Reader Comments

From Paul's review, it looks like he not only disliked UAP, he loathed it.:-) In parts 4 and 5 of his review he has slammed MS in general and Vista in particular. I wonder why he gave it a five-head (5 star) rating, though?

Good question. In the meantime, here's a special Vista feature presentation: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4134446112378047444&q=Motorrider&pl=true

After this week's fiasco on the NGs, I hope we get this update this week but I'll beleive it when I see it.

I *knew* when I saw bonch's link that it would be Apple related. Bonch: In those items that were shown, Vista does them better. I can elaborate if necessary. As for those who think Vista is just eye-candy and no substance, look at this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_Windows_Vista Does OS X have *All* of those features and more? Not to my knowledge!

"major changes to Windows Backup and the Windows Recovery Environment, and a further deemphasizing of the virtual folders/saved searches functionality, which drops almost all support for keywords." Why would you remove funtionality from a feature more likely to be used by most people every day? Screw the recovery and backup management, these have never been an issue for me. Just buy a extrenal hardrive and cheap backup software to run everynight.

Bonch, first of all, why are you posting the same comment all over the place? Secondly, the video discusses a very small subset of features in Vista. Thirdly, MS had planned to have features like desktop search in Vista before Apple released OS X Tiger. Fourthly, when Paul says he expected this OS to be out of the world, I wonder what he was talking about. If Vista is stable and fast, it'll succeed mainly because under its new Aero glass graphics, it's still a familiar Windows Operating System at heart.

I read through the wiki list of WinVista features, but I'm still not impressed. The most meaningful features are already available via third parties. I'm NOT attacking NateB2! Vista is not meaningless and will undoubtedly be finanically successful. However, I respectfully contend that Microsoft is not creating a compelling reason to upgrade.

I agree that Vista could have been better. Many of the features are either already available through third parties and some features like Win Calendar are direct copies of OS X applications. MS, with so many people working on it, could have done better. The problem is that MS cannot do something dramatic with Vista the way they did with Windows 95. Things are different today and MS has to ensure that whatever they do, Vista has to be a Windows OS. When the average joe upgrades to Vista from Windows XP, he should immediately be at home with it. That's what MS wants. Of course, vista would have been a lot more relavant had it been released a year ago.

"I'm NOT attacking NateB2!" No offense taken :) A "compelling reason" can be very subjective. If someone finds out that features they consider very important are now in Windows Vista, they will consider it a "compelling" reason to upgrade. Likewise, someone such as mswrisner looked through the list and did not find features he thought were important, and thus he does not find it not a "compelling" reason to upgrade. Both views are perfectly acceptable! What IS unacceptable is the constant bashing of the opposite OS and constantly writing/flaming in almost EVERY SINGLE ARTICLE how bad it is. Summary: differing opinions are fine, flaming is not.

"Thirdly, MS had planned to have features like desktop search in Vista before Apple released OS X Tiger." For those of us who actually remember this in 2003... Both companies (who also were not the only two) were in discussions of a so-called "desktop search" feature. Steve Jobs revealed Spotlight at the World Wide Developer's Conference in the first week of June, 2004 and one year later it was released. Jobs showed the world exactly what Apple's feature would be before Microsoft showed the world what they would have in Vista. Apple gave developers a full beta of Spotlight before Microsoft's developments in Vista. The "idea" has been thrown around for years yo. Apple most certainly did beat Microsoft to the punch on this feature, and it won't be until two years after Apple released it that Microsoft can finally make it happen. What's really important here? This gets thrown around more than the word love in this industry. Who came up with the idea first is highly up for extensive debate, even party camps don't know who truely had the team that had the idea first. IMO, it doesn't matter. Apple released a full developer conference with betas to test and work on the feature two years before Microsoft's last summer. Apple also released the final version along side Tiger one and a half to possibly two years before Microsoft Vista. Credit is given where credit is due, and who earned the credit for producing this way ahead of everyone else is Apple. An idea is only an idea, but who put it to use years ahead of Microsoft shark?

"[UAP] is now linked to something called "Secure Desktop," which is what the CTRL+ALT+DEL keyboard shortcut will now trigger as well." The "now trigger as well" in this statement is inappropriate, as CTRL+ALT+DEL has switched to the Secure (aka Winlogon) Desktop since NT 3.51 (except on 9x systems and XP Home Edition). From MSDN (http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/dllproc/base/desktops.asp): "If you press the CTRL+ALT+DEL key sequence, you are switched to the Winlogon desktop."

