Support NeoGAF

[Burger]

with a dash of linux.

http://homepage.mac.com/mstamper77/CoolStuff folder/CoolStuff/

I know it's OSX biased, and Shog is going to pick this one to bits, but it's an interesting read none the less.

Some of the comparisons of the same features make windows look positivley short-sighted. It's as if nobody at MS really thought about how things should be easier, instead added so much functionality that it became blatently counter intuitive.

I like the comparison of the search features:

Windows: Why do I need this moronic , multi screen wizard just to find a file????? Why does it ask me what type of document I’m searching for? More unnecessary decisions to make.

OSX: I just enter my search string and away it goes..no questions, no wizards, no dialogs, no thinking. And back it comes with everything that qualifies, regardless of document type.

I mean, that shit is a no brainer. If I want to search for something in XP, I DO get a multipanel window, I also get a stupid cartoon dog, with hyperlinks coming out of a speach bubble. I mean what the hell were they thinking ?

Anyway, have a read.

 

[scorcho]

well, you COULD change the preferences to turn off the 'dialog' choices and just bring up a standard query, but that is too hard for bias OSX comparisons. up next, an iPod Shuffle user laughing at how complex flash-based mp3 players with screens are.

 

[Shogmaster]

OH NO YOU DON'T! I"M NOT FALLING FOR THIS OBVIOUS TRAP!!!!

 

[Mario_Hugo]

I didn't read the article. I grew up on PCs (21 years), and now I'm a mac user. I will say, with utmost sincerity and conviction, that my OSX experience beats the ever-loving-shit out of my windows experience (hands down). Going back, which I do occasionally since macromedia mac support blows (flash mx is insanely buggy), is absolutely painful...

 

[The Faceless Master]

ok, i got as far as this :

And menus! UGH! It took so much time to navigate them, and so much precise eye-hand coordination to avoid slipping off of them all of the time, or accidentally arcing your mouse a bit and start up the wrong program.

joke article?

 

[Burger]

well, you COULD change the preferences to turn off the 'dialog' choices and just bring up a standard query, but that is too hard for bias OSX comparisons. up next, an iPod Shuffle user laughing at how complex flash-based mp3 players with screens are.

I meant bias as in the author disagrees with most of Windows' design choices, most of these in my opinion. Clearly at the start of the article she states that she is expressing her opinion.

Like I said, having so many options is stupid. Even in the search preferences the text is underlined, making me think it is a hyperlink. I think "If I click that I'm going to be taken to a webpage, which I don't really want to do."

It doesn't take alot of brains to realise that OSX really is better designed than Windows. The Start menu IS stupid, the taskbar IS stupid. If you want to access a program from the start menu, it's slow and confusing.

Look at how fast Apple is adding to OSX, Tiger isn't far away and includes a HOST of new features. Whats ms done ? Oh service pack 2 thats right, all stuff that serves to patch up super vunerable operating system (partly by design, partly by popularity)

 

[Burger]

ok, i got as far as this :
joke article?

Try and quickly load a program from the start menu, when you have in excess of say around 120 menu items. It's impossible.

In fact, it's a complete design nightmare. As you scroll across to the program or submenu that you want you will have all sorts of menus flying out from everywhere, sometimes EVEN COVERING WHAT YOU WANT TO THE RIGHT OF IT. I mean, it's a completley backwards, bizzare slow and totally confusing way to do things.

 

[Shogmaster]

Try and quickly load a program from the start menu, when you have in excess of say around 120 menu items. It's impossible.

In fact, it's a complete design nightmare. As you scroll across to the program or submenu that you want you will have all sorts of menus flying out from everywhere, sometimes EVEN COVERING WHAT YOU WANT TO THE RIGHT OF IT. I mean, it's a completley backwards, bizzare slow and totally confusing way to do things.

Maybe someone should enable quick launch? Maybe.

 

[cubicle47b]

My only real compaint with the Windows interface is I don't get multiple desktops. It should be part of the Windows default configuration. My problems are with security.

If you really have that much trouble with the start menu and the taskbar you're an idiot.

