Reader Comments

Once again - 2007 is the year that Steve jobs has dropped 3 major letdowns on the iNation. I haven't seen Leopard yet...but , it appears that most of the 300 new features found here - http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/ - are actually enhancements to bundled applications. If MS did that, not only would the Apple fanatics be screaming, but the lawsuits would continue. If only it wasn't a $129 upgrade, I'd consider upgrading my Mac so that I could appear to be on a tropical island while video chatting. --tayme

"...so that I could appear to be on a tropical island while video chatting." I personally want to use my mouth on several high-profile celebrities' faces while chatting. Time to retire OSX and blow everyone away with OS XI (eleven)! Yet 'eleven' doesn't sound as good I suppose. ;P

Although this is largely already known information, those that use Boot Camp will be required to upgrade if they wish to continue using it. Nice way to force what must be a relatively sizable cadre of users to fork over the $129. If MS did this, everybody would be demanding blood.

What also makes this interesting is in a year or so, everyone who wants to run the latest applications on the OS X platform will be practically forced to upgrade, especially if those apps utilize "Core Animation", similar to WPF. The difference is Microsoft back-ported WPF to XP, whereas you have to pay for a new OS to get Core Animation. Also, like the above poster said, you will need to pay for the upgrade if you are planning to use Boot Camp. It's amazing how much spin can affect a release - Vista was constantly attacked, even though the feature list is miles long, whereas Leopard has been largely praised, even though it only has 300 new features, most of which are invisible to normal users, and the rest force the users to upgrade to Leopard, if the developers use the new features.

Love the objective reporting, Paul. Typical. "Leopard has been largely praised" Not really. There's been a collective "yawn" from much of the Mac community (with the exception of Time Machine). The new dock, in particular, has been widely panned. "those that use Boot Camp will be required to upgrade if they wish to continue using it." More properly, those who use Boot Camp BETA. No one was ever promised a free ride forever, sorry. In other news, Microsoft "innovation" continues: http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2007/10/microsoft-paten.html

@lotsa If you look closely, the images more closely resemble Windows mobile, and they have updated the patent that was originally filed in 2005 and 2006. Besides, how many ways can you display email?

@lotsahypocrisy - "In other news, Microsoft "innovation" continues:" Wasn't it you that agreed with another poster when pointing out "redirection" tactics? Another double standard from the marketing hack that wishes he know something about IT!!! --tayme

As easy as it is to poke fun at Leopard, I wouldn't put it past old Steve to hold at least one true real feature back so that they can at least boost sales. I'd really hoped that Apple wouldn't itemize every change and call it a feature... were MS or god forbid Linux enter the feature war, they would have lists in the thousands, but this has became the norm it seems for Apple. Afterall, you can have billions of differently configured Mac Pros... half of these configurations depending on if you want a spanish or english keyboard.

"Wasn't it you that agreed with another poster when pointing out "redirection" tactics?" Yes. I only did so after addressing the issue head-on; I didn't simply obfuscate. And, if you'll notice, I *did* make note that I was discussing a different subject after doing so. You might want to calm down. From the looks of things (and your three exclamation points), it's time for your Paxil.

@lotsanowhethinkshesadoctor- "You might want to calm down. From the looks of things (and your three exclamation points), it's time for your Paxil." I am perfectly calm - I just enjoy pointing out that you talk out of both sides of your mouth continuously on this board, but chide others when they do the same. I know, I know...there are more productive ways to spend my time; but at least I am posting to a board that, until you came along was related to my profession, rather than posting to a site regarding something that I know nothing about. Thanks for your concern, though...and have a nice day!!! <---oh no 3 exclamation points again!!! Oops, there I go again. --tayme

Regardless of our opinions on the Apple vs Microsoft marathon arguments, I think it's time to objectively call it like it is. The desktop in both OS X and Windows is a mature paradigm without any clear goal for its next iteration. Thus we get "secret" promises and empty deliverables. Computing is getting dull again, and Ballmer and Jobs both know it.

