Leopard vs. Vista: Random Thoughts
Posted by Harry McCracken | Tuesday, August 08, 2006 9:27 PM PT
How different are Microsoft and Apple's approaches to rolling out a new operating system? Let's compare and contrast how we've learned about Windows Vista and Leopard, the next generation of Mac OS X:
Microsoft: Begins talking up the new OS years in advance. Drums up enthusiasm for
features that it turns out it can't actually implement. Deploys beta versions early and widely. (I've been running Windows Vista as my only OS on my primary work machine for
over a year.)
Apple: Says almost nothing about its new OS until well under a year before its planned release. CEO
begins keynote speech at which OS is unveiled by saying he's keeping some of the good stuff secret. Gives betas only to developers, and only if they agree not to talk about them.
All of this makes a truly meaningful comparsion of Windows Vista vs. Leopard impossible just now. In fact, it's impossible to give Leopard a thumbs up or thumbs down; while Microsoft says that Vista is "feature complete," Steve Jobs has basically put us on notice that Leopard is still feature
incomplete. (Much of the blogosphere's reaction to yesterday's WWDC was
less than glowing; most of it seemed to be based on the quality of the demos as much as on the quality of the OS, but it still feels early to be deciding that Leopard is either
ho-hum or a big deal.)
With those disclaimers in mind, a few thoughts on the two operating systems:
Leopard is almost by definition a minor upgrade compared to Vista. Both Apple and Microsoft released OS upgrades in the Fall of 2001. (Apple's was OS X "Puma," and Microsoft's was Windows XP.) The difference is that XP is
still the current version of Windows, while Apple followed up Puma with Jaguar, Panther, and Tiger. In other words, Apple has a lots-of-incremental-upgrades philosophy versus Microsoft's big-upgrade-once-in-a-blue-moon approach.
Leopard looks to be idiosyncratic and entertaining in a way it's hard to imagine a Microsoft product being. The first major Leopard feature demoed at yesterday's keynote was Time Machine, a backup utility that lets you step back to earlier versions of your system and files. This is not exactly a revolutionary idea, and in fact
Microsoft is planning at least vaguely similar functionality for Vista. But Time Machine's UI, which involves windows flying through space is quirky and fun. (By contrast, Windows Vista has no particular personality other than XP crossbred with warmed-over effects that OS X has had for years.) I'm not saying it's
good for an OS to have a playful side--I know folks who gnash their teeth even at the way Mac OS X Dock icons bob up and down when a program is loading--but it's becoming a defining difference between the two products.
Apple can still get away with security not being a selling point for an OS upgrade. As opposed to Microsoft, which has to introduce castor-oil features like Universal Access Control. No wonder Leopard looks like more fun than Vista. But you've got to wonder if Apple will be able to stay
smug about security forever.
Neither Vista nor Leopard shows signs of being truly Web-native. I'd say it's a dead certainty that we'll eventually see operating systems that are so tightly integrated with Web services that you can't tell where the OS leaves off and the Web service begins. But Windows Vista seems to have almost nothing to do with Microsoft's Windows Live services, and if Apple has big plans for better melding of Leopard and the .Mac service, it's keeping them under wraps. (.Mac, which charges $100 a year for stuff that's
increasingly available for free elsewhere, is in danger of becoming irrelevant.) You begin to wonder whether some other company (maybe with initials like G.O.O.G.L.E.) will be the one that builds the first real Web OS.
Web clips are potentially a revelation. And a wonderfully Webby one at that. This new Dashboard feature--which
lets you grab bits and pieces of Web pages and store them a keypress away from your desktop--is the best ad I've seen yet for widgets, gadgets, or any other form of little Web-enabled applet. (Anybody else remember services such as
Octopus, which tried to do similar things a few years ago, before the technology was quite there?) Microsoft's Sidebar and Gadgets, meanwhile, mostly seem to be playing catchup with stuff that's already out there, although the
Windows Sideshow mini-screen for notebooks is a potentially interesting feature which we probably won't see on MacBooks anytime soon.
...But VoiceOver was the most impressive demo. I've been listening to text-to-speech software since about 1980, and VoiceOver bowled me over--never have I heard a computer come so close to sounding like a person. Great news for folks who can't read a computer screen, but I could see myself multitasking by listening to Web pages while doing something else online or offline.