 

[Burger]

If you really have that much trouble with the start menu and the taskbar you're an idiot.

I give up.

 

[Teknopathetic]

Why didn't you give up before you posted that travesty of a read?

 

[Anthropic]

Maybe someone should enable quick launch? Maybe.

I especially love that you can construct your own menu system with quick launch. It's awesome.

The Start menu may be increasingly useless, but at least it isn't the annoying, overgrown tech demo the Dock is.

 

[Zaptruder]

I get around most of the navigational problems in windows by creating a list of shortcuts and destinations that I frequently use and then putting them into a folder, then placing that folder into the quick launch bar.

So, for example, I have Applications, Games, Anime, Backups, which all goes into 'Quick Access' (although they're also seperate icons on the desktop), which also contains shortcuts to various folders such as Comics and Manga, My Videos, My Pictures, My Music, Wallpapers, C drive and D drive.

With those in place, it's rare for me to have to fumble around the start menu or through C drive to actually get to a program I want.

If you really are a power user, you can easily compensate for deficiencies in the GUI, which is unlikely to ever 100% suit your highly opinionated demands.

 

[cubicle47b]

It is possible to argue that OSX has a better interface without making yourself sound retarded.

 

[pestul]

Try and quickly load a program from the start menu, when you have in excess of say around 120 menu items. It's impossible.

In fact, it's a complete design nightmare. As you scroll across to the program or submenu that you want you will have all sorts of menus flying out from everywhere, sometimes EVEN COVERING WHAT YOU WANT TO THE RIGHT OF IT. I mean, it's a completley backwards, bizzare slow and totally confusing way to do things.

Someone who has hundreds of start menu items is not a beginner. If you're not a beginner, then most likely you can find ways around the defaults in winxp. Thankfully, xp provides an environment that is completely customizable for the advanced user.

 

[DJ Sl4m]

You know it's actually fnny this topic was posted, I was thinking about how incredibly stupid windows sets itself up after a format and install.

Sure it can be configured to be more secure and set up to be more intuitive, but damn how hard would it be for MSFT to havce windows auto set up some shit during install ?

EX: When installing windows these shitty settings are set untill the user or installer corrects and changes them for the better:

1. know file types = hidden
(most ignorant setting I know of)

2. files display as "tiles" instead of details
(who in their right mind would preffer to run their PC with this setting ?)

3. error reporting is enabled

4. remote assistance is auto enabled

5. auto updates is enabled
(sure this one is tricky, but in all honesty it should be left up to the user or at least a prompt when installing windows)

6. pagefile max & min should be the same

7. group similar taskbar icons is enabled
(I hate this option, another which should be left up to the user, but not enabled at install)

There are more things that make me wonder wtf, why can't they just tune it up a bit and make it easy on the newbies.
It doesn't bother my own installs, but it's when I have to work on other peoples PC and I see this crap set like this. No wonder more people dont know shit about PC's, the first 2 issues keep a lot of people in the dark.

 

[tedtropy]

(Resized from 1280 X 1024)

I seem to get around in XP just fine. All my programs are a maximum of two clicks away at that toolbar at the top of my screen and grouped into relevant catagories. Most used stuff is one click away, auxillary stuff is under one submenu. Works great. I use a program called Winkey to assign keyboard shortcuts to alot of my most-used apps.

Yeah, I too think the Start menu is flawed, but I feel the same way about the Dock. They're both inefficient uses of screen space. Also, I find it funny how alot of OS X users whine about XP having too many options. XP is ABOUT customizing your UI experience. Most of the guy's complaints about XP are as biased and uneducated as alot of XP fanboys' whining about OS X. If you spend even a few minutes time tweaking a few things, XP is a great environment to work in.

The operating systems are aimed at different audiences. Can't we all just get along.

 

[Burger]

Why didn't you give up before you posted that travesty of a read?

Hey listen cock munch. You didn't have to come here and you didn't have to click the link I posted. I posted it because I found it interesting. Piss off.

