Numberzz Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 Most people know that I recently wrote a page or so saying that Paul Thurrot was lying when he was saying that Leopard was a service pack. Now he has changed his website to say the following: Now, that made me think that Vista had no bugs, glitches, or slowdowns of any kind. But then I remembered the good times. Good times, good times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lkr Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 old pics are old Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numberzz Posted November 8, 2007 Author Share Posted November 8, 2007 New pics are new. This is at the time when Vista was a kinda new OS. Leopard has been out for less than a week for comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhbas0001 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 I would say that for what both products are (Mac OS X running within a restricted ecosystem, and Windows Vista being compatible with virtually any hardware combination you could imagine), Windows Vista is remarkebly stable. I've been running Windows Vista for the past several months, and I haven't had a single blue screen of death or hardware incompatability. Having said that though, I also have a Macbook Pro that runs flawlessly, and which I use for the majority of my school work, music, and movies. I'm planning on upgrading the Macbook to Leopard in a couple of months once all the bugs have been sorted out. At the moment though, Leopard does seem less stable than Windows Vista. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apowerr Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 I would say that for what both products are (Mac OS X running within a restricted ecosystem, and Windows Vista being compatible with virtually any hardware combination you could imagine), Windows Vista is remarkebly stable. Seriously Numberzz, Vista works great with nearly any processor, any video card, any third party hardware you pick up off the shelves. Leopard works great on over priced Apple Hardware Stop dissing Vista, it's not bad by any means. And once SP1 comes out there will be no reason to stick with XP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azurael Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 No modern OS is 100% stable, even on idealised, perfect hardware. They're just too big and complex. Vista is in practical terms no more or less unstable than any modern version of Linux, OS X, FreeBSD. Whatever I'm using, I might have a BSOD or an unrecoverable lockup every couple of months of computer use unless I've done something stupid like pushed my overclock a bit far. I could probably statistically prove that Vista crashes more than OS X for me, but in reality when you're talking about a once in a blue moon occurrence either way, it means nothing. Most Windows crashes are caused by badly written drivers anyway. Remember, any driver that's essential for the OS' operation is written by, or at least seriously quality-controlled-by Apple. That's a luxury Windows, Linux and just about every other 'mainstream' OS I can think of doesn't have. I could probably just as easily have a Mac OS kernel dump (or at least a permanent Safari-induced rainbow wheel of doom ) as my avatar now. My reasons for disliking Vista have nothing to do with it's stability. And as for this: It reminds me of when Stuffit Expander used to count up rather than down when decompressig files, a bug they didn't fix for many, many releases. It always amused me that as the opeation neared completion, I had 360,000 years remaining! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gooly Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 Vista crashed yesterday. I rolled back to XP. I lost most valuable datas cause vista corrupted my partition table & MBR as well. not able to recover it. waste of time in reinstalling it. I ran hardware test last night, i dont find any hw issues. Mac crashed earlier due to driver issues. But now, it is perfect. No, I am using OS 10. 4.10 as primary OS. Sometimes BSD. I have seen BSOD in one of the ATM's as well. New products are waste of money, not really that stable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLiDE FTW!!1 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 Just suffered a Leopard crash... yes, it's fun trying to save your pages work when Finder doesn't want to gtfo. Safari seems to crash alot on my lately, too... and I'm on a macbook Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest h2a Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 Seriously Numberzz, Vista works great with nearly any processor, any video card, any third party hardware you pick up off the shelves. Leopard works great on over priced Apple Hardware Stop dissing Vista, it's not bad by any means. And once SP1 comes out there will be no reason to stick with XP. are you kidding me. for one thing, vista is everything BUT backwards compatible with "any" hardware, and the "overpriced apple hardware" thing is such an old and dated argument that it really isn't necessary to bring it into this discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neilis Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 As has been said, Vista isn't bad regarding stability. I use it on a laptop regularly that I've had for about 9 months or so now, and I've had zero crashes out of it. It does have an underperforming video driver that I can't find an update for, but that's just performance (and not THAT significant), rather than stability. My two machines running OS X are also both stable, as is my Linux machine, and two other machines running Windows XP. Truthfully, in the hands of any competent user, all modern OS's are pretty stable and work well. Now there are other reasons to use alternate platforms. Mac OS X is arguably more stylish and polished (opinion of course), and it has very little problem with spyware or viruses. Some elements of it's interface are also quite nice. It's also rather easy to use and software installs are cake. It does suffer from a lack of software, limited (and expensive) hardware choices, and a few oddball user interface quirks though. Linux is better from a community standpoint. It's people working together to produce something good. It's free, very stable, runs on a very nice selection of hardware and platforms, and if you're dedicated, you can make it look just as slick/polished as a Mac or Windows system. It's interface scheme is flexible enough to make it do just about anything you want. Negatives here though are a lack of commercial software (lots of open source stuff but niches like games don't work well for this), a dated GUI infrastructure (X11), and a complicated method of maintenance (it's OK if you stick to only stuff your distro offers, but then you get stuck with one method that will vary from distro to distro, your software is limited to what they offer, and versions lag behind. If you want to install a generic "Linux" program you're usually stuck compiling from a tar ball, which is not newbie-friendly). Windows is also good. It's fast, stable, runs on virtually anything with an x86 processor, has a polished interface, and a selection of software unrivaled by any other platform in existence. On the negative side it's security has been lacking, and this has lead to numerous viruses and spyware for the platform. It's also rather expensive despite running on cheap hardware, and the company that produces it has shown time and time again that they want to drive the industry further down the road to a future full of DRM on our media and subscription licensing on our software. So, overall, all of them will get the job done. Use whichever happens to suit your needs the best. Being an enthusiast, I tinker with all of them, though I end up spending most of my regular usage time in OS X these days, while gaming time is spent in Windows. Linux I like to play with. I program for it, and spend a lot of time customizing my box, but it's kinda like a mechanic's hot rod. He works on it all the time, and when it's on the road and looks great and performs like a dream, but he generally enjoys working on it more than actually driving it . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vbetts Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 Yeah, Vista hasen't crashed for me once yet. So far, it's performing better than XP did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forceman Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 HeyNumberzz You know you can't knock Vista because now the hackintosh people come out and defend it. It reminds me of when Stuffit Expander used to count up rather than down when decompressig files, a bug they didn't fix for many, many releases. It always amused me that as the opeation neared completion, I had 360,000 years remaining! Stuffit Expander is third party software, the compression in Vista is as slow as hell and explorer takes a good 30 seconds to come up(longer sometimes). Also transferring data on Vista is slow, to a usb key it's as slow as USB1. It took Microsoft about 6 months to fix the USB issue and all the rest of you poor Vista users will have to wait for SP1 and hope it's fixed. Paul Thurrot is on the defensive just like Microsoft is, it's like Apple are close to getting 50% market share or something. He and others need to learn not a go on the defensive to much when your favorite OS has 90% of the market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhbas0001 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 are you kidding me. for one thing, vista is everything BUT backwards compatible with "any" hardware, and the "overpriced apple hardware" thing is such an old and dated argument that it really isn't necessary to bring it into this discussion. I've been running Windows Vista Home Premium on my Acer Aspire 5100 for almost a year now, and I haven't encounted a single hardware incompatability, or system crash since I installed it in Februrary. Microsoft even goes to the trouble of releasing new drivers through Windows Update, which is very convenient. In fact, I haven't installed a single third-party driver on this sytem, which is power by the notorious Radeon Xpress 200M. Having said that, although the system generally runs quite well, file transfer is painfully slow. It seems to take forever to calculate the estimated time of the transfer. I'm told that will be fixed with SP1. Of course everybody's experiences will be different, but I just thought I'd share mine with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayanami Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 Hey..it's you again =D I had an Acer Aspire 5100 before I bought my MacBook Pro. It came with Windows Media Center, which came off pretty quick. I fooled around with a few versions of Linux, and went straight to Vista the day it came out. In fact, I waited outside Circuit City for them to open. I hated Windows XP. HATED. I longed for something dark and minimalistic, which was how I always ended up skinning things on XP. When Vista came out, I loved it. I still do. I'm just waiting for 64-bit drivers from Apple. Waiting. And Waiting.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~pcwiz Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 Heres what I say: XP rules. The interface ain't great but XP does everything its supposed to nicely without problems. Its also compatible with any hardware you pick off the shelves. And Ayanami, now you can get skins for XP that make it look EXACTLY like Vista. Vista is XP with a dumb ram hogging interface garbage called Aero (although rather good looking) and a few minor apps that MS turns into a ENORMOUS deal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayanami Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 Heres what I say: XP rules. The interface ain't great but XP does everything its supposed to nicely without problems. Its also compatible with any hardware you pick off the shelves. And Ayanami, now you can get skins for XP that make it look EXACTLY like Vista. Vista is XP with a dumb ram hogging interface garbage called Aero (although rather good looking) and a few minor apps that MS turns into a ENORMOUS deal I can't agree with your first statement...I had issues with XP all the time. Programs crashed, would run amok and eat up RAM, features would turn themselves on after being disabled from startup.... I had a decent amount of RAM on my Acer, so RAM usage wasn't too noticable. The HD space the OS took up was unreasonable, but I thought it was a major improvement. It wasn't the monster MS built it up to be, but it was a needed improvement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forceman Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 Hey..it's you again =D I had an Acer Aspire 5100 before I bought my MacBook Pro. It came with Windows Media Center, which came off pretty quick. I fooled around with a few versions of Linux, and went straight to Vista the day it came out. In fact, I waited outside Circuit City for them to open. I hated Windows XP. HATED. I longed for something dark and minimalistic, which was how I always ended up skinning things on XP. When Vista came out, I loved it. I still do. I'm just waiting for 64-bit drivers from Apple. Waiting. And Waiting.... Wow thats sad, waiting outside the store for Vista, pity you had to wait another year for them to fix it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhbas0001 Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 Don't you Apple fanatics ever have anything useful to say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~pcwiz Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 I am not an Apple fanatic. Just telling the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhbas0001 Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 Sorry -pcwiz, that comment was directed a Forceman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forceman Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 Sorry -pcwiz, that comment was directed a Forceman. Seriously, would you expect anything else, I've noticed a lot of hackintosh people coming here spreading FUD and simply can't do their research about how Apple works. OS X users can joke as much as we want about Vista, if you can't take it go to a Vista forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhbas0001 Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 It's ashame there are people out there as closed-minded as you Forceman. A real shame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forceman Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 It's ashame there are people out there as closed-minded as you Forceman. A real shame. Why am I closed minded, I'm I not allowed not like Vista?, I use Vista and dont like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhbas0001 Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 No, you're not closed-minded because you don't like Windows Vista, you're closed-minded because you can't come to grips with the fact that somebody else might like Windows enough to queue for it overnight, and rather than acknowledging their right to do so (and appreciating why it’s no different than waiting several days outside an Apple store for an iPhone), you chose to ridicule them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forceman Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 awwww, go get a sense of humor because you forgot to bring it with you when you joined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts