backtop


Print 149 comment(s) - last by DeepBlue1975.. on Jun 25 at 6:46 PM


Both Steve Ballmer and Bill Gates were on hand for the Windows 7 demonstration.  (Source: Microsoft)

Julie Larson-Green, Microsoft VP of Windows Experience Program Management, debuted Windows 7 at D6, including showing off its new touch capabilities.

Larson-Green shows off the multi input touch abilities of Windows 7 on a Dell Latitude XT, during the demo.  (Source: CNet)
The new OS made a surprise appearance that's got everyone talking

While Apple is known for stealing the show and anticipation has been building at a giddy pace for the new 3G iPhone, its long time rival Microsoft is not afraid to steal a bit of spotlight of its own.  After months of tight-lipped silence, even as recently as last week, about Window's Vista's successor Window 7 which is set to debut in 2009, Microsoft finally unveiled the work in progress to the press.

The place was Carlsbad, California at the sixth edition of the D Conference, known only as D6.  Julie Larson-Green, Microsoft's VP of Windows Experience Program Management gave a tantalizing brief demonstration of the new OS, which is showcasing strong support for the touch technology.  Steve Ballmer downplayed the demo as the "smallest snippet of Windows 7", but the crowd obviously knew the significance of the event.

The new OS was demonstrated on the Dell Latitude XT, a current model notebook with touch screen capabilities.  Julie said that touching is "super important" to the new interface.  And she knows what the customer wants.  She made a name for herself at Microsoft when she delivered the well received 2007 Microsoft Office UI, which featured marked improvements over past implementations both in style and feel.

"You will be able to do these things in Windows 7," Julie commented as she drew a picture in Microsoft Paint using only her fingers.  Further, she showcased how the system can accept multiple finger inputs, hence the "multi" part of the "multi-touch" technology title.  The new multi-touch technology will deploy on "all sizes and shapes of computers" according to Julie, but you would need the appropriate digitizer hardware.  Touching is "not complete replacement of the mouse", rather it’s a way to further your experience, she says.

Among other revelations is Microsoft's preliminary statement that Windows 7 will feature little if any general architecture changes from Vista.  Also the new OS featured, in the demo version, an OS X-like dock, unlike Vista's more traditional Windows UI, albeit prettied by the Aero Interface.  Other details on the new services remain scarce, but Microsoft promises big things in addition to its newfound touch abilities and UI.

Some note with curiosity the date that Ballmer reaffirmed for Windows 7 to ship -- 2009.  Previously, Microsoft had stated that the OS would like ship in 2010, giving Vista a 3 year window.  However, Microsoft Chairman and founder Bill Gates surprised the media this spring by announcing that it would likely ship in 2009.  With a confirmation from Microsoft Chief Executive, this seems to be an increasingly sure proposition.

The timing of the debut struck some journalists as a bit unusual, as Apple and Linux now have time to mount OS counteroffensives and work on some touching of their own.  Also some note that the continued trickle of news may only further many companies' "skip Vista and wait for Windows 7" mindset.

Despite its proponents' well-stated defenses of Vista, the likely reason for the debut is that Microsoft realizes that its current OS has fallen short.  For a company like Microsoft modest sales, failing to surpass your previous product, are not a victory but a loss.  Microsoft is eager to put this in the past by pushing out Windows 7 earlier than expected and generating a buzz with its strong push into emerging tactile technologies and more service to be unveiled in coming months.





Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Touch
By Spivonious on 5/28/2008 11:14:08 AM , Rating: 3
So we'll all have to buy new touch sensitive monitors now?

I think Microsoft really needs to just dive into the Win32 API and clean it up. Throw out the old 16-bit compatibility, and really streamline things at the most primitive level. New interfaces are nice, and easy to generate press about, but once that novelty wears off, we're still stuck with the designed-for-386 API functions.




RE: Touch
By 67STANG on 5/28/2008 11:21:22 AM , Rating: 3
I agree. However I believe that touch-screen technology is really mostly useful for notebooks and kiosks. Workstations I think would rarely benefit from this, barring the engineering software like solidworks that already allows you to draw components on special monitors.

I hope that this isn't the reason they say we need to upgrade, because to me... it's really a blah feature anyhow. What scares me is that they say the touch feature as "super important" to the system...

I hope they focus on slimming up the kernel like a previous article stated and actually go backwards in terms of system requirements from Vista.


RE: Touch
By Ammohunt on 5/28/2008 1:55:11 PM , Rating: 3
Touching a monitor all day doesn't make sense no howver think of the surface of your desk as a touch sensitive display!


RE: Touch
By retrospooty on 5/28/2008 4:55:42 PM , Rating: 4
Its a feature, for those that want it... You dont have to buy a touchscreen and you dont have to use it.


RE: Touch
By hr824 on 5/28/2008 5:50:47 PM , Rating: 5
I advise buying stock in windex and paper towel now.


RE: Touch
By noirsoft on 5/28/2008 6:29:32 PM , Rating: 5
Given how porn is still the #1 moneymaker on the internet, that's been a safe investment for years now.


RE: Touch
By saiga6360 on 5/28/2008 8:15:49 PM , Rating: 3
Sounds... messy.


RE: Touch
By Captin Crunch on 5/28/2008 8:04:24 PM , Rating: 3
I am an Industrial Designer, and for me the Multitouch revolution is brilliant idea with lots of potential. For anyone using Alias Sketchbook Pro, etc it will hopefully mean the capabilities of the Wacom drawing tablets built into the base unit. http://www.wacom.com.au/price/price.php obviously this is only one example, but its an important one. Also I am a PC/MAC user with a Multitouch MBP, Multitouch has changed how I interface with the computer, and I now prefer the track-pad over a mouse. Really looking forward to see how W7 implements Multitouch.


RE: Touch
By PrezWeezy on 5/28/2008 9:02:12 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I hope they focus on slimming up the kernel like a previous article stated and actually go backwards in terms of system requirements from Vista.


Yeah I agree, let's just make it compatible with 1 mb video cards and Pentium II's.

I can't believe how people are bitching about Vista's hardware requirements. Think about it guys, the reality is that 1 gig of memory is 22 bucks. And hardware is only going to get better and faster, why would you go BACKWARDS? That's completely asinine. It doesn't even really take that much to run Vista. I have an Athalon 4200+ with 1 gig of memory and a $50 video card running it just fine in 64 bit mode. I don't play games on it, but I couldn't play games if it was XP either, at least nothing more than what I can now. If they don't design these systems for the future they are outdated by the time they hit the shelves. No one complains that Crysis takes a $3000 computer to run well, nor any of the other games out there. Lots of programs are hardware intensive and I don't think MS should be constantly blasted for thinking 6 months down the road. Don't run it on a POS PC, run it on a new PC and you will be just fine.


RE: Touch
By rudolphna on 5/29/08, Rating: 0
RE: Touch
By blckgrffn on 5/29/2008 9:15:11 AM , Rating: 2
Companies running P2 workstations? Are you kidding? Where?


RE: Touch
By Spivonious on 5/29/2008 9:54:28 AM , Rating: 2
We still have many 486 machines running NT 4. They work, and there's no reason to upgrade until they break.


RE: Touch
By lightfoot on 5/29/2008 11:36:31 AM , Rating: 5
By that logic, why do you even have 486's?

Did all your pencils break back in the early 90's?

What the hell are you doing upgrading your OS if you can't afford to upgrade from a 486???

I doubt that Windows 7 or Vista is even an issue for a company who hasn't even joined the internet age.


RE: Touch
By TomZ on 5/29/2008 10:09:17 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Many companies are running Pentium II workstations, and cant afford to upgrade. Thats millions of dollars.

Yeah, millions of dollars in lost productivity you mean. Unless an employee only uses the computer for a few minutes per week, or has a vanishingly small wage, upgrading the computer to a more modern one with up-to-date software will pay for itself pretty quickly.
quote:
Vista is a resource hog too. At idle, it uses over a Gig of memory, running nothing else! Its ridiculous!

Blah, blah, blah. People have said the same about every new Windows release since Windows 3.1 - so what. If a new version takes 2X the memory as the previous version, but memory costs 1/2 what it used to, then the cost is the same. Microsoft correctly anticipated that memory prices would continue to fall, and so it was able to tune Vista to use more RAM for Superfetch, etc.


RE: Touch
By ice456789 on 6/4/2008 12:20:14 AM , Rating: 2
While I couldn't even hope to debate with most of you about the technical aspects of computing, I can tell you that right now there are PLENTY of small-medium sized businesses that run on p2's or even less. I worked for an appliance company in the Southeast with over 20 locations... sales had to be entered into the computer by the salesperson. The computers were running Win98, and the software we used was a DOS emulation. The computers could not display more than 256 colors, and despite the T1 lines it took a full 38 seconds (I counted) just to load the company's own webpage. Many medium size distribution centers run systems that are 10 years old. They track all their sales and inventory on these computers. You'd be surprised how common it is.

All that said, it doesn't freaking matter. You don't design a new OS with these guys in mind, because they're not gonna buy it. It doesn't add to their productivity and neither would new computers unless they update all the software, which is a HUGE expense with questionable value especially when the existing system still works. It won't help the salesman who types with two fingers fill out a sales form any faster, and it won't help the warehouse guys manually scan inventory faster. So don't worry about those companies when designing a new OS.

If some companies use 10 year old computers, they are not going to be interested in buying the newest OS to put on them. Obviously they would rather invest somewhere else.


RE: Touch
By PrezWeezy on 6/4/2008 6:32:44 PM , Rating: 2
I'm the moron? If you are suggesting that a company can afford to buy all new operating systems, spend the time to upgrade, and not upgrade hardware, you should take a look in the mirror. I understand there are SOME places that still use old machines, as someone below commented there is no reason to run anything faster than a PII if you are typing in sales info. But there is almost 0 market for upgrades. That's part of why they are so cheap. MS knows they wont make their money there. The largest chunk of money comes from new hardware, and that's where Vista does great. No one ever suggested someone with a PII should upgrade. It would run slower than NT would anways, so it would be a huge waste of money. Think about what you are actually saying before you post next time.


RE: Touch
By mikeyD95125 on 5/29/2008 12:22:49 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I hope that this isn't the reason they say we need to upgrade, because to me... it's really a blah feature anyhow. What scares me is that they say the touch feature as "super important" to the system...


Apple seems to do well on this buisiness model.