 

[Jonnyram]

I agree with DJ Sl4m in that Windows itself isn't terrible, but it has terrible defaults.
That said, I don't understand why so many people defend Windows so zealously whenever the Mac OS vs Windows arguments come up. Simplicity is beautiful to a lot of people, and that's why Mac OS continues to sell. I would have a Mac myself if I could afford one

 

[Shogmaster]

Hey listen cock munch. You didn't have to come here and you didn't have to click the link I posted. I posted it because I found it interesting. Piss off.

I think it's about time we need a mod that is pro PC counter part to -jinx- so we can punish Mac idiocy like this one. :lol

 

[Dilbert]

I am also going to say that I believe that workflow preferences are probably dependent upon a complex matrix of background, understanding of the software tools, the specific tasks that must be accomplished, and brain wiring. Others may have different preferences than I voice here.

Nothing to see here, folks -- it's a long, biased view of OSX from the POV of someone who clearly dislikes Windows. When someone with a degree in human factors does a nice comparison of the two, please wake me up and tell me the conclusion.

Shogmaster, you'd better go find some evidence that I'm biased towards Apple in general, because you're really starting to piss me off.

 

[Shogmaster]

Shogmaster, you'd better go find some evidence that I'm biased towards Apple in general, because you're really starting to piss me off.

Let me guess. Yer gonna ban me again, huh?

BTW, anyone notice how jinxy showed up after my little ditty? :lol

 

[Dilbert]

If you're going to say that I'm biased, and blatantly try to bait me, then go get some evidence and make your case.

If you're just looking for attention, I'll be glad to give you some attention, but you won't like it.

 

[Shogmaster]

If you're going to say that I'm biased, and blatantly try to bait me, then go get some evidence and make your case.

If you're just looking for attention, I'll be glad to give you some attention, but you won't like it.

Option A again?

Dude. Let it go. We know you love Apple. Just embrace it.

To quote master Shinobi, "Everyone is biased".

 

[Burger]

I think it's about time we need a mod that is pro PC counter part to -jinx- so we can punish Mac idiocy like this one. :lol

Mac idiocy ? I'm a PC user.

Guy comes into thread, reads a several page article that I posted, and then calls me out for making him read it ?

 

[Phoenix]

Its a worthless debate. Its like a 3d modeller who uses Max fighting with one who uses Lightwave

 

[Teknopathetic]

"Hey listen cock munch. You didn't have to come here and you didn't have to click the link I posted. I posted it because I found it interesting. Piss off."

Testy, testy. You posted a dumb article and people call it as such and then you get defensive over it as though you had written it. It *is* a dumb article, and the forum Database would be much better off had you never posted this thread.

 

[Sync M]

I mean, that shit is a no brainer. If I want to search for something in XP, I DO get a multipanel window, I also get a stupid cartoon dog, with hyperlinks coming out of a speach bubble. I mean what the hell were they thinking ?

I have been using PowerdeskPro for as long as I have been using XP. It has replaced Explorer as the main file manager. There is a search included, which is far superior to the default search. Windows, IMO, is better once you replace all the basic elements with 3rd party applications.

 

[tigerfan12345]

i think one of the best comparisons is here.

http://www.xvsxp.com/

It really is a long read though.
And alot of it is backed up by good logic.

i've used a windows for 7 years or so, and a os x for 2 or 3, and i really like the osx alot more. I like the dock in os x alot more than the start menu. And you can set it up kinda similar to what tedropy has. I have my main icons, then i have folders for utilities, and graphic programs, and games all inside the dock. All you do is hold it, then it brings up a pane withe all the programs. Im assuming thats what happens when you click the >> in tedropy's setup?

And i dont think you guys should take it so harshly when someone calls you biased. So what, what wrong with being biased.

 

[Macam]

If Windows could handle multitasking better, was more secure, and offered more options for true customizing in terms of removing Microsoft software components, I'd be far more impressed. It takes hours to customize any OS in my experience, regardless of how easy it is to use; that said it took far less to customize OS X to be a speed demon productive workhouse than Windows XP, but that comes largely thanks to Quicksilver, Expose, and OS X's superior multitasking abilities and stability. I certainly don't hate Windows, but if you gave me a choice between the two, I probably wouldnt touch my PC unless I needed to.