"Does OS X have *All* of those features and more? Not to my knowledge!" In various forms, not only does OS X have all those features, but it's had many of them since 2002. Look, even Paul Thurrott called Vista a "warmed over copy of OS X Tiger." Why can't you guys just accept it, laugh at Microsoft, and move on? I'm not saying Windows is going away anytime soon. But Microsoft's credibility is totally shot. Vista feels like a joke compared to the super-polished OS X and iLife suite. "Thirdly, MS had planned to have features like desktop search in Vista before Apple released OS X Tiger." But Apple had file indexing even back in the OS9 days, and when they added the real-time search field to iTunes, they decided to add it to OS X. "Fourthly, when Paul says he expected this OS to be out of the world, I wonder what he was talking about." He's talking about what Microsoft promised in 2003. I still have the old PDC build when the Sidebar still used "tiles." "If Vista is stable and fast, it'll succeed mainly because under its new Aero glass graphics, it's still a familiar Windows Operating System at heart." Ugh...that's why it'll suck. Windows is a teetering old house of cards. The interface sucks, the technology sucks. Usability studies have shown that users are faster in the OS X interface than in the Windows interface, because the Windows interface requires many more starts and stops with the cursor, much more pinpointing, many more dialogs and wizards, and so forth. For instance, a Mac user jams the mouse to the top of the screen to hit a menu--Windows users have grown accustomed to having to slow the cursor and pinpoint a menu because it's attached to the window. Just one example. Where do you think your "Recycle Bin" came from? Your "File Edit View Window Help" menu? Everything in Windows is a copy of the original--MacOS. Why not use the operating system where the innovation originates from? And not the third-rate clone of some monopoly.

"Look, even Paul Thurrott called Vista a 'warmed over copy of OS X Tiger.'" Oh yeah! When it convenient to you, PAul suddenly becomes the expert. At other times, he doesn't know what he's talking about. Isn't that right ? :-) "But Apple had file indexing even back in the OS9 days, and when they added the real-time search field to iTunes, they decided to add it to OS X." Windows had file indexing before the XP days too, for your information. "Windows is a teetering old house of cards. The interface sucks, the technology sucks. Usability studies have shown that users are faster in the OS X interface than in the Windows interface, because the Windows interface requires many more starts and stops with the cursor, much more pinpointing, many more dialogs and wizards, and so forth. " Definitely. If everyone in the US switches to macs, the GDP will go up 100%, won't it? In fact, Windows is so horrible that some retailers are preinstalling Windows on macs just to increase sales.

Bonch, there's no reason to be so fanatical about this. I've used both XP and OS X and inmy opinion, OS X is technologically years ahead of Windows. I don't know about Vista, but I don't see anything groundbreaking in it. However, Vista may work just because it's windows.

"Look, even Paul Thurrott called Vista a 'warmed over copy of OS X Tiger.'" Seems like the windows team has run out of ideas.

"Build 5365 will include major changes to the User Account Protection (UAP) feature" I really didn't think Microsoft was stupid enough to leave it in it's current form of dialog hell. I changed Internet Explorer for people who have to use it (or dislike the alternatives for whatever reason) to where it prompted for ActiveX controls, and it drove them crazy with all the prompts. Glad to see Microsoft's making changes there. "May 22, two days earlier than the previous schedule." If it was May 22nd of last year, that would have been better. :| "Why can't you guys just accept it, laugh at Microsoft, and move on? " "Vista feels like a joke compared to the super-polished OS X and iLife suite." "OS X is technologically years ahead of Windows." "Why not use the operating system where the innovation originates from?" Are you on Apple's payroll or something Bonch? Yeah, the platform is so advanced it only works on Apple's hardware (here comes the BUT THAT'S WHAT MAKES IT STABLE comment, even though Linux and Windows 2000+ don't really have stability problems to begin with, and they work on a helluva lot more than Mac OS X is designed to). What exactly is it that makes it advanced, anyways? Because Apple says so (yeah, i've seen the picture on the site about it being built on top a "rock-solid" UNIX foundation, but no explanation as to how their UNIXish implementation is rock-solid [I don't need a lecture on UNIX architectures, but feel free to give me one if you like seeing yourself type])? Oh, and that super-polished comment. Yeah, Mac OS X looks decent, but it's got some incosistencies , like apps made by Apple that come with the OS using their own skin. That alone makes it seem less "polished". I've heard this sort of thing will be fixed in the next OSX release (although it could have just been speculation). I haven't even used OS X, so I can't comment any further (except that i'm glad their killing off that polished metal thing, didn't like it from screenshots).

"Bonch: In those items that were shown, Vista does them better. I can elaborate if necessary." You know, my favorite part of this statement is how it illustrates the way Microsoft fans think. Vista doesn't do any of those things better--in fact, it doesn't do them at all. Vista's not OUT yet. It's not out until early 2007, and by then OS X Leopard will be out. You're claiming a product that doesn't exist yet does something better than a product released way back in April of '05. For some reason, Microsoft fans like to pretend that if Vista is mentioned in the MSDN brochures and Windows fansites, it magically exists as a real product that you can use and compare to. Nope, sorry, Vista's not out, and it's been delayed to 2007, so happy waiting. That means Vista can't do any of that stuff, because it's not OUT yet. Not until 2007, and by then, it'll all be dated anyway.