RE: Touch
By freaqie on 5/28/2008 11:23:44 AM , Rating: 2
windows 7 and vista maybe too.. should have been 64 bit only... it would have meant only one driver had to be created from now on. and 32 bit could(should) just be emulated...

please drop 32 bit.. it's too slow. and supports too little ram etc...


RE: Touch
By JasonMick (blog) on 5/28/2008 11:25:21 AM , Rating: 5
FYI... the 16-bit compatibility was thrown out with Vista, an oft topic of debate (is it "ruining the good old times" or "about time they got rid of that antique junk"?).

I agree some baseline cleanup may be in order, but it doesn't appear Windows 7 is going to be the place with it.


RE: Touch
By Saosin on 5/28/2008 5:28:36 PM , Rating: 2
I believe 16-bit support is still there in the 32-bit version, just not in the 64-bit one.

But ya I agree, Microsoft really needs to start cleaning up the code base.


RE: Touch
By TomZ on 5/28/2008 10:55:36 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I believe 16-bit support is still there in the 32-bit version, just not in the 64-bit one.

Incorrect; Vista doesn't support 16-bit in either edition.


RE: Touch
By Spivonious on 5/29/2008 9:55:31 AM , Rating: 2
Incorrect again. 32-bit Vista supports 16-bit applications.


RE: Touch
By TomZ on 5/29/2008 10:16:42 AM , Rating: 1
You're right, sorry my mistake, 32-bit Vista does support 16-bit apps. The resource I was referring to was talking about 64-bit Vista but did not make that very clear.


RE: Touch
By TomZ on 5/28/2008 11:16:48 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
I agree some baseline cleanup may be in order, but it doesn't appear Windows 7 is going to be the place with it.

As you well know Jason, major portions of Vista, including within the kernel, were re-written/cleaned-up since the prior release (Server 2003). I believe the same happened in every OS release so far for the NT-based OS family.

People have this romantic idea that somehow the OS should be distilled down to some pure essence which would be just a fraction of its current size. But the reality is that the only way that would ever happen is if you removed a substantial fraction of the functionality and requirements, which is never going to happen. Customers expect - no they demand - that each subsequent release does more, not less, than the previous release.

In fact, it is clear that one of the areas where many people believe that Vista fell short was that it was not enough of a "step up." How do you think customers would feel if, in the interests of "cleaning up," Microsoft were to cut out a lot of functionality in a new OS release? The idea is really so stupid that nobody would ever seriously think about it.

...especially when you consider continuously increasing hardware capability. Today it is cheap and easy to have a fast quad-core with 4GB of RAM and hundreds of GB of HDD. What do you think we'll have in 2-3 years when Windows 7 is released, or 4-5 years when it becomes mainstream?


RE: Touch
By larson0699 on 6/3/2008 3:12:50 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
What do you think we'll have in 2-3 years when Windows 7 is released
A very non-inclusive OS / another reason not to upgrade.

The concept of minimizing the footprint of an OS is far from unrealistic, but more often than not eclipsed by function. How much more functional can the OS get?

I have a plethora of 100-233MHz Pentiums/MMX + Win95 systems deployed all over the place (give em Office 95, Winamp, a few games, and an older Mozilla build) and have not heard one complaint.

Sometimes (I say sometimes...) people are satisfied having just what they need and not much else. Moving forward is not always about exerting 100% of future technologies. That's a disease.

Who actually needs and is not simply spoiled by one-third of Vista bloat? You know they could have done better.

There could always be a mainstream edition of the next OS that downloads only the required drivers at install time and leaves everything else OFF the hard drive. There could be a decent I/O scheduler coupled with a minimal base so as to not juggle 80+ processes between two to four cores. It's not simple and it's not necessary.

For so many editions of Vista, they could have tailored each for a MUCH more specific duty (and still be 98% practical to each target, believe it or not) at a much lower cost of system resources.

In twenty years, I still won't need one gig of RAM to write a paper.


RE: Touch
By LyCannon on 5/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: Touch
By allometry on 5/28/2008 11:55:35 AM , Rating: 5
If you remove support for 32-bit software, you cease to support over 90% of the software on the market.

That would not be a smart move.

Windows API is a monster; it's huge. .NET makes Windows Development nice again, since it's entirely modular and well documented. I wouldn't say that .NET needs a whole lot of work itself and maybe it's a pipe dream, but it would be neat to see .NET become native.


RE: Touch
By JAB on 5/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: Touch
By napalmjack on 5/28/2008 1:32:47 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Jack off all trades


Freud is my favorite poster.;)


RE: Touch
By HVAC on 5/28/2008 2:43:07 PM , Rating: 2
Freud certainly seems to SLIP them in ...


RE: Touch
By overzealot on 5/29/2008 8:34:52 AM , Rating: 2
I thought I was the Master of Noting.


RE: Touch
By aharris on 5/28/2008 1:38:14 PM , Rating: 2
If Apple pulled it off 8 years ago without virtualization, Microsoft can pull it off in two years with virtualization. I really want to enjoy Windows again, but Microsoft is making it very difficult by refusing to clean up their platform.

Virtualize legacy Windows, move everything up to a new 64-bit kernel, and make anything that is not core-OS modular. That's what it will take for me to love Windows again.

Until then, I'll continue enjoying my MacBook Pro and my Window XP desktop.


RE: Touch
By Screwballl on 5/28/2008 3:46:38 PM , Rating: 4
agreed....

although I have the linux preference as I cannot stand paying Apple for service packs


RE: Touch
By Pirks on 5/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: Touch
By ninjaquick on 5/28/2008 5:12:16 PM , Rating: 5
yeah.. um, it IS a service pack, the others are just hot fixes bundled into a single patch. Simmilar to a service pack only that service packs modify the actual windows in some way, adding new dirext x extensions or security software.
"New version of the OS" is actually read "New version of the SAME OS" dont get me wrong, lotsa changes were made, but youre trying to say apples and oranges in a case of a dime or two nickles. New dock with stacks is translated to stacks added to dock, maybe new theme? Time machine is really, i dunno, never used it, but i guess maybe some kids enjoy playing with it. 64bit across whole OS would really turn into what your point is, and even so, if MS wanted to, they could SP XP 32 to 64, except itd be a massive service pack, since it would have to include patches for pretty much everything in the world. Apple has it easy since anything that goes onto their OS is made or ported specifically for the OS, and apple hardware.
10.5 is a service pack man. Whole new version would be server 2003.


RE: Touch
By aharris on 5/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: Touch
By gochichi on 5/28/2008 7:51:57 PM , Rating: 2
I agree that Mac OS is a nice OS, and it may very well have "new kernels" but the fact of the matter is that the updates to the OS are so frequent and so service-pack-like that it really has irked me after a while. Got my laptop, three months later Tiger came out, then Leapard more recently. I would say 10.1-10.4 could have been service packs, and Leopard may just be different enough to call it an actual new OS. For instance, it has Bootcamp (not-Beta, but fully supported).

The saving grace of Mac OS X so far is not that it is UNIX, it is that you can upgrade as many computers as you want with one disk (it doesn't have crazy copy restrictions like Windows does, you can upgrade as many Macs with the one disk, so it kind of averages to $20-$40.00 per service-pack per Mac).

All of this is irrelevant to me actually, Mac OS X is worth $150.00 or whatever. THe problem I have with Apple is that I can't use real hardware with it, I have to enter their Nazi world or ubber design. I prefer less style, more economy and more processing power.

I don't understand why people can't like Vista right now based on the fact that it still has some 16-bit compatibility. I mean, I honestly don't like the GUI very well and it's a little slow (not a ton slow, a little) but I don't see too much of how worse it is than outdated as hell Windows XP (including the "for-children" look and feel). The main problem with VIsta as far as I'm concerned is that it's too Windows-like period.


RE: Touch
By Pirks on 5/28/08, Rating: 0
RE: Touch
By Alexstarfire on 5/28/2008 8:34:17 PM , Rating: 2
LOL. I know what you mean. While I'm not 100% sure of this, but pretty darn sure none-the-less, Windows 95, Windows 98, and Windows ME were all DOS based, not NT based. Windows 2000, Windows XP, and likely Windows Vista are all NT based. Not sure about Vista, but I'm pretty sure it's at least partially based on it.

Anyways, I think what he's really trying to say is that if it was a new OS then why wouldn't it go from 10.x to 11.x? I mean honestly. If it went to 11.x then I sure as hell would consider that a new OS. With Apple not changing it to 11.x that must mean that there is a LOT that they keep the same.

BTW, I've never purchased an OS from Microsoft. It's merely been forced down my throat thanks to not being able to remove it from an OEM PC during purchase/configuration. If I could have removed that option and saved $100+ I would have done so.


RE: Touch
By TomZ on 5/28/2008 11:01:48 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
LOL. I know what you mean. While I'm not 100% sure of this, but pretty darn sure none-the-less, Windows 95, Windows 98, and Windows ME were all DOS based, not NT based.

No, the Win9x operating systems were not "DOS based" - not at all. Yes, they did support DOS compatibility (for obvious reasons), but they were true operating systems that ran natively on top of only the BIOS and hardware.

ref. http://www.microsoft.com/technet/archive/win95/rk3...


RE: Touch
By larson0699 on 6/3/2008 3:21:47 AM , Rating: 2
When it runs DOS natively, that could be considered DOS-based.

When it accesses real-mode memory, that also could be a sign.

Fact: The hybrid kernel had roots in both DOS and NT, so it is easily misunderstood.

@GP, Vista = NT 6.0 but you'd hardly know if it weren't for that string in System Properties.


RE: Touch
By cmdrdredd on 5/29/2008 1:27:43 AM , Rating: 2
With MacOS there are more $99 upgrades than there are Windows versions. This Vista > Windows 7 thing may be the first transition that wasn't years apart. I think this will also be the first time I sit on an OS instead of upgrading right away. Vista is perfect for what I've been doing and what I need. I'm not sure that an upgrade is necessary so soon. I don't see what the point is personally. So Businesses aren't buying volume licenses of Vista and whatever, why release a further different OS? It's not like everyone is going to rush out and buy Windows 7 now, especially if they skipped Vista. I'd work a few updates into Vista and make it a viable solution. I don't know how many people would enjoy buying a new $400 OS (Vista Ultimate retail price).