Shog: And I hardly see how participating in iPod discussions by relating experience and making iPod threads sustainable by kicking out the perpetual derailment of "superior MP3 players" qualifies as Mac favoritism. It's like suggesting -jinx- is biased towards math and physics because he helps some posters out with their problems. But if you want to pursue the bait and switch path, knock yourself out...you seem to have this tendency to walk into bear traps where there are none.

 

[aoi tsuki]

(Resized from 1280 X 1024)

I seem to get around in XP just fine. All my programs are a maximum of two clicks away at that toolbar at the top of my screen and grouped into relevant catagories. Most used stuff is one click away, auxillary stuff is under one submenu. Works great. I use a program called Winkey to assign keyboard shortcuts to alot of my most-used apps.

Yeah, I too think the Start menu is flawed, but I feel the same way about the Dock. They're both inefficient uses of screen space. Also, I find it funny how alot of OS X users whine about XP having too many options. XP is ABOUT customizing your UI experience. Most of the guy's complaints about XP are as biased and uneducated as alot of XP fanboys' whining about OS X. If you spend even a few minutes time tweaking a few things, XP is a great environment to work in.

The operating systems are aimed at different audiences. Can't we all just get along.

i used to use one of the popular dock programs for my apps, but i find this works about as well, and doesn't require an additional program to load. It takes a while to set apps up where you need them, but t works so much better than using the quick launch toolbar if you have a lot of frequently used apps, and it's faster than scrolling through multiple columns of program groups/folders in the programs menu.

On that note, i find creating a folder for programs not used frequently and dumping them there helps with the bloat. It keeps them out of the way, yet still available should you need to use them again.

 

[DonasaurusRex]

HAH Mac users wish they had "HUNDREDS of ICONS" that might imply the platform has a worthwile software library that could actually hold a candle to what you can get on a PC in terms of variety and support. Please. I dont care how pretty the damn OS is its a great piece of work with a pitiful software library in comparison to windows. Im not gonna defend XP cause that can suck me too, but the fact remains 99.99999999% of software coming out of dev studios is for windows, until that changes Mac is a no go for me. Might as well get freebsd , now thats an OS.

 

[tedtropy]

HAH Mac users wish they had "HUNDREDS of ICONS" that might imply the platform has a worthwile software library that could actually hold a candle to what you can get on a PC in terms of variety and support. Please. I dont care how pretty the damn OS is its a great piece of work with a pitiful software library in comparison to windows. Im not gonna defend XP cause that can suck me too, but the fact remains 99.99999999% of software coming out of dev studios is for windows, until that changes Mac is a no go for me. Might as well get freebsd , now thats an OS.

You do realize that OS X essentially runs a modified version of BSD under its hood, right?

 

[tedtropy]

If Windows could handle multitasking better, was more secure, and offered more options for true customizing in terms of removing Microsoft software components, I'd be far more impressed.

Care to back those multitasking 'inabilities' with some facts? I frequently find myself running dozens of programs simultaneously on both my home and work XP machine with no problems, and my work machine is only sporting 512MB of ram. I rarely have any stability issues, the programs restore quickly and maintain their speed. There's many times where I'll be burning a DVD at home while ripping another one, while capping TV with no frame drops, while watching a movie, while editing a PSD in Photoshop in the background, while having Firefox going with several tabs opens, while doing any of a number of other things. Frankly, I'm pretty happy with XP's multitasking abilities...

 

[tedtropy]

i think one of the best comparisons is here.

http://www.xvsxp.com/

It really is a long read though.
And alot of it is backed up by good logic.

i've used a windows for 7 years or so, and a os x for 2 or 3, and i really like the osx alot more. I like the dock in os x alot more than the start menu. And you can set it up kinda similar to what tedropy has. I have my main icons, then i have folders for utilities, and graphic programs, and games all inside the dock. All you do is hold it, then it brings up a pane withe all the programs. Im assuming thats what happens when you click the >> in tedropy's setup?

