given the option, I will avoid such mires or at least pick what I feel is less restrictive.

Ours is a balancing act between need, ROI, CoO, compatibility and future extensibility .... in which Vista failed to capture our business as an indispensable tool.   

Drocket

I don't normally get involved with these debates but one of my colleagues has installed Vista Business (64 bit version) to test the software we develop and tin a word it is terrible (okay 3 words :)).

It is constantly dropping the wireless network connection, his machine locks up randomly, but the most annoying feature he is faced with is the constant nagging dialog boxes asking if he wants to do something and if he is really sure (guess this is what Dark Fire meant by Windows being more secure :)). I am not sure if this is an option he has managed to turn off yet but there lies another problem, they have hidden, moved and probably removed items in the UI that it takes you minutes (if you are lucky) to locate them, case in point "adding removing programs", in XP this is simple, in Vista this is hard to find. This is not unusual when they release a new version of Windows, they change the UI so much it takes you days to figure out where they have moved things.

One user on the Lightwave forums has said that on his machine if Lightwave is busy processing then after a while Vista shuts Lightwave down causing him to lose his work, really useful feature that, not!

I am waiting for Leapord to appear on the Mac to see what that is like but I have no issues at all with OS X, I find it easier to use and just as productive as Windows, things just work with OS X.
Sure, Windows has more software available to you but if the software I need is available on the Mac I use the Mac, that is my choice and personally I prefer OS X over Windows.

Now let me clarify my position, I am not a fanboy of any platform, I use what I need to (Windows/OS X/Linux) in order to get a job done, I have used and developed Windows applications since Wndows 3.1 (both client and server applications) and have been lucky enough to see the Windows NT source code (I worked for a company in the UK who wrote software on behalf of Microsoft to put in one of their server products) which was an eye opener. But I have to say as it stands at the moment Vista is not worth upgrading to, for me I will stay with XP as long as I can and need to.

Drocket.

sonshine777

Quote from: Drocket on February 23, 2007, 05:00:43 pm
It is constantly dropping the wireless network connection, his machine locks up randomly, but the most annoying feature he is faced with is the constant nagging dialog boxes asking if he wants to do something and if he is really sure (guess this is what Dark Fire meant by Windows being more secure :)). I am not sure if this is an option he has managed to turn off yet but there lies another problem, they have hidden, moved and probably removed items in the UI that it takes you minutes (if you are lucky) to locate them, case in point "adding removing programs", in XP this is simple, in Vista this is hard to find. This is not unusual when they release a new version of Windows, they change the UI so much it takes you days to figure out where they have moved things.

Drocket.



Internet Explorer 7 does many of the same things mentioned above. I will probablly go to Firefox very soon.

Dark Fire

I moved back from Firefox when IE7 was released - Firefox 2 is too unstable, inefficient and slow compared to IE...

Mammoth

I'm a Mac user myself and have no problems. People complain that you can only use an iPod with iTunes, but I really don't care because I like iTunes and it doesn't put DRM on CDs I rip.

oggyb

Quote from: fREeCYCLE on February 19, 2007, 05:44:21 pm
Just my two cents ... but Vista looks so terribly bad in so many respects, that I've commited to removing every windows box from our corp before it's too late to get out.

Only 4 of 68 left in administration;   two as of 3/5;   none as of asap.

Production is next.




Switching to what?  Mac or Lin?

Dark Fire

Quote from: Mammoth on March 03, 2007, 02:06:03 am
I'm a Mac user myself and have no problems. People complain that you can only use an iPod with iTunes, but I really don't care because I like iTunes and it doesn't put DRM on CDs I rip.

I don't know how to put DRM on CDs I rip with Windows Media Player. I prefer Windows Media Player because the Windows Media formats are very good, and because it is very fast at starting up and doing everything it does. I admit that iTunes has some much better features, but I still think WMP is better...

old_blaggard

WMP is a very solid and respectable media player.  However, in terms of content management and user interface, iTunes blows most everything I've seen out of the water.  In addition, QuickTime's h.264 and nice streaming capabilities keep it on top for me.
http://www.terragen.org - A great Terragen resource with models, contests, galleries, and forums.

Dark Fire

Quote from: old_blaggard on March 03, 2007, 05:31:14 pm
WMP is a very solid and respectable media player.  However, in terms of content management and user interface, iTunes blows most everything I've seen out of the water.  In addition, QuickTime's h.264 and nice streaming capabilities keep it on top for me.

I hate the iTunes interface and management system. They are the biggest weaknesses of iTunes for me. Everything else is fine - the graphics and visualtsations are good, the iTunes store stuff is good and the compatibility is good. However, it could be a bit faster...

MeltingIce

Haha I love iTunes and hate WMP.  I find the WMP library views to be very cluttered and unefficient.  I guess it just boils down to personal opinions :P

MeltingIce Network | Wii Number: 3881 9574 8304 0277

old_blaggard

That's why we live in a capitalist world: choices, choices ;).
http://www.terragen.org - A great Terragen resource with models, contests, galleries, and forums.