RE: Touch
By Sulphademus on 5/30/2008 9:02:55 AM , Rating: 2
The way things are shaping up it seems that Vista is the new Win95, the big new thing, and Windows 7 will be the new Win98, the perfection* of what the prior started.

* - please dont take literally.


RE: Touch
By JimmyC on 6/2/2008 12:54:25 AM , Rating: 2
Hopefully Windows 7 is closer to 98SE.


RE: Touch
By Reclaimer77 on 5/28/2008 5:08:49 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
If Apple pulled it off 8 years ago without virtualization, Microsoft can pull it off in two years with virtualization.


Microsoft doesn't have Apples advantage of proprietary hardware and software that only needs supporting. Its easy to do things when you only have to worry about a very short list of hardware and software to work into the environment.


RE: Touch
By allometry on 5/28/2008 2:14:05 PM , Rating: 2
That's a good point you bring up.

Making Windows a completely 64-bit OS and virtualizing the 32-bit and even 16-bit portions of past API's would be wonderful. If you needed 32-bit support, the OS could fire up the necessary VM to support you. The same goes for 16-bit support.

Not a bad idea.


RE: Touch
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 5/28/2008 2:54:05 PM , Rating: 5
A nice idea in theory, but the work required to make it happen is staggering. Not due to the fundamentals, but the security that needs to be in place so you can't exploit 16-bit mode to hijack something in another segment, while still allowing legit functions to cross the threshold. That's the trick, and the reason 16-bit was dropped from Vista. (Security exploits on 16-bit is staggeringly high)


RE: Touch
By inighthawki on 5/28/2008 7:17:03 PM , Rating: 3
You want to get rid all all legacy software after people are complaining now about software incompatibility in Vista? Half the reason that people use windows is for knowing that their programs will still work. Take away everything they have now and starting over on a fresh sheet of paper would be throwing away a large portion of their user base and basically destroying stuff that people love to use.


RE: Touch
By noirsoft on 5/28/2008 3:11:51 PM , Rating: 3
I seriously doubt your 95% statistic. Vista Home Premium runs beautifully on an old 2.4 Ghz original Pentium 4, and I had Ultimate installed on a 3.2 Ghz Pentium D, neither of which would handle 64-bit code. My brand-spanking new quad-core running 64-bit Ultimate does not run the every day tasks appreciably faster than either of those machines.

A 64-bit CPU is not the important spec for Vista. 2 gigs RAM and a decent video card are.


RE: Touch
By djkrypplephite on 5/28/2008 7:23:55 PM , Rating: 2
All Pentium Ds and some Pentium 4's handle 64-bit.


RE: Touch
By jconan on 5/28/2008 8:21:38 PM , Rating: 1
Some AMD Athlons and Semprons are 32bit only as with some of Intel C2D are 32bit or do not support virtualization.


RE: Touch
By Spivonious on 5/29/2008 10:04:20 AM , Rating: 2
All C2D chips are 64-bit.


RE: Touch
By larson0699 on 6/3/2008 3:24:27 AM , Rating: 2
To further clarify, all Core 2-series CPUs support EM64T.

The only of these to not support virtualization are the Allendales.


RE: Touch
By xzourska on 6/13/2008 11:59:15 AM , Rating: 2
I dont remember any P4's being sold when Vista was released or any of the 32bit Core Duos. I could be wrong but the way he stated is about 95% or some number around there of all the new systems that are labeled Vista Compatible are 64bit capable. That does not mean the system you purchase the Retail copy for that meets the Vista minimum specs but a new system. That is how I saw it.

I am one who thinks Microsoft had a major opportunity to force 64bit into the world by making OEMs to only use 64bit while only allowing the retail copy to have the 32 bit option just to increase the support for older systems and legacy software support. If they allow OEMs with the new Windows 7 to use 32bit I will be extremely upset since all processors by 2009 being sold should support 64 bit including the Atom! They could also be really bold and make Window 7 multi core required for desktop and high end laptops for OEMs and only have single core compatibility with the retail copy. That would allow companies designing software to do the same thing they did when MS required a CD-ROM to install Windows and forced the death call of the floppy drive.

I know that I am ranting and saying the same things others have said and obvious stuff but if MS requires this new technology out of OEM's then we as the consumer benefit a lot more then just getting a visual upgrade and some other added features. So if we pay $200 (random number) for the license of a Windows on a new system we will be getting some assurance that now we are establishing a new minimum standard that software companies build for.


RE: Touch
By AmbroseAthan on 5/28/08, Rating: 0
RE: Touch
By mcturkey on 5/28/2008 11:53:51 AM , Rating: 2
My understanding was that Windows 7 was supposed to be a totally new OS, supporting backwards compatibility through the use of VMs. Thus native apps would run much faster and be easier to write, without sacrificing support for the millions of older programs out there. Is this not correct?


RE: Touch
By Jeff7181 on 5/28/2008 12:02:57 PM , Rating: 2
The only thing I ever heard like that was around the time of Vista's release and people were saying the next Windows OS would be revolutionary.
After Vista's release, and complaints about it not running well on a minimum spec machine, I think Microsoft decided a "refresh" was in order.
Windows 7 will no doubt be evolutionary, not revolutionary. I for one am happy about that... since it's based on Vista, the hardware requirements will likely be similar and won't require an upgrade to new hardware like people complained about when moving from XP to Vista.


RE: Touch
By Polynikes on 5/28/2008 12:41:23 PM , Rating: 2
I'd rather have something revolutionary. We need to dump the legacy support and 32-bit support and let VMs handle that stuff. It would make for a much more streamlined OS.


RE: Touch
By fuser197 on 5/28/2008 3:37:17 PM , Rating: 4
'Touching is "not complete replacement of the mouse", rather it’s a way to further your experience, she says.'

You're not required to buy anything.


RE: Touch
By omnicronx on 5/28/2008 4:23:24 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
So we'll all have to buy new touch sensitive monitors now?
Always something to complain about.. even before the OS is released.. I bet you were the guy that said 'What so now we have to buy a mouse?' when windows 3.1 came out..

quote:
Throw out the old 16-bit compatibility, and really streamline things at the most primitive level.
They did in Vista, you can now only run 16bit via a compatability layer, similar to how 32 bit programs are run in 64 bit windows.

quote:
New interfaces are nice, and easy to generate press about, but once that novelty wears off, we're still stuck with the designed-for-386 API functions.
Obviously someone did not read up on Vista.. If you read the article yesterday, it was made quite clear that these major changes like these were released in Vista and not to expect them in Windows 7. Basically don't expect to see too many big changes in regards to windows APIs as any major changes were done in Vista.


RE: Touch
By Pirks on 5/28/2008 4:49:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I think Microsoft really needs to just dive into the Win32 API and clean it up
I can't understand Win32 touting necrophiles. Win32 is dead, use .NET instead. WPF is _WAY_ better than that ancient GDI #rap.


RE: Touch
By Spivonious on 5/29/2008 10:06:22 AM , Rating: 2
.NET Windows Forms is a wrapper over Win32. I've tried using WPF and it's just not ready for primetime yet. No grid control???


RE: Touch
By jconan on 5/28/2008 8:11:19 PM , Rating: 2
M$ doesn't have to throw away everything, they could make the OS much leaner and modular with plug-ins ie 16bit, 32bit, 64bit, and 512bit etc. That was one of the flaws with Vista lack of compatible drivers and programs. Probably Micro$oft would be better off with different kernel versions like the anorexic, lean, moderate, and chunky nt kernels of windows for different clients or markets.


Dock from OSX
By CU on 5/28/2008 11:49:12 AM , Rating: 5
How can it have dock like OSX, when Win 9x already has a "dock" called Quick Launch. It can be dragged to any edge, made to auto hide, become a separate window, or sit on top of the task bar like most people I know have it. OSX didn't invent the dock.




RE: Dock from OSX
By FITCamaro on 5/28/2008 1:23:23 PM , Rating: 5
Haven't you learned yet? When Apple develops a product that already exists and puts it in a prettier case, they have created a new product. One that will be rejoiced and deserves to be worshipped like the Golden Calf at Mt. Sinai(sp?).


RE: Dock from OSX
By srue on 5/28/2008 2:30:17 PM , Rating: 2
Wow, I thought I actually knew how to use my computer. Thanks for posting that - I never knew the quick launch toolbar could be used like that. I just now set it up to hide on the left of my screen (always on top so I can open it when another app is maximized), and it works great. I even moved my desktop icons over to it. Cool! This is probably the first useful thing I have learned from reading the comments.


RE: Dock from OSX
By CU on 5/28/2008 3:44:40 PM , Rating: 2
Glad I could help. You can also create more tool bars and drag them to other edges.


RE: Dock from OSX
By aharris on 5/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: Dock from OSX
By noirsoft on 5/28/2008 3:15:39 PM , Rating: 3
I seriously don't like the OSX dock, as I feel that mixing task-switching with task launching is a bad UI decision, which only enhances the typical Apple user problem of accidentally leaving apps open (you mean closing the window doesn't close the app?) and wondering why the machine runs so slow.

Adding a dock to Vista would be a huge mistake.


RE: Dock from OSX
By CU on 5/28/2008 3:41:08 PM , Rating: 5
Why do you assume my argument is full of fallacious points?

1. The article said the dock was like OSX's. No one mentioned OS9 or commercials.

2. That is what the system tray is for. All though you can empty the recycling bin from the quick launch bar, so there may be away to add functions to right click. Just most programs use the system tray instead.

3. Create a new tool bar and point it to the folder you want. You can browse the folder by clicking on the little arrows. It works just like the Start Menu. However, I would add the folders you want to browse to the Start Menu instead.

4. In Win 9x you can create multiple tool bars and put them all in the task bar split by divider bars you can even name them, and put one on each edge. Try creating multiple docks in OSX that can group in on place, become a window, and dock to any edge.

5. Drag the recycling bin to the quick launch bar. :P

Window's task bar, which includes tool bars, are far superior to OSX's limited dock, and yes I have used both since Win95/OSX 10.1. The dock is like a subset of the windows task bar.

Yes, OSX's Dock was taken from NeXT I think. They probably used alot of the same code when creating OSX from NeXT.


