| |
|
Welcome to KnowledgeSutra - Dear Guest | |
New York Times Says Vista Is A Copy Of Mac Os X
#1
Posted 18 December 2006 - 09:02 PM
http://video.on.nytimes.com/?fr_story=d146...a4991&rf=bm
Check it out it's funny how much the resemple each other.
#2
Posted 18 December 2006 - 09:19 PM
Widgets does not equal gadgets
#4
Posted 18 December 2006 - 10:30 PM
#5
Posted 18 December 2006 - 11:22 PM
It's not a ripoff guys, can't you see the search botton on Vista is in the bottom left corner. DUH.
#6
Posted 19 December 2006 - 05:54 AM
#7
Posted 19 December 2006 - 05:58 AM
#8
Posted 19 December 2006 - 04:27 PM
#9
Posted 20 December 2006 - 09:08 AM
#10
Posted 20 December 2006 - 10:55 AM
Well... I'm going to stick to Windows XP a little longer. I'm already annoyed that it takes up a lot of RAM by itself because I need my RAM, and I can't exactly purchase an upgrade in my financial state. Sure... it looks pretty, but I don't enjoy lagging 'til kingdom come. I can't leave Windows entirely yet because I need it to run certain programs...
#11
Posted 20 December 2006 - 11:13 AM
What I can't really understand is the video. Is is supposed to attack the claims that Vista is a copy of Mac OS X or the other way around. Because, in my opinion, the video lets you think the exact opposite of what they say. C'mon the last thing with the chess board was a killer. Yeah as if the main difference in the two operating systems come in the chess game. True journalism... Mac OS X has grass chess board and Vista has marble. Yeah thats really important.
Anyway I won't be switching to Vista very soon... at least not as my main operating system. I have it installed as my secondary one and I can say it looks pretty good. As far as the hardware requirements they are high, but not as high as I expected. On my AMD 64 3000+ with 1GB RAM and GeForce 6600 it works decent, even very fast... of course I don't have many software that might slow it down. I don't even have an antivirus on it. So it is still irrelevant. On the other and Vista seems quite unfinished to me. I think Microsoft has rushed it too much... We have waited 5 years I think we could have waited another year. Windows XP is the next Windows 98 x 10.
#12
Posted 20 December 2006 - 11:20 AM
Of course that being the case the creator of linux could sue both Apple and Microsoft on some stuff that went open source to non-open source. Then Apple could sue Microsoft on some junk. Then Microsoft could go bankrupt since they took everyone else's ideas.
You would have to see it in the coding to find out if Microsoft did in fact did do some copy and pasting.. Of course whats funny is that Bill Gates has got some control over Apple computer, since he help Steve Jobs get out of Bankruptcy back in the 90s.
Who knows' he could me pimping out the Mac OS just to see what people think about before working on his own.
#13
Posted 20 December 2006 - 02:00 PM
the only reason I (and probably countless others) use windows is because we don't want to use macs because we're narrowminded individuals who don't like change and thrive on familiarity
98===>XP- was okay, a bit buggy but I could survive
XP===>Vista- *hides under blanket* "I'm scared, what's going on in my desktop- gadgets???"!
every time I use a mac it takes me like 20 minutes to open something! microsoft what are you doing!?
#14
Posted 20 December 2006 - 08:30 PM
And M$ ripped tabbed browsing. They aren't very original, but you can't sue them for stealing Mac Os X. You could just call it a parody.
V for Vista!
#15
Posted 21 December 2006 - 06:46 AM
Quote
Why does it take you 20 mins to open something. They have a dock to put all your most used Applications (programs on Windows) which I have 20 and they fit nicely and the other ones i dont use often are only 3 clicks away. Same amount of clicks as Windows Start > All Programs > Program > .exe file On a mac its Mac HD > Application > Application. Actually quicker.
Quote
#16
Posted 08 January 2007 - 04:07 AM
#18
Posted 08 January 2007 - 01:45 PM
If apple cannot sue microsoft over this thing, that means everyone can make the similar operating system without being sued. Or there is some point that I have missed?
Edited by apacheNewbie, 08 January 2007 - 01:46 PM.
#19
Posted 14 January 2007 - 10:45 AM
#20
Posted 19 January 2007 - 11:52 AM
And another thing, i will NEVER EVER install Vista on my computer... TCPA... No one is going to mess around in my computer, and spy on me... I will rather sell my computer, and never use it again, than agree on that damned TCPA... Trusted computing... Yeah right... Trusted for them
The only reason I'm still using Windows is that I chose my path badly, when I learned programming... But I'm changing that slowly, and soon, it will be bye bye Windows, and hello Linux
#21
Posted 26 January 2007 - 08:36 PM
By the way, there's a difference between Vista and Mac OS X.
Vista, all kinds of games can be played. Cool for all gamers
X, you can only play certain games. Totally sux for real gamers.
Microsoft has my loyalty. Go Microsoft, bankrupt Apple Inc.!!!!
#23
Posted 27 January 2007 - 11:08 PM
BooZker, on Dec 19 2006, 06:54 AM, said:
Not at all. First of all, the possibility of multiple desktops is not supported by any version of windows, but Linux certainly isn't the only one with it. Apple just added a feature to make the switching between these desktops a lot easier and ADDED the ability of exchanging windows between the different desktops or spaces, which in essence, just are different virtual terminal's, Linux keeping the name "desktop", Apple using the name "spaces", nothing wrong with that, not?
Then your statement about windows beeing original... Well when you release your first realy graphical versions of your os, it isn't kind of hard to add new features eh? Concidering versions of windows prior to 95 not beeing graphical, at least not user-friendly graphical.
Linux does this a lot better, but Apple is some leaps ahead with user-friendly GUI's, and it is still coming up with new features. (Anyone ever thought about making a UI like Apple's iPhone for portable phones? I believe not.
What about the games... Well it is true there aren't many games written for Apple computers, but that's because the market isn't big enough. For homepc, Apple's are mainly used in the USA. In Europe and Asia, the pc is more commonly spread, whereas Apple is more used in the professional industry (I think it isn't necessary there to play games, is it?), but Apple is getting more and more spread in Europe. In a few years, I guess there will be more games made for Mac.
#24
Posted 28 January 2007 - 07:01 AM
#25
Posted 28 January 2007 - 08:44 AM
Reply to this topic

1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
