And i dont think you guys should take it so harshly when someone calls you biased. So what, what wrong with being biased.

That's what happens after clicking the '>>'.

 

[tigerfan12345]

tedropy,
yeh, thats what i was assuming happened, but i didnt know how to explain it.

on os x though, that would be a folder i have in the dock, like named graphic programs or burning software...or something similar. I definitely like how thats setup on your windows setup though better though. What program is that, i want to try that on my pc, or is it an option in xp? Thanks in advance.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

Gah. Doesn't *enyone* see that both OSes have serious issues?

The Dock is a joke.

The Start Menu is a pain in the ass.

Both can be customized the be better.

So what?

I use Quicksilver on my Mac, and before that, Butler. My other option was to either dockify everything I wanted to use (making a very crowded dock) or hunt through the finder. Neither very conducive to keyboard use, I might add.

The start menu *only* works if you work at it. And never mind the piles of nonsense that app-installers dump on a default menu. Do I need to see the uninstaller for every one of my apps? Is this supposed to be a tool launcher or a mini-explorer? Sucks. Biggest pro to it is that it's very keyboard accessible. Bigger issue altogether is the was the Windows family of OSes manages apps (ie, it doesn't) ending up with a ridiculous number of files, some share, all over the place. Mac got that one right, at least.

Quicksilver makes me wonder why exactly all OSes don't have a similar feature. Windows registry, in its infancy, could have supported somehting like this wonderfully, before it became the dumpng ground of every bloated apps turds. It's even still not too late, though it might not be as automatic. But regards of OSX *or* Windows, something like this ought to be a frikkin standard.

And that's just app launching. Window management is ridiculous on both platforms as well. Why in the world does mac have "Hide" and an option to iconify windows? I know that I *could* iconify only some windows of an app, but I never find the need. And why is there no keyboard-simple way to hop around all my *windows* as opposed to my apps? And don't even get me started on the apps that open a zillion tiny windows when 2 or three would do, or one per document. Over on Windows, you have the inane windows-within-windows paradigm, inconsistently applied and creating nesting title bars and leading me to close the wrong window on multiple occasions. No wonder I prefer to use the less-confusing keyboard options.

And this is just touching the surface. All the "this is better than taht" really miss the boat on how UI in general could be improved. It's just people justifying their tastes, either against the market's popular choice, or against articles like this.

I hate them all.

 

[tedtropy]

tedropy,
yeh, thats what i was assuming happened, but i didnt know how to explain it.

on os x though, that would be a folder i have in the dock, like named graphic programs or burning software...or something similar. I definitely like how thats setup on your windows setup though better though. What program is that, i want to try that on my pc, or is it an option in xp? Thanks in advance.

Just right click on a blank area in the taskbar, go to the 'Toolbars' submenu, select 'New Toolbar...' and then you just point it to a folder where you want to keep your shortcuts. What you can do is actually sync it up with folders in the Start menu if you prefer. Personally, I don't even use my Start menu anymore, but it provides you with two locations for your shortcuts, and the Start menu has the advantage of being able to be accessed completely by keyboard. Once you've made your new toolbar, you can drag it to edges of the screen to set it up as I did, keep it on your taskbar, etc. When you right-click on a blank area or the label of the toolbar you've created, you get a menu with options like making the icons larger or smaller, removing their text labels, etc. Windows is incredibly customizable. I just think alot of people don't bother to research its nuisances and choose to go 'teh Start menu iz the buttsexlol'.

 

[tedtropy]

Gah. Doesn't *enyone* see that both OSes have serious issues?

The Dock is a joke.

The Start Menu is a pain in the ass.

Both can be customized the be better.

So what?

I use Quicksilver on my Mac, and before that, Butler. My other option was to either dockify everything I wanted to use (making a very crowded dock) or hunt through the finder. Neither very conducive to keyboard use, I might add.

The start menu *only* works if you work at it. And never mind the piles of nonsense that app-installers dump on a default menu. Do I need to see the uninstaller for every one of my apps? Is this supposed to be a tool launcher or a mini-explorer? Sucks. Biggest pro to it is that it's very keyboard accessible. Bigger issue altogether is the was the Windows family of OSes manages apps (ie, it doesn't) ending up with a ridiculous number of files, some share, all over the place. Mac got that one right, at least.