RE: Dock from OSX
By nitrous9200 on 5/28/2008 4:12:19 PM , Rating: 2
Try clicking on the icon iTunes for Windows puts in your system tray to do that instead. (Not that I ever would, iTunes for Windows is probably one of the most bloated and slowest applications I've ever seen)


RE: Dock from OSX
By FITCamaro on 5/28/2008 4:25:12 PM , Rating: 3
2) I don't use iTunes. I use WMP and have it minimized to the task bar that gives me all the control I need. Other programs also have mini-versions to allow basic control without taking up screen space. Being able to pause your music player by right clicking on the icon is nothing to get excited about.

5) I don't need a recycle bin on my quick launch bar. When I want to put something in the recycle bin, I hit the delete key. Revolutionary huh?


RE: Dock from OSX
By DASQ on 5/28/2008 4:49:18 PM , Rating: 3
I can 1-up your 5), I circumvent the recycle bin altogether.

Shift-Del FTW!


RE: Dock from OSX
By FITCamaro on 5/28/2008 5:49:50 PM , Rating: 2
Well yes I typically just use Shift+Delete myself. But he was referring to putting things in the recycle bin. I thought about mentioning that, but didn't.


RE: Dock from OSX
By pwnsweet on 5/28/2008 9:25:06 PM , Rating: 1
This Jason Mick guy is an idiot. Every time he writes an article/blog there are mistakes/inconsistencies.


Just a second...
By KaiserCSS on 5/28/2008 11:49:12 AM , Rating: 3
I don't know about you guys, but my monitor is positioned fairly far away from my body. I do this for a comfortable viewing experience. Therefore, I wouldn't be very pleased with the proposition of reaching across my desk to tap on my monitor to do something.

I can easily see the novelty value of this kind of technology. It's apparent with the success of the iPhone that consumers like the touch-screen implementation. However, I personally prefer the tactile sensation of hitting keys and moving a mouse or using a drawpad for Photoshop. I don't think I'd be able to handle a Star Trek-type interface. It would be annoying, rather clumsy, and difficult to adapt to due to the fact that there is no sensation associated with hitting individual keys. I can see how this would cause problems such as typos and incorrect inputs.

Now, apply this technology to business and industry, and we might have something. For example, I'm all up for a coffee table at Dunkin Donuts where you could simply sit down and order your coffee and donuts straight from the table. Or perhaps instantly bring up and enlarge a security monitor by simply dragging a thumbnail of the shot with your fingers. I could even see this technology implemented in malls, with interactive clothing catalogs, or aviation, where air traffic could be deconflicted manually using such a device from a tower.

I'm not saying this technology doesn't have consumer value; obviously it does. I'm just dubious of it's value in the home setting. It seems Microsoft is targeting the average user by the sound of this article, and if that's so, I'm not sure I could adapt to the sudden change of interface too well.




RE: Just a second...
By lightfoot on 5/28/2008 12:50:25 PM , Rating: 4
Most people do dislike change. Unfortunately technology is all about change. Sadly back in the late 80's and early 90's people had to adapt to using a mouse and clicking on icons - it would be so nice to get back to a simple blinking cursor at a command prompt.


RE: Just a second...
By FITCamaro on 5/28/2008 1:21:08 PM , Rating: 2
What I love about Star Trek is how they can reprogram or bypass circuits in a complicated piece of technology with what looks like a tiny screw driver.


RE: Just a second...
By jimbojimbo on 5/28/2008 4:32:51 PM , Rating: 2
or how about the people that use their HDTV as a monitor and sit 8 feet away? I just hope it's not too tied into everything but I don't think it will be. It'll just be a neat additional feature.


RE: Just a second...
By Reclaimer77 on 5/28/2008 5:18:41 PM , Rating: 2
I think the whole touch screen thing is, obviously, a promotional attention grabber.

In practice, touch screens are never optimal. After using my friends I-Phone for a few minutes, the screen turned into a smudgy unreadable POS. Unless you plan on wearing gloves every time you go to use Windows 7, I would expect the same results.

No matter how careful I am, I still end up having to clean my LCD monitor once or twice a month. Theres no way I'm going to use some touch screen interface for my PC.

But yeah, its just optional and sort of a " geee wiiz look at meeeee " kinda thing right now. It might not even make it into live for all we know.


RE: Just a second...
By danrien on 5/28/2008 10:20:48 PM , Rating: 2
i could see some of this touch technology being used as an interesting control peripheral, i.e. you have a touch screen built into your coffee table at home that sits in front of your tv; the peripheral is treated like one of those "second screen" deals that's been implemented with Vista Media center, then certain things could be put on that screen to control your pc more intuitively then searching for everything with your mouse.

I personally envision a large start icon being put on this hypothetical desk, which would touch, would expand to have some sort of "snapshot" glance of your start menu, which you could then dig into. Meanwhile, your HDTV, which is hooked up to your PC, would be relaying the actions to the normal classic Windows GUI. That's personally where I see this technology having some merit. Also, Microsoft can contact me for the patent information on this idea.... haha jk.

Anyways, obviously the technology has much more applicability in the handheld area... but that's not to say that the ideas with this technology could not be re-implemented for the desktop in new and interesting ways.


AHHH
By Kefner on 5/28/2008 11:34:35 AM , Rating: 5
I can't stand when someone walks over and points something out on my screen, and has to touch the screen and put a finger print on it! I'll really flip when there are smearing finger prints going all over my screen!!!! Sounds interesting though :)




RE: AHHH
By Schrag4 on 5/28/2008 12:45:40 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah really! No more browing DT during my lunch break because it's too messy!


RE: AHHH
By Schrag4 on 5/28/2008 12:46:38 PM , Rating: 2
*brow s ing*

(sigh)


RE: AHHH
By danrien on 5/28/2008 10:10:28 PM , Rating: 2
maybe they could put an acid on the screen? altho that would probably come with its own bucket of problems... and health concerns.... :S


RE: AHHH
By fuser197 on 5/28/2008 3:43:46 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, man, I totally know what you mean, I always make them use a pen to point to something on the screen, a capped pen/retracted pen.


By Locutus465 on 5/28/2008 1:21:24 PM , Rating: 2
Windows 7 does look nifterific, I will probably hold off on switching from vista primarly because I only just recently bought a laptop, and next year is a bit soon for me to be upgrading. But yeah, if I can get an OS with vista's features set, 64bit, perhaps a little leaner and multitouch capability on a laptop then hells yeah I'm all about that. I might even go for a more traditional tablet style PC as my primary moble PC.

For the desktop, well... Who knows, Vista might live quite a bit longer on my desktop than on my mobile PC. The next coolest thing would be if you could keep multiple instances of Outlook in sync with each other automatically w/o the need for exchange server. If I had that I'd be all set between my PPC, Laptop and Desktop.




By FITCamaro on 5/28/2008 1:59:43 PM , Rating: 1
Unless you have a laptop with a touch or multi-touch screen, the touch features will be useless on your laptop. Same goes for the touch pad.


By Locutus465 on 5/28/2008 2:30:54 PM , Rating: 2
Hence I said I might hold off on an upgrade... This upgrade will basically require a hardware update (on the mobile side for sure) but probably not due to the actual requirements of running the OS (slimmer than vista sounds like it should make my laptop slightly faster) but because there'd be no point to upgrading my laptop. If I'm getting Windows 7 on a mobile PC then I want the touch functions, no questions. Which is why I would also want something like a laptop/tablet combo type PC. The kind that you can use in regular laptop configuration or fold the screen down and use as a tablet.

Such a system with Windows 7 on a laptop would be fairly killer. As far as the desktop env... Well IDK, I doubt touch will be a big deal on the desktop anyway and my desktop's HW will almost certainly eat windows 7 for breakfast (it already does so to vista). So upgrading that will depend upon whether there are enough compelling UI/system changes.


By Pirks on 5/28/2008 5:06:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Unless you have a laptop with a touch or multi-touch screen, the touch features will be useless on your laptop. Same goes for the touch pad.
Try to use multitouch touchpad on MacBook (two finger scroll, etc) before judging it.

As they say - "don't argue about taste of oysters with those who never sampled them".


By Locutus465 on 5/28/2008 5:23:30 PM , Rating: 2
As far as I know the mac book only uses multitouch on the touchpad, what gates and CO seem to be talking about is on screen not on touchpad. Different animal, closer to iphone multitouch than mac book if you're looking for a comparison. At least that's what I got out of this.


By Pirks on 5/28/2008 7:40:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
As far as I know the mac book only uses multitouch on the touchpad
And FITCamaro above argues that multitouch on a touchpad is a stupid idea nobody needs. I say FITCamaro knows $hit about what he's talking about. He obviously never tried multitouch on MacBook's touchpad.


By Locutus465 on 5/28/2008 9:17:48 PM , Rating: 2
Well, I guess i'm not going to argue the idea all that much since I have limited personal experience. All I can say is that my limited experience basically mirrors what I've read in online reviews, that multitouch touchpads just aren't as useful as having a multitouch screen, and is almost gimicky. Maybe if I used it on a regular basis I would appriciate it more than I do now, but as it is the aspect I appriciate most is that accidently having my hand on a random part of the touch pad doesn't disable normal mouse operation. Personally I'd rather have a second mouse button.

Again, I'm not trying to knock it since I don't have the day to day experience with it, but from playing around with it in a couple different apps here and there I just wasn't wowed.


My decision
By FITCamaro on 5/28/2008 11:53:26 AM , Rating: 4
If Windows 7 is just Vista without a task bar and with touch capabilites, I'm sticking with Vista. I hate the dock in Macs and I won't be using touch.

I'm only switching if they do the cleanup and leaner version that they promised.




RE: My decision
By lightfoot on 5/28/2008 12:56:50 PM , Rating: 5
I too am planning on "down-grading" to Vista when Windows 7 comes out. It's what all the cool kids do now-a-days.


Did you know....?
By rudolphna on 5/29/2008 8:10:56 AM , Rating: 2
....That Windows 7 isnt based on vista? Its True! Its really based on Windows Server 2008 kernel, which is much cleaner, and smaller.




RE: Did you know....?
By Spivonious on 5/29/2008 10:18:44 AM , Rating: 2
And WS2008 is based on Vista.


RE: Did you know....?
By TomZ on 5/29/2008 11:16:06 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Its really based on Windows Server 2008 kernel, which is much cleaner, and smaller.

Smaller than what - Vista? It is only because the "desktop experience" is not installed by default. If you choose to install that option, then it's basically the same as Vista.

In other words, if you want a smaller footprint, you have to take out features.


not impressed
By vapore0n on 5/28/2008 1:05:54 PM , Rating: 3
It seems like Windows 7 will be just Vista with a new face.
We will call it Vista Sp2, or Vista with all the promised features complete.

3 years for a new OS doesn't give much room to make a revolutionary OS. Just fixes.

They should have made Vista the right way. Like make it a 64bit OS and support 32bit via emulation only.
Even if it meant forcing people to upgrade. That way Windows 7 would have been the OS we've been waiting for.




RE: not impressed
By noirsoft on 5/28/2008 6:48:39 PM , Rating: 2
As I mentioned above, a great deal of 32-bit hardware runs Vista just fine. It would have been a huge mistake to release Vista as 64-bit only. WIndows 7 might be a better time, but if they want also want it to run "leaner" then they will want to support some of the low-power small 32-bit chips as well. Aren't the VIA CPU chips still 32-bit?


HOW ABOUT SOMETHING LIKE THE Wii?
By rasmith260 on 5/28/2008 11:51:09 AM , Rating: 2
Maybe I don’t get it, but with all this talk about the new “TOUCH” abilities of Windows 7 I can’t help but wonder how this differs from the Tablet PC? I mean if they plan on delivering an experience similar to what was seen in the movie “Minority Report”, when Tom Cruise was manipulating the screen with a wave of his hand I’m all for that; and when you consider that’s what’s being done with Nintendo’s Wii to play games, you’d think they would be moving in that direction sooner, (and that would be an OS that everyone would want) a PC connected to a Projector of some kind that can be controlled with sensors on a glove, but I’ve been using touch screens when I use self-checkout at Wal-Mart for a while now, and that’s not impressive to me, so maybe someone can help me understand what I’m missing and why this is a big deal?




By lightfoot on 5/28/2008 12:46:42 PM , Rating: 2
Don't confuse touch-screen with multi-touch screen. They are very different technologies with very different applications.

Apple iPhone is multi-touch.
The Macbook Air has a multi-touch touchpad.
The Star Trek consoles and PADDs were multi-touch.

The touchscreens at walmart are the much more primitive single-touch type touchscreens.
Tablets are almost all single-touch devices that require use of a stylus.

Multi-touch technology allows a computer to be fully functional without needing a seperate keyboard/mouse, or any other input device. We have yet to see how practical it will be in the long run, but this technology is still in it's infancy.


Keep your fingers to yourself, Bill!
By HVAC on 5/28/2008 2:44:27 PM , Rating: 2
I don't want anything Windows-y multi-touching me!




By fuser197 on 5/28/2008 3:40:25 PM , Rating: 2
I believe you're supposed to be multi-touching Windows, not the other way around. That sounded weird.


Man, some of you are dense...
By Jeff7181 on 5/28/2008 12:12:24 PM , Rating: 3
Just Vista with a dock and touch capabilities?

Have to reach across your desk to use it?

I guess "smallest snippet of Windows 7" and "not complete replacement of the mouse" didn't make it through your thick skulls into your pea sized brains.




does anyone know if Windows 7 will retain DX10?
By tejas84 on 5/28/2008 12:38:37 PM , Rating: 3
Does anyone know if Windows 7 runs on DX10 and Windows Presentation Foundation.I sure hope that they don't ram DX11 down our throats for Windows 7. After upgrading my system to DX10 last month for Vista, I refuse to upgrade next year for DX11 if it is an integral part of Windows 7. I also think the DX10 thing put a lot of people off Vista.




I just bought another copy of XP.
By falacy on 5/29/2008 12:35:20 PM , Rating: 2
Honestly, apart from heavy users of large scale Autocad projects or similar heavy processing requirements, there's simply no need for more than 3GB of RAM. Sure, 1% of computer users are "high end gamers" and perhaps 5% are highend content creators, but the other 94% of computer users could get by just fine with Windows XP Home or Mac OS X 10.5 with 1GB of RAM. In fact, the vast majority of computers sold are of this sort, with onboard graphics and 1GB RAM.

Simply put, for the average person's usage, computer hardware surpassed the requirements a few years ago.

I could have bought XP 64bit, as my motherboard can hold up to 8GB of RAM, but why bother? Everything I do runs 100% fine with 2GB RAM, which includes running Opera, Open Office Calc, World of Warcraft, Internet Connection Sharing, and streaming video on my home network all at the same time with absolutely no slow downs.

Vista? Seven? Touch interface? Meh, I don't need any of that; no one really needs any of those. Hell, I don't even need Windows XP, I just happen to prefer it over Linux. On that note, it is nice to see that they are adding more options to the interface, though I wish it weren't being designed by the crack fiend who made Office 2007, of which everyone I have talked to despises (really, everyone - I don't use it).




RE: I just bought another copy of XP.
By TomZ on 5/29/2008 5:52:37 PM , Rating: 1
Have any of those you talked to who "despises" Office 2007 actually ever used it? Most people I've talked to who have used it prefer it to Office 2003 (including myself).


Imagine
By chmilz on 5/28/2008 4:40:57 PM , Rating: 2
Porn would be even better with touch technology! Imagine interactive online porn where you can undress the object of your desires with your hands? Screen would get smudgy real fast though...

For gaming, how awesome would Civilization 4 be (or any RTS, really) if you could tap to select, drag n' drop units, etc?




WinFS
By JNo on 5/28/2008 4:52:53 PM , Rating: 2
What about the much touted WinFS filing system that was dropped at the last minute from Vista (but possibly going to be added as an update - but hasn't been yet). Is that going to be in Windows 7? Any news?




I doubt she talks like this
By bobdeer1965 on 5/28/2008 6:47:21 PM , Rating: 2
Touching is "not complete replacement of the mouse",

She didn't really say it like that. Did She?

Obviously she is better educated than that.

But the DailyTech writers sure aren't.




By IcePickFreak on 5/29/2008 2:21:02 PM , Rating: 2
The top picture of Balmer and Gates is a text-book graphical reference for the word "Nerd"

They have taken nerd-dom to an entire new dimension. Despite them being rich beyond comprehension, it is still a dimension which I do not want to be associated with. Henceforth, I will be resigning from my nerd-dom and returning to geekiness.




Over my dead body!
By sh856531 on 6/4/2008 12:47:24 PM , Rating: 2
Just so we're clear - if *anyone* smears their grubby little digits over my 30" Dell TFT, I will straight up shoot the %£^$er

Best Regards

:-)




Not impressed at all...
By DeepBlue1975 on 6/25/2008 6:46:37 PM , Rating: 2
"Touch technology super important" + "the rest almost the same as Vista" = no reason to upgrade at all, unless there's some major feature they forgot to talk about (how about a real 3d GUI?).

Touch capability is not important to me at all, and for the rest... I'm fine running Vista 64, and doing heavy multitasking even though I have only 2gbs of ram.
To me Vista is a really stable OS (only hangs where due to overclocking) and runs smoothly with appropriate hardware, while XP was showing a rough spot every now and then.

So I think I'll be in the boat of those who'll be skipping w7 and wait for w8...

W7 should leverage all of the UI treatment to the GUI and spare the CPU of all that, like Vista was supposed to do but later they decided not to (bad move. you should at least be given the option... because basically those expensive GPUs are being completely wasted while not gaming and have a lot of processing power that should be harnessed by more applications, at least IMHO)




windows Xp FTW
By Joz on 5/28/2008 3:11:06 PM , Rating: 1
Based on currently avaiaible sampling and "theoretical" software speeches given to us by every company I canthink of over the past year.

Im going to be using WindowsXP well into the 22nd century.




Seriously?
By guacamojo on 5/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: Seriously?
By mikefarinha on 5/28/2008 12:46:10 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I've not met anyone who liked the new office interface.


Hi, I'm mikefarinha it's nice to meet you guacamojo. Did you know that the new office 2007 interface is awesome!?!?


RE: Seriously?
By lightfoot on 5/28/2008 1:06:11 PM , Rating: 4
Sometimes the "me-too" interface is because it is better. You wouldn't like it if you had to crank-start your Toyota just because the electric starter was used by Ford. Macs would be great little computers if they did three things:

1. Supported Enterprise level applications
2. Ran 90% of the programs on the market
3. Supported 3rd party hardware.


RE: Seriously?
By aharris on 5/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: Seriously?
By Mojo the Monkey on 5/28/2008 1:55:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Parallels


Have you ever tried running a secure VPN-type app through parallels? A huge pain in the ass.


RE: Seriously?
By aharris on 5/28/2008 2:18:41 PM , Rating: 2
I haven't run into that yet. All of the VPN gear we've used either has a Mac client for the app or can use the OSX native config to connect.

As for the Parallels -> OSX interface, I agree it could use a bit of work. Depending on the app and your workflow, you could always use BootCamp to handle specific instances like this.


RE: Seriously?
By lagitup on 5/28/2008 4:16:06 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
3. Why?

Two reasons I can think of:
The first is price. If third party OEMs like psystar or whatever that company was could legally make osx based machines and sell them, apple boxes would be a lot cheaper to stay competitive
Secondly, a lot of people on this board, myself included, enjoy building their own machines. I would never pay someone else to build a computer for me, though that is probably more of a personal preference than anything else.

lag


RE: Seriously?
By aharris on 5/28/2008 5:20:31 PM , Rating: 2
Never?

When was the last time you built your own laptop?

What about your own iMac/SonyLookalike/HPWannabe?

If you answered anything besides, "Well, umm..." you spent way too much money on parting together something that's not near the quality you could've had in a high end PC or an Apple system.

I have my own custom-built PC. It was fun, yes. But the experience of building your own PC is only applicable to certain types of systems, and the integration of the hardware/OS makes life much easier for many of us who have to be responsible for the technology we deploy on a daily basis.


RE: Seriously?
By Pirks on 5/28/2008 5:24:06 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
If third party OEMs like psystar or whatever that company was could legally make osx based machines and sell them, apple boxes would be a lot cheaper to stay competitive
Do you want competition and innovation to finally disappear in the personal computing world? No? Then stop asking Apple to cut their R&D budget and switch to Dell's model of competing purely on price. It's very dangerous when ALL the companies start competing on price. We need some premium brands that don't hesitate to experiment and innovate and charge higher price for that. Do not ask for Apple to turn into Dell. We already have Dell, why are you asking for the second one? Forget about it. The market in general has the place for all sorts of companies, both for those who are great cloners/cheap mass producers like Dell and for those who specialize in funky niche/advanced stuff like Apple. We need them ALL for the market to stay healthy and non-stagnant. Got it?
quote:
a lot of people on this board, myself included, enjoy building their own machines
Apple does not target the market of DT readers. In fact Apple consciously avoids this market. Some other companies like Newegg taget this market, but Apple doesn't. Deal with it and stop complaining. Not all companies want to lose their focus, Apple is not one of these.

