Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 7th Feb 2007 22:20 UTC
Apple Apple plans to crank up the anti-Vista rhetoric at its international chain of retail stores later this week, the latest move in a broader bid by the Mac maker to undermine the new operating system release from rival Microsoft. The campaign, set to get underway this Saturday, will include new store displays and employee t-shirts gently mocking Vista as little more than a washed-up attempt at a modern operating system, those familiar with the matter say. In a multi-page training manual made available through the company's internal retail system this week, Apple challenged its employees to learn and tout the Mac's many existing advantages over Vista-equipped Windows PCs.
Thread beginning with comment 210319
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
what if
by Damind on Wed 7th Feb 2007 23:02 UTC
Member since:

MS got as secure as Linux or even more secure? Would all the MS people who do not like MS change their minds?

Reply Score: 1

RE: what if
by archiesteel on Wed 7th Feb 2007 23:03 in reply to "what if"
archiesteel Member since:

For that, MS would have to break compatibility...for example, making sure a file is not executable simply because it has an .exe, .bat, .scr, .vbs or .com extension...

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: what if
by Kroc on Wed 7th Feb 2007 23:07 in reply to "what if"
Kroc Member since:

If Windows was secure, it would still have the registry, stil require re-installing every six-months/year, still cost too much, still have too many popup-bubbles and prompts, still have abusive, intrusive, unwanted third party software and still be hell bent on not being interoperable with anything else. If Windows was secure, I might not have moved to a Mac so quickly, but Leopard compared to Vista would have sold me straight away.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: what if
by BluenoseJake on Thu 8th Feb 2007 17:15 in reply to "RE: what if"
BluenoseJake Member since:

"stil require re-installing every six-months/year"

Man, must be a long time since you used Windows, you haven't had to do that since Win2k.

"still be hell bent on not being interoperable with anything else"

Are you still living in 1992? Come on, interoperability between platforms have never been higher. You have Services for Unix (Free) which give NFS and standard unix tools, you have Active Directory (LDAP, and comes free with Win2k server and up) MSDSS allows Netware and Windows boxes to synchronise user info and accounts, and supports 2-way synchronization. Samba and CIFS allows other OS's to use Windows file and printer sharing, and even be a NT domain controller. C# is an ECMA standard. Web services on windows can be used by any language, any platform. NetBIOS is dead, long live TCP/IP

Even if MS is not the most well-behaved companies, Windows interoperates with all sorts of different products, on all sorts of hardware, At home, my linux box mounts fileshares from my win2k3 domain controller at bootup, no problems, and didn't take any effort really on either OS. I think anybody beating the interoperbility horse right now had better find another horse

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: what if
by rayiner on Wed 7th Feb 2007 23:11 in reply to "what if"
rayiner Member since:

Even if Windows became as secure and stable as Linux, and got rid of the UI brain-damage that is Vista, and got rid of the corporate culture of embracing massive complexity in their APIs, they still could not wash off the fact that they systematically and anti-competitively leveraged their monopoly to drive their competitors out of business in the 1990s.

There used to be a time when you had three major word processors to choose from, and MS Word wasn't the de-facto one. If Microsoft hadn't anti-competitively leveraged their Windows monopoly to gain ground in the productivity software market, you'd still have these choices. And of course, we can't forget all the markets Microsoft demolished as they were emerging, just by subsidizing their entry with profits from their Windows and Office businesses.

One has to keep in mind that most of Microsoft's divisions lose money. Indeed, for a long time, Windows and Office were the only divisions that made a profit. In a competitive market, those poorly-performing divisions would've been excised. But because Microsoft has a strangle-hold on Windows, they can afford to take losses almost indefinitely if it means muscling a smaller competitor out of the market.

But yeah, if they somehow manage to rewrite history, there would be no reason not to change one's mind about MS...

Reply Parent Score: 5

v RE[2]: what if
by Woogbear on Wed 7th Feb 2007 23:19 in reply to "RE: what if"
RE: what if
by Darkelve on Thu 8th Feb 2007 11:30 in reply to "what if"
Darkelve Member since:

No, because security isn't the only thing people don't like about Microsoft and it's products.

Edited 2007-02-08 11:31

Reply Parent Score: 3