Apple still has the opportunity to surprise us with cool new features for the holidays; Microsoft probably doesn't. The fact that Microsoft has to deliver functionality through third-party PC manufacturers means that we'd probably know about any major changes to Windows as an entertainment platform timed for this Christmas (although the
Zune "iPod killer" will presumably have a PC angle). But Apple might still release some Macs with more video and audio stuff, based on Tiger rather than Leopard. In fact, it seems a dead certainty that the iPod-Mac entertainment platform will evolve quite a bit before the year is over.
That's enough random musing for now. I'm about to update my Vista installation to the latest version, and once I do, I'll report back with more thoughts on where Vista stands...
Oh please.
When Apple was hacked at the Black Hat conference, it was mentioned AT THAT TIME that the fault wasn't in OSX, but in the WiFi drivers that ALMOST ALL PC's use.
Nothing is more infuriating than an uneducated zealot.
Do your homework, before you go spouting negative propaganta.
I don't know that the posting (which I thought was really good) sheds a particularly good light on either company's offerings.
I'm not an Apple fan in any sense of the word, but it would be nice to see some competition in the desktop OS market for once. Much like AMD/Intel, consumers win when companies go at each other's throats.
I like the article. There's not much to be said about either OS yet. I don't think either will be completely secure... there's always a way (like the wifi drivers). The big difference between MacOS and Windows is that Apple only allows their OS to run on their hardware. I can plug just about anything I pick off the street (usually pretty cheap) into WinXP and it works. Hopefully the last 5 years have been enough to make Vista even better. If it isn't much better then Microsoft has a serious problem and it will be hard to compete with the often-updated MacOS.
The only thing Microsoft does well is copy others work.
Started with DOS, Windows and now they have copied Mac OS X. Forget ?Leopard? that?s for next year, Vista is a copy of the best of the last (5) versions of Mac OS X over the past 5 years, ending with Tiger the current version, that has been out over a year.
Disclaimer: I use both Windows and Mac as an IT Manager, like both, but use Windows most of the time.
That being said, Harry doesn't mention that Apple charges $129.00 for it's incremental updates. Whereas, Microsoft has released SP1 and SP2 without cost and has included some major items for download at no cost.
Granted, I believe OSX is a much richer OS, I don't think that enough has been done to the OS between the Jaguar, Panther, and Tiger updates to warrant a payment of $387 plus tax. Maybe $129 for the Tiger update, which I think is very good, has some great features and I would consider a major upgrade.
It doesnt matter because the current OSX it 10 years ahead of anything those fat heads at windows can come up with. They are just waiting for apple to do someting inovative so they can take it and call it their own.
Talk about a waste of a web article.
"The best OS that 97.5% of the computing world does not use. Watch out BeOS, we are gaining on you" Whats next, Steve is going to release a wireless mouse w/ multiple buttons & call it an industry first? Oh wait, he already did that. I cant wait to hear what Jobs has up his flannel shirt for next year.
People can bash MS all they want, but the Gates well oiled machine has done more to introduce computers (I should say re-introduce as Apple had the educational market) & make them a part of their daily lives. Keep selling to Berkley Steven as MS goes after consumers & business that actually have money. Easy to see now who had the better vision 20 some years ago. The establishment wins yet again.
Talk about a waste of a web article.
"The best OS that 97.5% of the computing world does not use. Watch out BeOS, we are gaining on you" Whats next, Steve is going to release a wireless mouse w/ multiple buttons & call it an industry first? Oh wait, he already did that. I cant wait to hear what Jobs has up his flannel shirt for next year.
People can bash MS all they want, but the Gates well oiled machine has done more to introduce computers (I should say re-introduce as Apple had the educational market) & make them a part of their daily lives. Keep selling to Berkley Steven as MS goes after consumers & business that actually have money. Easy to see now who had the better vision 20 some years ago. The establishment wins yet again.
"The only thing Microsoft does well is copy others work.
Started with DOS, Windows and now they have copied Mac OS X. Forget ?Leopard? that?s for next year, Vista is a copy of the best of the last (5) versions of Mac OS X over the past 5 years, ending with Tiger the current version, that has been out over a year."