Quicksilver makes me wonder why exactly all OSes don't have a similar feature. Windows registry, in its infancy, could have supported somehting like this wonderfully, before it became the dumpng ground of every bloated apps turds. It's even still not too late, though it might not be as automatic. But regards of OSX *or* Windows, something like this ought to be a frikkin standard.

And that's just app launching. Window management is ridiculous on both platforms as well. Why in the world does mac have "Hide" and an option to iconify windows? I know that I *could* iconify only some windows of an app, but I never find the need. And why is there no keyboard-simple way to hop around all my *windows* as opposed to my apps? And don't even get me started on the apps that open a zillion tiny windows when 2 or three would do, or one per document. Over on Windows, you have the inane windows-within-windows paradigm, inconsistently applied and creating nesting title bars and leading me to close the wrong window on multiple occasions. No wonder I prefer to use the less-confusing keyboard options.

And this is just touching the surface. All the "this is better than taht" really miss the boat on how UI in general could be improved. It's just people justifying their tastes, either against the market's popular choice, or against articles like this.

I hate them all.

Agreed, they both have their fair share of flaws. And the registry IS a horrible idea that I've never agreed with and has only worsened with time.

 

[Tain]

Gah. Doesn't *enyone* see that both OSes have serious issues?

The Dock is a joke.

The Start Menu is a pain in the ass.

Both can be customized the be better.

So what?

Yes.

I agree with DJ Sl4m in that Windows itself isn't terrible, but it has terrible defaults.

Yes.

 

[DonasaurusRex]

You do realize that OS X essentially runs a modified version of BSD under its hood, right?

yeah so why not run freebsd , both are great platforms, and Mac doesnt exactly have a huge library advantage over BSD.

 

[tedtropy]

yeah so why not run freebsd , both are great platforms, and Mac doesnt exactly have a huge library advantage over BSD.

Because as great as Linux is for many, many things, I simply don't find that most incarnations of it make a good desktop environment. I have a friend the lives and breathes *nix and feels the same way, so I don't think my opinion in the matter is too rare. OS X takes the power of Linux and puts a pretty face and great interface in front of it. But to each their own.

 

[DonasaurusRex]

Linux? FreeBSD is..freebsd its not a linux flavor it predates it by years. Yes they are both Unix flavors but over the years with thousands of people adding to its evolution freebsd has become its own beast .

 

[Azih]

I like the taskbar myself.

But I think we can all agree that if Google ever made a desktop replacement it would beat the everloving shit out of both MS and Apple.

GOOGLE!

 

[tedtropy]

I like the taskbar myself.

But I think we can all agree that if Google ever made a desktop replacement it would beat the everloving shit out of both MS and Apple.

GOOGLE!

I can't say I was blown away by Google Desktop, but who knows. They have their hands in alot of interesting new technology...

 

[aoi tsuki]

I like the taskbar myself.

But I think we can all agree that if Google ever made a desktop replacement it would beat the everloving shit out of both MS and Apple.

GOOGLE!

i'm awaiting to see what happens with the Google-Mozilla collaboration. i think that overall in terms of metadata searching flexibility and speed, it'll be Tiger > Google-Mozilla > Windows XP given the fact that Tiger's is built into the OS, Google-Mozilla will be another process, and XP is stagnant in this regard. i expect them to build off of the index created by Google Desktop.

i held off on Google Desktop because it didn't do anything i really needed. i have a good file structure i've created, and so most of my files except things older than a couple of years are filed neatly away in a logical hierarchy. What i'm looking for is Tiger-level metadata searching, along with the ability to use this data to launch application, catalog files, etc. i don't expect it to happen right away, but i'm sure something similar is in the pipe.

Microsoft's also released the beta of MSN Desktop Search a couple of months ago. Anyone try this, or any of the other desktop search engines?

 

[Manics]

That article made no sense. In the first part when she's talking about her first Windows experience she says:

"All of those icon things looked the same to me. I seemed to spend more time scraping up and down the rows of icons looking for what I wanted than actually doing anything productive. I KNEW what I wanted...why couldn’t I just ask for it...you know...like on the command line, only perhaps with less typing? Since my primary programming tool was the VI editor, my PC was quickly relegated to reading company e-mail and hosting tons of terminal emulation windows into all of our various unix boxes."

So basically Windows was SO BAD she gave up on it. Then later on in the article she states:

"So what made me look in other directions? For one thing, I ‘m a compulsive upgrader. Sorry, I can’t help myself. The “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it” mentality is simply not me. I’m always looking for ways to use my computer more efficiently and for more things. I’m concerned not only with the presence of a functionality, but how efficiently I can work with its implementation. Suffice it to say that I find most implementations of most things lacking."

WTF? She's so advanced that she loves to upgrade all the time and is constantly looking to "tweak" her computer experience, but when first using Windows she just gave up on it without trying to improve or tweak it? Something doesn't add up.

Also, who wrote that article and why should I care?

 

[Macam]

Care to back those multitasking 'inabilities' with some facts? I frequently find myself running dozens of programs simultaneously on both my home and work XP machine with no problems, and my work machine is only sporting 512MB of ram.

Sure. Despite regularly maintaining my PC, running FireFox with multiple tabs, GAIM, iTunes, and doing just about anything else (spyware scans in particular) absolutely kills my computer's responsiveness. If I'm ripping a CD, I may as well start making sandwiches. And I often do.

That's my experience, but if you have any suggestions as to what could potentially speed things up barring expensive hardware upgrades, I'm all ears. I've certainly put time into customizing Windows and maintaining it, but the payoff has been exponentially less than it has been with the time I put into Mac OS X.

Ignatz Mouse: I'm sure you know it judging by your post, but I do hope you're aware that Quicksilver is far more than just an app launcher.

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

I work as a system administrator for a small private mid-west University. My department is mixed Mac and PC. I have a Mac and a PC on my desk, and at home I have a PC. I'd much rather support and work on the Mac's any day of the week. OS X is very stable (although to be fair, XP is pretty stable as well) and far easier for the average person to get up and working on in a short time. Apple has done a great job of creating a solid, modern operating system and OS X server rocks too. That said, Microsoft has come a long ways with Windows. It's a much better product over all then it was in the 95/98 days and the gap has closed between the two OS's considerably.

Couple of other quick points, more software for an OS doesn't always mean better software. Sure Windows has a lot more choices of software, but it also has a lot more crap. The major productivity packages (Office, Photoshop, Illustrator, Dreamweaver, etc.) are on the Mac and PC.

Also, I think I read somewhere that Longhorn (or Windows eXPerience or what ever the hell they're calling it these days) will come with something very similar to the Dock. It'll also ship with an accelerated desktop graphics engine that is similar to OS X as well, not to mention a few other similar features.

Someone mentioned that Apple will release Tiger soon (OS X 10.4) that keeps adding new features and updating the OS and that all MS has done is release another Service Pack. That's true, but Tiger will cost $120 to upgrade to. Apple has become great at releasing OS upgrades every year to year and a half and charing full price for them. If MS did that, people would be all over them for gouging the market. Hell, there would probably be an investigation by the Department of Justice. The point being that for Apple, it's another revenue stream to help their bottom line, and the Mac faithful line up and take it, while if MS did the same thing, they'd probably be cruicfied.

 

[Zelda-Bitch]

Personally, I think Macs are over rated in general. Some things designed to make things "simple" seem so stupid to me and make no sense what so ever. The only comparison I can think of is AOL. Simplicity over done.

Why is it when I burn a cd on my mac at work(OSX), to initilize the actual burning process I must throw the cd icon into the trash can? This is just one of many things that may in fact be "simple" but is just plain stupid to me. I have a whole list of other stuff too. Using a Mac just makes me feel like I'm using the "AOL" of computer hardware. It just feels dumb and over-simplified. *shrug*