P.S. I'm replying not only to your post above but to OP as well.


RE: Seriously?
By Reclaimer77 on 5/28/2008 7:36:16 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Do you want competition and innovation to finally disappear in the personal computing world? No? Then stop asking Apple to cut their R&D budget and switch to Dell's model of competing purely on price. It's very dangerous when ALL the companies start competing on price. We need some premium brands that don't hesitate to experiment and innovate and charge higher price for that. Do not ask for Apple to turn into Dell. We already have Dell, why are you asking for the second one? Forget about it. The market in general has the place for all sorts of companies, both for those who are great cloners/cheap mass producers like Dell and for those who specialize in funky niche/advanced stuff like Apple. We need them ALL for the market to stay healthy and non-stagnant. Got it?


Competitive. Innovative. Premium. None of these words come to mind when I think of Apple. You make it seem as if Apple is the only thing holding back PC manufacturers from steeply increasing prices. Thats a fantasy. In your own words " Apple consciously avoids this market ".

Competitive ? Apple would be buried if not for the success of their MP3 players. Their computer sales are horrible.

Innovative ? Patches or service packs get re branded into a new cool sounding named OS for full price. Hardly innovative. On the hardware side you get a fancy new case design every few years with the same proprietary average performing components. Or WOW, a laptop thats THIN ! So thin in fact, it has no optical drive. But its okay, because its THIN !!

Premium ? The only, ONLY, thing about Mac thats premium is its price.


RE: Seriously?
By Pirks on 5/28/2008 7:56:31 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
You make it seem as if Apple is the only thing holding back PC manufacturers from steeply increasing prices
That's purely your own delusion, I never said that. Also, do not forget that PC makers sell a lot of premium PC models for the price well above the price of an average Mac, so your statement that somebody holds PC makers from selling expensive computers is just distilled BS.
quote:
Their computer sales are horrible
Why the Mac sales are steadily growing the past several years and by now captured about 66% of the retail premium PC market? Don't you think Mike Dell would give his arm and leg to have THAT horrible income and profit margin that Apple has? Don't you think Dell now looks at his shrinking stock price which is nothing compared to Apple's stock and silently cries in his office when noone hears? You seem to know nothing about business side of PC makers, it's very obvious from your posts. You think that volume/units shipped is everything and profit margin is nothing. In fact, nothing could be farther form the truth.
quote:
Patches or service packs get re branded into a new cool sounding named OS for full price. Hardly innovative
Why don't you blame MS for doing exactly the same all these years?
quote:
On the hardware side you get a fancy new case design every few years with the same proprietary average performing components. Or WOW, a laptop thats THIN ! So thin in fact, it has no optical drive. But its okay, because its THIN
Exactly. A lot of people value ergonomics more than useless features like DVD drive. From the point of view of these people Apple is innovating.
quote:
The only thing about Mac thats premium is its price
That's a common point of view of the techie crowd. Unfortunately for them, they, techies, are a minority, this is why Apple stock is growing and Dell's is shrinking. Deal with it. Try to learn other people's points of view. Try to understand that only one out of ten potential computer buyers is interested in serial number on a CPU, other nine people are interested in (surprise!) ergonmics, which start with (surprise again!) case and component layout, size, weight and stuff like that.


RE: Seriously?
By Reclaimer77 on 5/28/2008 11:14:00 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Also, do not forget that PC makers sell a lot of premium PC models for the price well above the price of an average Mac, so your statement that somebody holds PC makers from selling expensive computers is just distilled BS.


The only " premium " PC companies I can think of are Alienware and Falcon Northwestern. They charge a high premium, but make no mistake, the emphasis is on PERFORMANCE. In any fair benchmark, an equally priced system from these two companies simply blows away the similar offering from Apple. And no, I'm not talking about just gaming.

Apple charges a high premium for an average performing machine with noob appeal, a stylish ( sometimes gay ) case, catchy themes, and other such glitter. Thats the difference.

quote:
Why the Mac sales are steadily growing the past several years and by now captured about 66% of the retail premium PC market? Don't you think Mike Dell would give his arm and leg to have THAT horrible income and profit margin that Apple has? Don't you think Dell now looks at his shrinking stock price which is nothing compared to Apple's stock and silently cries in his office when noone hears? You seem to know nothing about business side of PC makers, it's very obvious from your posts. You think that volume/units shipped is everything and profit margin is nothing. In fact, nothing could be farther form the truth.


I sold two more apples this quarter than my zero I sold last quarter. HA ! Take that Delmonte !! My market share is up 200% !!!

Yeah you guys tried to play that percentage game on another DT thread and failed horribly. Your comparing Apple as a whole to Dell. Dell simply destroys Apples COMPUTER devision in market share. Did I miss something or does Dell make most of its profits from an MP3 player and a cellphone ? No, didn't think so.

quote:
Why don't you blame MS for doing exactly the same all these years?


Because our service packs are free ?? From Xp to Vista was a span of FIVE years. Don't play that game with me.

quote:
Exactly. A lot of people value ergonomics more than useless features like DVD drive. From the point of view of these people Apple is innovating.


Calling an optical drive on a laptop " useless " is pure ignorance. I realize your worshiping at the First United Church of Steve Jobs, but come to your senses please. At some point you WILL need to use an optical drive. So its innovative to make a thin laptop, to save space, yet you are carrying around an external optical drive anyway ? But hey, if it was practical and made sense it wouldn't be an Apple product would it ? The message is clear. Form > function. All for a high premium. Its a great sales strategy, I can't deny it.

quote:
That's a common point of view of the techie crowd. Unfortunately for them, they, techies, are a minority, this is why Apple stock is growing and Dell's is shrinking. Deal with it. Try to learn other people's points of view. Try to understand that only one out of ten potential computer buyers is interested in serial number on a CPU, other nine people are interested in (surprise!) ergonmics, which start with (surprise again!) case and component layout, size, weight and stuff like that.


Yes because throwing out unfounded statements like " 9 out of 10 people " solidifies your argument. And putting words in the mouth of the consumer.

Why don't you let the consumer speak for themselves ? PC sales simply destroy Mac sales, and always have. And you can make up a fake market called the " Premium PC " market and claim the Mac reigns supreme if you want. But we both know they are the ONLY one in that market to begin with. Your post pretty much defines what a straw man argument is.


RE: Seriously?
By Pirks on 5/29/2008 3:45:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The only " premium " PC companies I can think of are Alienware and Falcon Northwestern. They charge a high premium, but make no mistake, the emphasis is on PERFORMANCE
Apple makes emphasis on ERGONOMICS, not on performance. You think that ergonomics is less important than performance, but majority of tech-illiterate home consumers disagree with you and buy Macs - hence Macs occupy most of the US premium PC segment in retail.
quote:
Apple charges a high premium for an average performing machine with noob appeal, a stylish ( sometimes gay ) case, catchy themes, and other such glitter. Thats the difference.
Yeah, the difference is that common Joe calls this stuff you are so excited about (OMG 45nm OCed octocoresuperdupermultihyperthread bomba with THAT SPECIAL SERIAL NUMBER that you can OC even MORE WOW!) a gay glitter and waste of money. For him ergonomics are much more importnat than 45nm OCed octocore "wonder" you techies love to worship.
quote:
Dell simply destroys Apples COMPUTER devision in market share
Apple simply destroys Dell in profit margins. Dell makes pennies form their cheapo Wintel boxes, while Apple makes hundreds of dollars on every Mac sold. In the end Apple makes MORE money than Dell by selling FEWER computers. You care about units sold because you know nothing about business and profit margin. Learn basics of economy and business first.
quote:
From Xp to Vista was a span of FIVE years
Look at how Mac OS changed in 5 years while XP stayed the same.
quote:
Don't play that game with me
Don't pretend to be an idiot by stating that Mac OS X stood still and unchanged like Win XP did from 2001 to 2007. You're smarter than that.
quote:
At some point you WILL need to use an optical drive
I have a bunch of DVD drives everywhere around me, in all my desktops and even in my 17" Dell Vostro laptop. I never used the DVD drive in Dell Vostro and never will. I don't really understand why do I need those DVD drives EVERYWHERE. It's necrophilia, man. DVD is dead, only lamers use it to watch movies. Same goes for BluRay. Ever heard words "DVD rip" and "802.11n"? Think about it for a while, you may start understanding why a lot of people prefer to get ultraportable notebooks without DVD (I'd get Dell Vostro without DVD if I could)
quote:
we both know they are the ONLY one in that market to begin with
Now you're contradicting yourself. You just said that Alienware and others DO MAKE premium PCs, and whoops - now they don't?

So they do or they don't? Please explain in which case you lied - when you said that there are PC makers selling premium PCs or when you said there aren't any?


RE: Seriously?
By Reclaimer77 on 5/29/2008 5:29:14 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
but majority of tech-illiterate home consumers disagree with you and buy Macs - hence Macs occupy most of the US premium PC segment in retail.


Again with the made up " premium " pc market. You won't just call a PC a PC because you will lose. And sorry, but the majority of all OEM pc sales are NOT Mac's.

The word Premium generally means a certain level of price vs performance in the PC world. Macs do not offer an acceptable level of price vs performance, and sorry they are no more " ergonomic " than a PC. Macs just cost more. That doesn't make something a " premium " product.

And please show me sales figures from the so called " Tech Illiterate " home consumer market. In your attempt to justify the Mac brand, you just insulted their entire user base. Nice !

quote:
Yeah, the difference is that common Joe calls this stuff you are so excited about (OMG 45nm OCed octocoresuperdupermultihyperthread bomba with THAT SPECIAL SERIAL NUMBER that you can OC even MORE WOW!) a gay glitter and waste of money. For him ergonomics are much more importnat than 45nm OCed octocore "wonder" you techies love to worship.


Lol super exagerrations make your point more valid ? I built my last 3 PC's, but I'm far from caring about what serial number my gear has on it. And I don't consider myself to be a " techie ". I believe the term your searching for is 'educated consumer'. And if you would have used that, instead of extremes, you would have had a good argument.

quote:
Apple simply destroys Dell in profit margins. Dell makes pennies form their cheapo Wintel boxes, while Apple makes hundreds of dollars on every Mac sold. In the end Apple makes MORE money than Dell by selling FEWER computers. You care about units sold because you know nothing about business and profit margin. Learn basics of economy and business first.


Nice try, but profit margins are entirely misleading and you damn well know it. Ferrari destroys Ford or Gm or Toyota in " profit margins " as well. They are NOT a larger company or higher grossing. I think you need to go back to Economics 101 mr. expert.

http://www.systemshootouts.org/mac_sales.html

What do we have here ? Mac is sixth in PC market share and Dell is second behind HP in the first quarter of 2008. Go back as far as you can and you will see the same pattern. Apple has consistently had one of the lowest, and in most cases THE lowest PC sales market share. Dell ? They have never went below second from 1999 till present day.

Either your a fanboi, a liar, or you don't know jack SHIT about economics. Refute these unrefutable numbers right now, or admit you are wrong. You can't continue to keep this argument going in the face of undeniable facts. So stop wasting my time.

quote:
Now you're contradicting yourself. You just said that Alienware and others DO MAKE premium PCs, and whoops - now they don't?


Go back to my opening statement. They are premium because they offer better performance over standard OEM pc's. NOT simply because they cost more. You continue to make a disparity where none should exist.

quote:
So they do or they don't? Please explain in which case you lied - when you said that there are PC makers selling premium PCs or when you said there aren't any?


Actually I can't find ANY " Premium PC " sales figures like this graph I just linked. Anywhere. So could it be, as I have stated, there is NO such thing as a " premium PC market " ??

You know, you just really suck. You know the Mac cant stand on its own compared to PC's in market share, overall sales, or any other objective category. So you cling to this " premium market " to prop up your arguments. No analyst I can find even recognizes this " premium market ". Not the IDC's Worldwide Quarterly PC Tracker, or the Gartner Group Dataquest Research Catalog. Where is this " premium pc " market !??

http://www.systemshootouts.org/mac_sales.html

Again, if you can somehow cook up an argument against this completely concrete proof, then you could probably argue that gravity does not exist. Either way, your being a stubborn fanboy.

Bonus ownage :

quote:
I never used the DVD drive in Dell Vostro and never will. I don't really understand why do I need those DVD drives EVERYWHERE. It's necrophilia, man. DVD is dead, only lamers use it to watch movies. Same goes for BluRay. Ever heard words "DVD rip" and "802.11n"? Think about it for a while, you may start understanding why a lot of people prefer to get ultraportable notebooks without DVD (I'd get Dell Vostro without DVD if I could)


Yes because NOBODY installs software or game disks anymore ?? Oh and before you bring up networking solutions, sorry you can't. Remember, thats only for those " ultra techies " you keep boasting about. The " majority of the tech-illiterate " home consumer agree, networking and installing over eithernet is just too complex and obtuse.

Now that I have fully and completely decimated you and all your arguments. I think I'll go take a shower and make love to myself and/or my PC. Damn I'm good :)


RE: Seriously?
By Pirks on 5/29/2008 6:23:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
because Eee is a high end laptop that costs over one thousand dollars
No, because Eee is ultraportable and lightweight notebook. Ever wondered why ultraportable lightweight notebook designers tend to avoid putting DVD drives in their machines?
quote:
majority of all OEM pc sales are NOT Macs
So what? I don't care about cheap stuff although I tend to buy it once in a while (because I'm cheap and poor), I'm only interested in discussing luxury stuff. It's not interesting to watch how many cheapo cars or cheapo Wintel PCs were sold, this is commodity stuff. Are you interested in how many loafs of bread were sold in your nearby convenience store? Cheapo Wintel PC are like bread and dirt these days. Everyone uses them but why TALK about them? You talk a lot about air, water, bread, soil and sunlight, huh?

I say watch for high-end stuff, this is where innovation comes from - it trickles down from luxury computers and cars and stuff to less expensive models over the time - so watch what Apple does and you'll see your own future with regard to computing - portable wireless devices everywhere, user-friendly broadband internet on your phone, etc etc.
quote:
The word Premium generally means a certain level of price vs performance in the PC world
You should actually learn a bit of analogy from automotive world. Did you notice that not all premium cars charge premium for pure engine power? Did you notice that there are two trends - noisy sports cars with insane HP like Dodge Viper, and serene luxury cars that have insane level of noise insulation instead of HP - this is Lexus.

Now try to tell me that Lexus is not a premium car just because you don't care about sound insulation. Tell me you want only HP and hence only the Viper is really premium car. After you tell me this it'll be much easier to pick your argument apart and show you how wrong you are.
quote:
you just insulted their entire user base
Oh, come on, please stop this silliness! You think I insult most people when I say that they are tech illiterate and cannot fix their car, instead they bring their cars to their mechanic? How old are you really? You seem to think that if a guy can't fix his own car and disassemble/reassemble its nice 6-banger engine with electronic fuel injection - then this guy is an idiot? And he is insulted by that?

Man, you are definitely not very old. I can see that easily. I used to be like that a long time ago :-)
quote:
educated consumer
I don't understand why you think that tech illiterate people can't be educated consumers. You don't have to know all the CPU revisions and manufaturing tech to be able to pick a nice computer you really want. Did you know that?
quote:
profit margins are entirely misleading
Nope, it's unit shipments that are entirely misleading. You think unit shipments is everything, but look at what investors think - looks like they like profits much more, hence Dell's stock is rolling down, and Apple's stock is growing all the time. No serious investor looks at the volume of shipments, it seems. You are in the minority, man.
quote:
Refute these unrefutable numbers right now, or admit you are wrong.
What numbers? I never said that Dell and others ship fewer computers than Apple. It's actually you who has to refute your claims that profit means nothing. You still haven't explained why profit margin is not as important as the units shipped.
quote:
They are premium because they offer better performance over standard OEM pc's. NOT simply because they cost more.
Macs also do NOT simply cost more. They are premium because they have better ergonomics over standard OEM Wintel PCs. Do you see now that Apple is not the only company making premium computers?
quote:
Actually I can't find ANY " Premium PC " sales figures like this graph I just linked. Anywhere. So could it be, as I have stated, there is NO such thing as a "premium PC market"
Or could it be that this data is not in public domain and you have to work as an analyst and pay for access to such data?
quote:
Where is this "premium pc" market?
http://www.informationweek.com/news/hardware/mac/s...
quote:
NOBODY installs software or game disks anymore?
So you claim that Asus Eee PC users don't install software and game discs anymore? How insightful! You're really smart ;-)
quote:
networking and installing over eithernet is just too complex and obtuse
This must be one of the reasons why DVD-driveless Asus Eee sells so well, hehehe :))
quote:
Damn I'm good
You should be putting more serious arguments next time, if you don't to stay that "good". Maybe you can enlighten me about profit margin vs volume shipments next time. You think I still have a chance? ;-)

P.S. Bonus owning! :)) Read on.

Do this experiment: try to assemble your own premium PC from Alienware and from Apple. Say, some ATX gaming box from Alienware and iMac from Apple.

Start with Alienware. Grab the case, mobo, CPU, RAM, etc - bong bang clonck clinck - several hours and you have your own Alienware clone for half a price. Including watercooling if you want.

Now go for Apple. Oops? You can't get this case to build iMac clone? Can't get that specially designed iMac mobo?

Alas, you can't build your clone of the Apple premium PC :P

That example will tech you nothing but other smarter readers are going to enjoy this one.

Damn I good! Time to make love to my copy of Crysis. I love this game! Do you?


RE: Seriously?
By Reclaimer77 on 5/29/2008 8:53:16 PM , Rating: 2
Now we have totally lost sight of what we started arguing about. You still have not backed your original statement that Apple is innovative, competitive, and whatever else you said about them.

I prove that Mac's have a pitifull market share and you counter by distilling the argument into the " over 1k premium PC market ", where they virtually stand alone anyway. And that link is NOT proof that a quantifiable and measurable " premium pc " market even exists outside of Apple.

quote:
I'm only interested in discussing luxury stuff.


Sorry but car analogies don't always cut it in the PC world. Pc's are not a " luxury " item, and their worth isn't measured in imenities. Look, its a computer. Get over this love affair that Apple has brainwashed into you. Its a computer, not a social movement, not an evolution. Stop drinking the Koolaid.

quote:
I say watch for high-end stuff, this is where innovation comes from - it trickles down from luxury computers and cars and stuff to less expensive models over the time - so watch what Apple does and you'll see your own future with regard to computing - portable wireless devices everywhere, user-friendly broadband internet on your phone, etc etc.


Rich. Apple hasn't come up with a single " innovation " for as long as I can remember. And NOTHING they do contributes to the x86 pc market. Bailing on their own hardware to go with Intel Core2Due CPU's are innovation ? Allowing Macs to boot Windows is innovative ?

IBM, now THATS an innovative company and one that has advanced computer science farther than anybody.

quote:
Macs also do NOT simply cost more. They are premium because they have better ergonomics over standard OEM Wintel PCs. Do you see now that Apple is not the only company making premium computers?


Name one. A power button on the keyboard isn't " ergonomics ". And hyping a company who only offered a one button mouse for the longest time as being " innovative in ergonomics " is a joke.

quote:
Oh, come on, please stop this silliness! You think I insult most people when I say that they are tech illiterate and cannot fix their car, instead they bring their cars to their mechanic? How old are you really? You seem to think that if a guy can't fix his own car and disassemble/reassemble its nice 6-banger engine with electronic fuel injection - then this guy is an idiot? And he is insulted by that?


We were talking about PC repair ? I didn't think so. Good job though with another car analogy. Its really working for you.

quote:
Man, you are definitely not very old. I can see that easily. I used to be like that a long time ago :-)


Ahh the age argument. Yes when you run out of ammo start hurling poop. I'm actually 31, and no, I don't feel very " old " if that makes you feel better.

You " used to be what " ? Informed ? Value minded ? Able to see through marketing hype speak ? Man, I'm sorry. What happened to make you lose these qualities as you got older ?

To be honest I have a hard time believing someone who uses " ROFL " in a serious debate is older, or more mature, than me.

quote:
So you claim that Asus Eee PC users don't install software and game discs anymore? How insightful! You're really smart ;-)


Why do you keep bringing up the Eee ?? Do you not understand that on a $300 PC you just have to accept it doesn't have everything possible ? But a 1k+ Mac ? No, this is no innovation. This is selling less for more.

quote:
This must be one of the reasons why DVD-driveless Asus Eee sells so well, hehehe :))


They sell well because they are dirt cheap. Keeping cost down, in Asus's own words, was the SOLE motivator for how they built the project and the hardware/software choices they made. This is, again, NO comparison to an Apple product.

quote:
Or could it be that this data is not in public domain and you have to work as an analyst and pay for access to such data?


Of course. How convenient for you that the real hardcore data that would support your premise is hidden in private somewhere. Good one !

quote:
That example will tech you nothing but other smarter readers are going to enjoy this one.


The last thing, the very LAST THING, Apple wants is Macintosh components being sold by aggressive retailers on the open market. Your example is only teaching me that you have no concept about what motivates Apples Mac business model. Mac simply cannot compete with PC's on the open market, and they know it.

Again, time to bring our discussion back to its center. Mac's are not innovative, " luxurious " ( only a Mac fan would being luxury into a PC debate ) or premium in ANY WAY other than price.

But people like you are proof that marketing hype, propaganda, and a huge advertising budget works.


RE: Seriously?
By Pirks on 5/30/2008 4:34:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You still have not backed your original statement that Apple is innovative, competitive
Well, how can I back it up if you don't consider well done ergonomics an advantage? If I tell you that Macs are smaller, more portable, more user friendly - how is it going to change your attitutde if you care about only pure performance and nothing else?
quote:
they virtually stand alone anyway
Nope, they don't because there's a LOT of various personal computers sold for $1k+, Macs are just the most popular among these in US retail.
quote:
NOT proof that a quantifiable and measurable " premium pc " market even exists outside of Apple
Go to any store and find there a bunch of $1k+ PCs waiting for a buyer, try newegg or anythiing else. See, there are premium PCs being sold everywhere. What were you saying about these PCs being sold in a "non-existent" market again? How come these premium PCs are being sold everywhere and their market is non-existent at the same time? Sounds like you're drunk or something... very illogical, don't you agree?
quote:
Pc's are not a " luxury " item, and their worth isn't measured in imenities. Look, its a computer
Why don't you say that to all the crazy people buying extreme Intel hardware and watercooling it to death? Why are they doing this useless benchmarking $hit and spend thousands of dollars on that stuff?! It's just a computer! So I suggest you to start with bashing your own fellow DT readers who love this OC kind of $hit. After you bash them for the same reason (because they don't understant that this is "just a computer") you maybe earn the right to bash Apple. I'm telling you that because you are clearly exhibiting double standards here. Apple is evil for pushing their computers and making people crazy about them, and Intel somehow is not? By pushing their useless extreme CPUs and $hit like that? Start with yourself and your fellow buddy readers, before you judge others.

That's a generic advice btw, all people just love to bash others and NEVER look at themselves, so why don't you start with yourself and your tech literate buddies who are crazy about OCing and ABSOLUTELY IN INSANE CRAZY LOVE their OCed watercooled rigs? Eventhough as you said they are "just computers"
quote:
Apple hasn't come up with a single "innovation" for as long as I can remember
That's because you haven't noticed how Apple first introduced Mac Mini and iMac which many PC manufacturers just started trying to clone now (read the recent Anand's preview of the Asus Eee Box as a good example), for Apple it's a past business, they moved on. You also haven't noticed futile attempts of MS to clone the iPod success by ripping off iPod and its store. You haven't noticed what iPhone is doing with smartphone market these days. There's really no point in trying to explain you anything 'cause you're totally blind and very narrow minded person. I can't explain you what is color if you're blind. Sorry ;-)
quote:
A power button on the keyboard isn't " ergonomics ".
How about Magsafe? Multitouch touchpad with two-finger scroll in any direction? Fiberoptics backlit keyboard? First 15" and 17" notebooks with LED backlight? Thinnest and lightest 17" notebook in the world? The only 24" monoblock PC in the world? Not enough for you? ;-)
quote:
You "used to be what"?
I used to be blind and narrow minded like you.
quote:
What happened to make you lose these qualities as you got older ?
I tried different machines and OSes, went from Windows to OS/2 to Linux to Mac OS X and back to Windows. When you do these things and experience full spectrum of platforms and approaches you become wiser and start making fun of blind PC zealots like I am doing it now ;-)
quote:
We were talking about PC repair ?
Well, if you don't understand my car analogies then there's really not much I can say. Maybe you'll grow wiser and start understanding them later, I hope.
quote:
Do you not understand that on a $300 PC you just have to accept it doesn't have everything possible ? But a 1k+ Mac ? No, this is no innovation. This is selling less for more
Did you notice that Sony charges more for their ultraportable Vaio TZ with even worse hardware than MacBook Air? No, you didn't. Like I said speaking with a blind is hard.
quote:
They sell well because they are dirt cheap.
And also because having DVD in them actually means not that much, contrary to what you're trying to prove (that DVD MUST be in a notebook no matter what)
quote:
The last thing, the very LAST THING, Apple wants is Macintosh components being sold by aggressive retailers on the open market.
Same's true for Sony Vaio. Would you like to bash Sony Vaio now?
quote:
Again, time to bring our discussion back to its center. Mac's are not innovative, " luxurious " ( only a Mac fan would being luxury into a PC debate ) or premium in ANY WAY other than price.
That's actually a nice litmus test for ya. Will you bash Sony Vaio with the same arguments? Yes or no?

This test will answer a lot of my questions about you. I'm really looking forward to your answer.


RE: Seriously?
By Pirks on 5/29/2008 4:21:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
At some point you WILL need to use an optical drive
Tell that to Asus Eee PC makers! :P

Hahaha

ROFL :))


RE: Seriously?
By Reclaimer77 on 5/29/2008 5:33:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Tell that to Asus Eee PC makers! :P

Hahaha

ROFL :))


Yes because the Eee is a high end laptop that costs over one thousand dollars ??

" Rofl " indeed.


RE: Seriously?
By hopsandmalt on 5/28/2008 1:11:33 PM , Rating: 2
Im sorry as well.

I love the new Office UI. It is exactly what was needed to streamline Office use.


RE: Seriously?
By just4U on 5/28/2008 1:15:41 PM , Rating: 2
I don't use MS OFFICE but i've heard alot of good things by those who have adopted the 07 variant. From what I understand it's a huge success for Microsoft and very well recieved.


RE: Seriously?
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 5/28/2008 2:59:17 PM , Rating: 2
Indeed. Office 2007 is excellent. I haven't gotten any user complaints yet, they all seem to be very happy to have it.


RE: Seriously?
By Ringold on 5/28/2008 3:11:44 PM , Rating: 2
I agree. Purely anecodotal on my own part, but people I know have generally gone through the following stages:

1: First look. They hate it.
2: They start to use it. They're not used to it, so they're annoyed.
3: They get used to it. Then they realize how much nicer it is, especially when one has to spend a lot of time in it at once.
4: Love.

To the contrary of the OP, I've not yet met anyone who wasn't a linux zealot that didn't prefer it.

Before this, I didn't think 'ergonomics' applied to software. Wrong! OpenOffice might be free, but I happily paid for Office 2007.


RE: Seriously?
By guacamojo on 5/28/2008 3:06:50 PM , Rating: 2
The more I think about it, the more I think this must be more geared for the tablet and surface computing markets. MS wants to own those spaces, and supporting multi-touch is a natural progression in that direction.

As a desktop interface element, I hope I don't have to use it much.

As far as Office 2007's upgraded interface, I guess I haven't met any of you. :)

I've not seen that 2007 streamlines anything except style changes, which aren't usually the focus of my efforts. I may be in the minority on that, though. My point is still that among the average users that I've talked to (a small sample, I admit), Office 2007 hasn't been any kind of an improvement over 2003, rather the reverse. Perhaps those curmudgeonly users don't like to change their antiquated ways. I can't say I completely disagree. I never bothered to learn the Dvorak keyboard, either.

As far as commercial success, Office is the de-facto standard in the workplace, and I'd be surprised if it didn't do well. I'm not sure that the interface can take credit or blame on that account.


RE: Seriously?
By glennpratt on 5/28/2008 3:46:22 PM , Rating: 2
As an IT consultant, I haven't met anyone that is unhappy with Office 2007. And these are not computer savvy people. Dvorak would probably make their heads explode.

quote:
I've not seen that 2007 streamlines anything except style changes, which aren't usually the focus of my efforts.


This is actually a big improvement for my clients, people are making documents that fit their company style - and they barely need to think about it.

It's all anecdotal, but I haven't met anyone who gave Office 2007 an honest chance and doesn't like it. Enough to buy it over OpenOffice? Enough to upgrade from 2003? Maybe not, but that's not the point.


So wait a minute...
By pity on 5/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: So wait a minute...
By tehbiz on 5/28/2008 2:21:09 PM , Rating: 1
or maybe we can have an operating system thats so awesome that it requires only specific hardware that you have to buy from microsoft only to get periodical updates or "bug fixes" that you have to pay for, which in turn create new bugs and prevents you from using the software that "just works" on your operating because it "doesnt work anymore". oh and pay about a thousand dollars more than a competitors machine that does everything with less hassle and has more support.


RE: So wait a minute...
By pity on 5/28/2008 2:37:29 PM , Rating: 2
You mistake me for a Mac zealot, I'm simply frustrated with Windows is all. At this rate we'll be sticking with XP through Fall 2015


RE: So wait a minute...
By tehbiz on 5/29/2008 4:52:26 PM , Rating: 2
how many machines do you have vista on?


RE: So wait a minute...
By DASQ on 5/28/2008 4:55:19 PM , Rating: 1
You think Apple invented multi-input touch sensitive screens?


RE: So wait a minute...
By Pirks on 5/28/2008 8:01:28 PM , Rating: 2
Not invented but sold most of the products based on this technology *cough* iPhone *cough*


SAWEET!
By fm2001 on 5/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: SAWEET!
By tehbiz on 5/28/2008 2:17:30 PM , Rating: 5
yeah if you upgraded to leopard its probably a good idea to give up your mac now. does it still 'bluescreen' or have they fixed that yet.


"People Don't Respect Confidentiality in This Industry" -- Sony Computer Entertainment of America President and CEO Jack Tretton













botimage
Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki