89 replies to this topic

[gwprod12]

I dont much care for quicktime either.  I've always been annoyed by it's insistance on opening a new windows for every file, even if that file is being opened in the player itself.  Also, I really like full-screen.

[myzar]

Unstable Connection, on Jun 17 2006, 09:36 PM, said:

To all of you, who are unsatisfied with OSX

1) Download Pathfinder

it doesn't work logged as root no idea why tho , it's what finder should be  

Unstable Connection, on Jun 17 2006, 09:36 PM, said:

4) Windows from the kernel up is a very unstable OS, due to bad memory management, registry and no security.

I never saw win2k3 crash on me unless i overclocked too much or i was using some buggy beta videodriver

username931, on Jun 19 2006, 12:31 AM, said:

I agree. OSX is working smoothe for me now. Obviously windows security and archetecture are crap. I've realized that it never crashes - BUT it does stop responding often and since theres no protected memory the whole system fails.

huh no protected memory i see you must be stuck using win3.11

[John the Geek]

gwprod12, on Jun 16 2006, 07:45 PM, said:

I also like being able to alt-tab to a window.

You can Apple-Tab to the application you want, then Apple ` to the specific window.

ultrasoul, on Jun 17 2006, 11:02 PM, said:

1) Windows ...  has been around for a much longer time and more people have used it.

Apple's OS has been around longer than Windows.   Windows 1.0 was based on Mac OS when Microsoft had prototypes of them in 1983 to build Mac software on.    Apple paid Xerox (in stock) to spend 3 days learning from the Palo Alto project, then hired many of those programmers to write the Mac OS once Xerox scrapped the project.  GUI versions of Microsoft Word and Excel were released in 1985 for Mac before Windows 1.0 was released.

Still, you are correct that more people use Windows, but that doesn't necessarily make it better.

Also price of hardware, not a lack of licensing, is what killed Apple in the 90s.  Steve Jobs (and his ego) were no longer with the company during it's downfall.

[antrunix]

On my 855GME intel laptop :
- no 3D graphics driver
- no Wifi driver
- no CPU Freq utility

OSX86 is useless.

With Novell Suse linux 10.1 I have got all that. Even more as for example my french Hachette 2006 encyclopedia native installed!

Attached Files

•  hachette.jpg   100.03K   174 downloads

[rogabean]

gwprod12, on Jun 18 2006, 11:06 PM, said:

Yeah, a version of quicktime that supports full screen and has the codecs for RM and wmv would be swell.

You want full screen support in QT.. that is available... it's called Quicktime Pro.

I figured I'd stop in since I've been busy lately... and decided I wanted to comment in this thread.

Different GUI's for different folks. I happen to find the OS X GUI perfect for my taste, others may not. It's a neverending battle there. Period.

I've had both crash... the iBook was crashing 2 days ago (turned out to be faulty RAM in the end, but whatever)... and my Windows based laptop crashes if I watch a Real video while downloading torrents at the same time. everytime. without fail.

No OS is bulletproof. No OS will ever be perfect. They will just work to be the best they can be for the intended audience. If the Mac GUI isn't to your liking, then you are most likely not the intended audience. and in reverse the same is true. But both are very customizable if you know what you are doing.

blah. in other words.. there is nothing to /flame here.

[gwprod12]

Yeah... I would have preferred a media player that came with the OS to have full-screen support.  I know you can "buy" a "better" version of quicktime.

I am, for the most part, not disappointed with OS X.  The UI isnt very friendly though, at least to my mind.  I am just sorta defending windows especially from the sort of dogmatic attacks it receives.  Mac OS X isnt utterly stable, and Windows doesnt BSOD every 2 seconds.  Poorly written applications (especially Real Player, in my view) can wreak havoc on both systems.

[INFNITE]

boohoo, no full screen.  Just load up Serial Box and you can easily find QuickTime Pro's serial #.  No need to install cracks and {censored}.

[Colonel]

Quote

Yeah... I would have preferred a media player that came with the OS to have full-screen support. I know you can "buy" a "better" version of quicktime.

Here. I wrote an app with AppleScript that will play movies full screen in Quicktime without Quicktime Pro. Just double click the app after you've started the movie and enjoy free fullscreen goodness.

Attached Files

•  qtfullscreen.zip   17.3K   406 downloads

[gwprod12]

I would rather have some KFC, but I appreciate it none-theless.

[Mactelman]

First, I'll take my alt-tab LIVE PREVIEWS in Vista over OS X any day.  I also would prefer that the media player which comes with my OS does not have a nag screen, many PRO grayed out features on the menu, and limited functionality.  Windows Media Player is a much better bundled app than Quicktime.  Why should I have to pay $30 to fully experience the media player enclosed with my OS, especially since the binaries to do all of what I want are sitting right there on my disk, just waiting for a serial number.  And pirating a serial IS NOT a valid arguement.  For those of you constantly advocating Microsoft Office on the Mac, I hate to disappoint you all, but there is no friggin way it is better on the Mac than the PC.  Microsoft would deliberately not do that.  First of all, half the features are missing from Powerpoint, word and Excel, second, there are about 10 more great Office applications which aren't available for the mac, such as Microsoft Access, which kills Filemaker Pro.  To me it is a lot easier to use the Windows interface productively than the Mac interface.  I don't loose windows at all in Windows, and It's much more user friendly, the mouse tracking is also better.  No offence, but Rogabean, if you crash while doing torrents and realplayer, you just must fudge something up.  This excuse that Windows BSODs and crashes every 5 seconds is fanboyism that is wearing old, because my Vista install is more stable than my used to be OS X 86 install.  Not to mention Windows is faster, and Adobe/Macromedia, have openly admitted this.  I also don't like the Apple only options, Windows has more software out to choose from.  As a PC user once always excited about Mac, (Liked them 5 good years before this project, could never afford one), I got to use it both on PowerPC (at the store), and osx86 at my house, and I was really disappointed.  I was so glad to get Windows back, and I will never leave it again.  I have been on both sides of this issue, and as a heavy PC user, I feel Windows is a better operating system.

[INFNITE]

Mactelman, on Jun 20 2006, 04:53 PM, said:

First, I'll take my alt-tab LIVE PREVIEWS in Vista over OS X any day.

and I'll take Exposé over alt-tab live preview any day.

[cyrana]

The flame is strong here. lol.

Oh well, I still say it just comes down to what someone is more used to using.  I like both fairly equally, although for just every day 'normal' use I prefer OS X over Windows, but Vista is making some strides in some areas.  (And prefer both over Ubuntu, which I have to use at work).

As for the alt-tab live previews, I also think Expose has it done better.

[daefiman]

You know what. Ubuntu will solve all your problems. Hardware support for most everything; apps you can use; IT'S FREE as in speech; and more eye-candy than you can droll at. Just look at AIGLX(or XGL)/Compiz. Beauty. Better than Aqua, XP or Metacity any day. XP and OS X have one serious problem, that they are closed-source. I see OS X opening up to the FOSS world and the advantages it can bring. I'll never use either until they are freed up. I don't even know why I come to these forums, if I'm not going to install the software. But that's my problem...

[myzar]

daefiman, on Jun 20 2006, 09:14 PM, said:

You know what. Ubuntu will solve all your problems. Hardware support for most everything; apps you can use; IT'S FREE as in speech; and more eye-candy than you can droll at. Just look at AIGLX(or XGL)/Compiz. Beauty. Better than Aqua, XP or Metacity any day. XP and OS X have one serious problem, that they are closed-source. I see OS X opening up to the FOSS world and the advantages it can bring. I'll never use either until they are freed up. I don't even know why I come to these forums, if I'm not going to install the software. But that's my problem...

No apps, no games , far worse situation than osx

[A Nonny Moose]

Mactelman, on Jun 20 2006, 12:53 PM, said:

First, I'll take my alt-tab LIVE PREVIEWS in Vista over OS X any day.  I also would prefer that the media player which comes with my OS does not have a nag screen, many PRO grayed out features on the menu, and limited functionality.  Windows Media Player is a much better bundled app than Quicktime.  Why should I have to pay $30 to fully experience the media player enclosed with my OS, especially since the binaries to do all of what I want are sitting right there on my disk, just waiting for a serial number.  And pirating a serial IS NOT a valid arguement.

Well, iTunes does support full screen video playing if you're unhappy with QuickTime Player.  Now shut up.

Quote

For those of you constantly advocating Microsoft Office on the Mac, I hate to disappoint you all, but there is no friggin way it is better on the Mac than the PC.  Microsoft would deliberately not do that.  First of all, half the features are missing from Powerpoint, word and Excel, second, there are about 10 more great Office applications which aren't available for the mac, such as Microsoft Access, which kills Filemaker Pro.

I never could understand Access, so maybe that's why I'm still using AppleWorks' database module.  It just works and is simply amazing.  Microsoft itself has admitted (with the advent of the G4 iMac nonetheless) that the Mac version of Office is better than it's Windows version.  Can't argue with the company that makes it.  

