Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 14th Feb 2007 22:58 UTC
Windows El Reg has reveiwed Windows Vista. "So, there's our first look at Vista. It does benefit from a lot of good ideas, many of them Apple's, of course, but good nevertheless. It simply doesn't work very well, unfortunately. There are serious problems with execution; it's not polished; it's not ready. It should not be on the market, and certainly not for the outrageous prices being charged. Don't buy it, at least until after the first service pack is out. Don't pay to be a beta tester." Elsewhere, analysts believe Windows Vista will take a bite out of Mac's market share.
Thread beginning with comment 212826
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
This guy lost all credibility
by Nelson on Thu 15th Feb 2007 00:18 UTC
Member since:

"So, there's our first look at Vista. It does benefit from a lot of good ideas, many of them Apple's, of course, but good nevertheless."

Shut up, just shut up. I'm tired of hearing this. Considering it's WRONG.

Vista was in development along the same time as Mac. We all know Mac has a closed development cycle as in they don't disclose any information nor show it off until it's near release.

How in the HELL could Vista have taken these things then?

Reply Score: -2

ebasconp Member since:

MacOS X 10.4 already had all those features available on mid 2005!!!

Reply Parent Score: 5

SlackerJack Member since:

I heard a argument that longhorn had the features before Tiger, is this true?

Reply Parent Score: 1

sappyvcv Member since:

Oh yeah and Microsoft had no idea what was going to go in Vista in mid 2005.. right.

Reply Parent Score: 2

h3rman Member since:

Vista was in development along the same time as Mac. We all know Mac has a closed development cycle as in they don't disclose any information nor show it off until it's near release.

How in the HELL could Vista have taken these things then?

Cool, are you for real? I've seen people running OS X for years, with all the spotlight and gadget stuff in it for quite a while too. And yes, I know the Finder sucks.
But, I know you're joking, so this reply too is just for entertainment value. ;)

Not that "closed development" really matters much. You really think MS can't get their hands on what Apple do before it's out? It's in the best interest of Apple to show much of what they're doing to Microsoft, because if MS would create something too similar, it's much easier to accuse them of using the copiers. If you see something, it's much more difficult to avoid being inspired by it. And if MS keep thinking OS X is the benchmark, they will never escape the role of being the follower. Keeping things a real secret @Apple might force MS to really innovate, don't it sound wild? Something Apple wants to avoid.

Reply Parent Score: 5

Headrush Member since:

Obviously all companies that having changing APIs/ABIs seed their developers with early versions. It's naive to think that MS doesn't have many Macs on site and is part of the Mac developers....they do publish MS Office for Mac don't they? :lol:

Reply Parent Score: 1

macisaac Member since:

I have noticed that some Mac fans seem to have a rather creative and overly generous (towards Apple) view of computing history sometimes. That is, Apple invented just about everything, everyone else just copied. At least they don't claim that Apple invented TCP/IP (well, at least yet...)

Granted, they have done some important bits here and there, though largely, like just about _everyone_ else, they see somebody else's idea, take what they like about it, add whatever they think up, package it all up with their look and feel and custom touches, and voila, it's the new iWhatever!

OSX is a great example of creative pilfering right down to the kernel. Not much wrong that, but it does get annoying when folks forget this, and start pointing fingers.

In terms of Vista and OSX similarity, I don't quite get it. I've run the latter, and I'm typing this from Vista Enterprise, and sure, there's some areas where you can see MS obviously had an eye on the competition, but overall, they're still quite different. If anything, Vista is reminding me of recent versions of KDE. But then, folks will say KDE gets its model from Windows...

Edited 2007-02-15 00:48

Reply Parent Score: 5

stestagg Member since:

The thing that I find ammusing is that Max OSX was released around 4(or 3 or 7 or something) years ago. While Vista was released last month (Don't you dare mention RTM!). And yet they are pretty similar in functionality.

Reply Parent Score: 5

Phloptical Member since:

"Free Beer and Wings Day" at Redmond for Apple employees?

It could happen....

Reply Parent Score: 1

LobalSurgery Member since:

Well, 10.4 was first previewed in June 2004.

In August 2004, Microsoft announced that it was basically starting fresh with Longhorn, building upon Windows Server 2003.

This isn't to imply that certain features in OS X (Spotlight, Widgets, look and feel) were implemented by Microsoft right after Apple publicly previewed them, but the timeframe certainly allows for it.

Plus, there were other features (most notably Expose) available in 10.3, which was originally previewed in June 2003.

Edited 2007-02-15 00:53

Reply Parent Score: 4

sappyvcv Member since:

And Microsoft was demoing most of the planned features for "Longhorn" in 2003 and earlier.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Chicken Blood Member since:

It's not WRONG, but it's not completely RIGHT either.

You know, you make a good point. Clearly MS was developing these features since long before Tiger was released (software development doesn't happen overnight). So it's unfair to say that they just ripped-off Expose, Spotlight and Dashboard. It's also not easy to say who thought of these things first.

To be fair, I would expect to see these features in any modern OS and that is exactly what we are seeing in the OSS desktops too (Beryl/Compiz, Beagle, Plasma/SuperKaramba, etc - people conveniently forget this). Some groups innovate, some copy. Most do a little of both, it's how the technology generally evolves. No party is innocent of this behavior and that's not necessarily a bad thing - the consumer wins.

However. What is shameless is how Microsoft has impemented these ideas. These videos illustrates the point well

Desktop search could have been implemented in a number of ways. Calendar/photo managers/address books could have been done differently. Why then, is the visual design so similar to OS X?

MS may have been developing the features for years, but IMHO the UI was 'acquired' in the last year.

Reply Parent Score: 2

rayiner Member since:

Your quite right that this line of argumentation is a bit stupid. OS X is hardly the first system to feature a vector display and composited UI. That probably dates back to NeXTStep, if not earlier. And at an architectural level, Avalon and Aqua are quite different. Avalon is built around a scene graph (retained mode), while Aqua uses a procedural model (immediate mode).

However, it's fairly apparent that Apple set the standard here. OS X DP4 defined what a modern display system should look like (vector-based, fully anti-aliased, fully-composited, etc). This was back in March 2000, a year and a half before Windows XP was released. Since then, the work in this area has been implementation, in the Windows, Linux, and OS X camps. There isn't really anything in Vista that's fundamentally different than what was in DP4, rather Vista has a faster, more featureful implementation of the same basic concepts. And again, Apple is hardly the first one to implement these concepts, but they're certainly the ones that set the bar for all of their competitors.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: This guy lost all credibility
by ma_d on Thu 15th Feb 2007 04:24 in reply to "This guy lost all credibility"
ma_d Member since:

Actually OS X development started, probably, before XP development.

Reply Parent Score: 2

freebeeg Member since:

Is that you Steve Ballmer? You should really get a grip on that's just going to cause high blood pressure.

Reply Parent Score: 1