Let's get it correct, MS purchased DOS and tweaked it a little before licensing it to IBM. Both Apple and Microsoft ripped off the GUI and mouse from Xerox who had it years before either of them did. XP has flaws and so will Vista - but it still runs on a limitless combination of hardware on 93% of the small personal computers in the world. OSX is a fine operating system - it is the best developement of BeOS out there - Apple didn't invent OSX - it's still BeOS.
And as a IT professional who uses both XP and OSX at work, I choose SUSE Linux as my operating system of choice for my personal computer because I like it best, and that's all that counts.
First thought windows drums up support for vista because xp is getting old. and any thing that company does is always over hyped. The fact that mac does not talk about its next os is for one reason, it does not want to hurt sales. particualy back to school sales. mac gets a lot of its laptop sales from college kids.
Vista could also be called just a update the same as vista, i also back k12IT in that window updades are FREE were as mac does charge a bit for any updates.
On a different knote, the biggest complaint about vista side from its dely is that it will make the rest of pc extreamly out dated. as a person has gave the beta a run for its money, it is defently desinged to optimize atleast 2 gb of ram and a 2 core procesor. one reson pc sales have gone down. it cost a good chunk of change if you can't build your own to obatin this kind of hardware. and we will not even talk graphics. i have a felling lepoard will do the same thing for mac if not it is way underpower
It's lind of funny the way Windows zealots like to bait Macheads like me. I am also an IT specialist. I run an ISP that is also a family business. We get our share of support issues. Mainly Windows users struggling to set up a POP3 account in Outlook. I want to refute the claims that the author makes regarding features of the up and coming Leopard and Vista. Leopard is not a minor upgrade and Vista is barely a major one. Each version of Mac OS X has vastly improved optimisation increased speed and 10.5 has dramatically major feature upgrades. SP1 ad SP2 were really just bug fixes and attempts to add security to XP (which still isn't there) When I upgraded my old G4 from Jaguar to Panther it seemed to move from fast to faster and from Panther to Tiger it went blazingly fast. Now Leopard will have Native support for both PowerPC and Intel on both 64 bit and 32 bit applications. Vista will only have native 64 bit with 32 bit emulation. Next post will cover time machine.
Time machine needs to be seen to be believed. Where Vista will have a calendar to choose a date to restore files from, Time machine will have a more intuitive version of that feature plus much more. Basically imagine if you have deleted a contact in your address book as you thought you would never need to contact them again. Then murphy's law prevails and you finally need that contact. Simple, Just go into your address book and type a portion of the person's name until "no matching contacts" is displayed. Then click the time machine button. finally click the back arrow on time machine's interface and deleted contacts with the matching name pop up. You can go further back if the contact is not the one you were looking for.
Also you can do the same in all Apple apps. Imagine deleting DV clips in iMovie or Final Cut Pro and getting them back a week later at the touch of a button. Also, any developers can build time machine support into their applications (I suspect most will support it).
My final point. I have respect for the author's article to some extent as it seems he has done some research on Macs but one point he made is rediculous "But you've got to wonder if Apple will be able to stay smug about security forever".
Well as a Mac user by choice and a Windows user by reluctant necessity (to test my sites in IE6) I can tell you that Apple's security measures are excellent. We get updates within days of vulnerability discovery. Darwin and Apple's internet technologies are Open Source UNIX standards. They are open to the public so any security issues that may arise are taken care of quickly by Apple, their developers and thousands of people in the open source community. In contrast. Windows was never designed to be a networked OS. Holes are discovered all the time and fail to be fixed properly in case they kill backward compatibility. With over 16 million Mac users, not one genuine vulnerability has ever got into the wild and no genuine viruses have been written.
"I don't know that the posting (which I thought was really good) sheds a particularly good light on either company's offerings.
I'm not an Apple fan in any sense of the word, but it would be nice to see some competition in the desktop OS market for once. Much like AMD/Intel, consumers win when companies go at each other's throats."
thats because this person just looks at the facts (-ish) without spreading propaganda.
these articals are so hard to find.
Yeah, Leopard has pretty much gotten the last word on Vista. The best part about it is that, what with M$'s big money on an OS people are desperate to downgrade from back to XP, they can't even produce a viable answer to Leopard! Anyway, show this (http://tinyurl.com/3cm4hf) to your friends who still believe in Vista . . . *snerk*