And about PowerPoint sucking--why the hell do you think we have Keynote?  It's because PowerPoint absolutely sucks (on both platforms).

Quote

To me it is a lot easier to use the Windows interface productively than the Mac interface.  I don't loose windows at all in Windows, and It's much more user friendly, the mouse tracking is also better.  No offence, but Rogabean, if you crash while doing torrents and realplayer, you just must fudge something up.  This excuse that Windows BSODs and crashes every 5 seconds is fanboyism that is wearing old, because my Vista install is more stable than my used to be OS X 86 install.

Sad that I got complete system freezes in Windows while trying to fix it.  Within thirty secons of it starting up.  So then I reboot and it freezes again...in thirty seconds.  Plus, you're comparing a Vista install to a patched (read INHERENTLY UNSTABLE) OS X86 install.  Care to explain why you think an inherently unstable system should be on par with something that isn't?

Quote

Not to mention Windows is faster, and Adobe/Macromedia, have openly admitted this.  I also don't like the Apple only options, Windows has more software out to choose from.  As a PC user once always excited about Mac, (Liked them 5 good years before this project, could never afford one), I got to use it both on PowerPC (at the store), and osx86 at my house, and I was really disappointed.  I was so glad to get Windows back, and I will never leave it again.  I have been on both sides of this issue, and as a heavy PC user, I feel Windows is a better operating system.

Windows only feels faster because the system was designed to make individual keystrokes feel faster on the system.  It's an illusion, a myth so to speak.  So the Windows system "feels" faster.  Also, just because there is more software to choose from doesn't mean it's good software.  There's plenty of crap to choose from in Windows.  There's also crap for Mac, to be fair, but there's a lot less crap.

Gee, Adobe supports the G3, G4, G5, makes their applications scream on those processors compared to Intel offerings, but they say "Windows is better"?  Sounds like some major doubletalk from the makers of Adobe crapware, now doesnt it?

As for the final point, you just answered your own question.  There are certain Windows apps you need to use and the opportunity cost of utilizing a Macintosh system is too great.  So you have to use a Windows system, which is fine.  You also made a value judgment on both OS's, which is also fine; you're entitled to your opinion just like everyone else is.  But don't go spreading around crap without getting a huge rebuttal.

[Mactelman]

Well, to me, expose is the OS X way of handling it's poor Window Management.  Alt tab is just a convenience.  It's not just the fact that iTunes is an audio jukebox, and Video playback it inconvienient, it's the repetitive nags to get pro labeled all over the application where the full binaries are right there on the hard drive.  As far as Appleworks, whatever works for you fine, but Access has been corporately deployed.  The Macintosh Business unit said they think the Mac version is better than the Windows version.  The facts here are getting twisted, of course they would, as of course the Windows department wouldn't, that'd be suicidal.  Either way, you can in fact still argue with the company that makes it, as they don't always know it's functionality beyond the code to the average user.  And you certainly can't tell me it's better even when it's under emulation?  I love how it used to be, oh Powerpoint for mac is great, Apple releases keynote, then suddenly Powerpoint sucks.  If it weren't for Microsoft, Apple would have died in 97, from the monitary investment, to IE and Office.  Keynote lacks many of the matured features that are included in Powerpoint, that's the opinion of many, that said, it still is a nice app.  Sounds like you're doing something wrong if you get those kinds of problems.  Even minimal Windows Maintenance could prevent that.  I'm not even talking just about patched OS X 86, I know a few people who have regular macs, and who often get the BBOD, and Kernel Panics.  Adobe was the one who said that Intel was superior.  I am not spreading crap, the people of this forum are just closed minded fanboys.  I reccomend Macs to a ton of people.  For email and web/music and all, it's the way to go, and it's still a nice os, but for power users like myself, if I want to game or do digital media, I go windows, if I want a stable *nix system for serving, or stable secure productivity, I'll use linux.  That leaves really nothing for OS X.  No hard feelings, OK?

[tehsu]

If the ppc was so great, why did they switch to x86

[ampTK]

IBM didn´t delivered as promised

[gwprod12]

I wish we could just leave the whole Mac vs Windows thing at a personal preference / fulfills needs level.  Mac OS is better at some things, weaker at others, and vice versa.  

Neither one is "Better" in an absolute sense.

[Gooly]

if u r a windows user, u will think windows is better. think about old sco n sun solaris , think about the stability not the gui.