"I am posting to a board that, until you came along was related to my profession, rather than posting to a site regarding something that I know nothing about." Since you see the Mac as irrelevant to IT and the enterprise, perhaps you should turn your vitriol to Mr. Thurrott and the publishers of this site for posting such irrelevant news. I don't think my "coming along" has much to do with his story decisions. I think I have the credibility to comment on this story. Do you?

That's some serious ZUNE your smokin' man! Where do I start with this stupidity. Hell, I don't even own a mac but I know your full of it. I think the night shift is in your future. That's OK though. It will give you more time to smoke!

"Since you see the Mac as irrelevant to IT and the enterprise, perhaps you should turn your vitriol to Mr. Thurrott and the publishers of this site for posting such irrelevant news. " The problem is not the stories. The problem is the fact that you and some other posters have falsely identified this site as a forum for bashing Microsoft and making snarky remarks about the company and anyone who disagrees with you.

I'm a Mac user and I'm looking forward to Leopard. I don't like some of Apples marketing (300 new features for example) but I usually enjoy the OS upgrades. The new features are well designed and enhance the user experience. I do take exception with Mr. Thurrot's article on a couple of points. "Plagued by delays... Leopard is the fifth minor revision to the company's OS X system, and it is shipping almost exactly a year after Windows Vista, an OS that Apple incessantly ridiculed for its tardiness" - Truth is the release was delayed once, for 4 months. Is it really fair to call the revisions minor? I think anyone who compared OS 10.1 (Puma) with 10.5 (Leopard) would agree that there are major improvements in Leopard. I use a PC at work and a Mac at home, I prefer the Mac. It seems to me that anyone in the market for a new computer should at least consider a Mac. Why limit your choices? Isn't it at least possible that the Mac might work better for you? That's what I did 7 years ago and I've used Macs ever since. There's no right or wrong answer to Mac vs. PC. It's what works best for you.

@Skabeetle - "I think anyone who compared OS 10.1 (Puma) with 10.5 (Leopard) would agree that there are major improvements in Leopard." That's like saying there were major improvements between the 1972 Pinto and the 2007 Focus. Things evolve and improvements are made. The level of improvements is not so great between Tiger and Leopard, though...and the price point id still the same. Macs are good computers for the basic home user that wants to surf the web and do schoolwork. And from what I hear they are good for mixing music and page layout...but in a datacenter or major office environment they are not mature enough...even though they have been around for decades. I have always said that...and yes, choice is good. --tayme

"without any clear goal for its next iteration" I'd say that's a pretty accurate description. But it's not because there arn't progressions to be made, I think it's more because there just arn't any novel ideas being brought forth.

@lotsaexcusesforbeinganA$$HOLE - "I think I have the credibility to comment on this story. Do you?" Are you asking me if I think that you have credibility to comment or if I have credibility to comment? You - No opinion...just sick of you talking out of both sides of you face. You are in marketing, not IT; and you remind me of a used car salesman in a plaid leisure suit. Me - Yes...I have used Macs, PCs, Linux, HP-UX, AIX, Solaris, Z OS, and others since the early 80's. --tayme

Thanks, Paul! The one guy on the net who will tell the truth about Leopard AND Vista!

Funny, you go over all sorts of features in your Winsupersite review of Vista which are easily equivalent to the 300 features in Leopard you mock. Vista has basically three major features that end-users of Windows XP might find worth the upgrade: - Instant Search + related OS-integrated functionality - Aero interface - Arguably, Sidebar. Although, a year later, the free and Windows XP-compatible Yahoo Widgets is still a better experience with better widgets. (Add in the Media Center and Tablet PC for those that aren't using those editions of Windows XP.) The rest are little details, the equivalent of Leopard's 300 features. (I'll leave aside the question of how many of Vista's new functionality is actually an improvement... things like the Backup and Defrag utilities are steps backward from Windows XP.) Whereas Leopard offers three new features that people will find to be worth the upgrade: - Time Machine (the implementation is SOOO much better than Vista's lame backups) - Finder improvements - Spaces What were the improvements in Tiger? - Instant Search + related functionality - Dashboard And, of course, an "Aero"-type UI experience has been part of OS X since Jaguar. So I'm not sure how you can say Leopard under-delivers compared to the competition. In anything, Microsoft is the one playing catch-up. (Another thing worth noting: Both Vista and Leopard included new developer tools for rich user experiences- Windows' WPF and Leopard's Core Animation. So far, almost a year later, there are pretty much no decent applications out there that take advantage of Windows' WPF. I bet within a few months there will be TONS of decent apps out there taking advantage of Core Animation.)

"- Time Machine (the implementation is SOOO much better than Vista's lame backups)" While the UI is better, it's still something that's been around for quite a while in a little thing called Shadow Copy. "- Finder improvements" Don't see that worth spending $125 on. "- Spaces" Windows 2000 supported "spaces". It was a quick registry switch and you and your spaces. AFAIK it's in XP and Vista as well. However, nobody uses it. Personally, I used it for about a week and found it more of a pain than anything - and this is coming from someone with a minnimum of 15 windows open at any one time. Simply put the taskbar on the left side and I can easily find the window I'm looking for. Oh, and I think every UI that runs on top of Linux since it's inception has had that feature as well.

"Vista has basically three major features that end-users of Windows XP might find worth the upgrade:" They're actually the most visible features. They've made a lot of changes to the architecture. Just because Microsoft touts only those three features, doesn't mean that's all is new. And so what if MCE and tablet PC functionality existed in the respected XP versions. Media Center in Vista is a huge improvement over XP MCE.

Windows users are so used to crappy usability that they assume that because two features have the same bullet-points they're equivalent. Time Machine automatically and transparently makes hourly backups, automatically maintains hourly, weekly, and monthly backups without user intervention and with automatically clearing redundant backups (ie. it'll clear last month's daily backups and just store weekly version), and stores them all in the normal file system where you can just browse like any other file (in addition to the fancy 3-d interface). Backup and Shadow Copies don't come close - in usability, configurability, performance, or utility. Similarly, Windows implementations of "Spaces" have always been hacks that never quite work right. Spaces in OS X is a first-class support operating system feature. When someone writes an OS X app for Leopard, they'll need to make sure it supports spaces; no one puts effort in to make sure an app works right with the Windows Virtual Desktop Power Toy. It's the difference between "can do something" and "does something in a way that most people will want to use". (Other examples: Dashboard vs. Windows Vista Sidebar, Expose vs. Windows Vista Flip 3d)

bonch? Sorry, didn't recognize you with that thingy.

Many writers that offer up editorial content fall into the trap of thinking that their opinion has value based upon the merit of thier name or position alone. In-precise statements like "Plagued by delays" and "Notable but minor" do nothing to back up your opinion, and the equal comparison of Window's Shadow Copy feature to Leopard's Time Machine borders on the edge of ignorance. In this artical Paul as gone out of his way to belittle the latest release of Mac OS X which is obviously the biggest since the initial release of Mac OS X itself.

@thingythingy Ahh... bonch all over again. I'll assume you aren't bonch with a different username, so I'll address your arguments: 1. Vista's defrag is *vastly* better than XP's. Vista will defrag files based on performance - if a large file is in 2 fragments, it is not worth the effort to defrag. Vista's defragger works almost as well as commercial defrag apps like Diskeeper. It defrags in the background so you don't have to manually defrag. 2. Previous Versions in Vista works a *ton* better than Time Machine, because you don't need an extra hard drive to store the backups - the previous version feature stores as much data as possible in your free space. As you use up your free space, the previous versions disappear. There have been times where I needed to restore a previous version of a file - it took me maybe 2 minutes to right-click, choose "Restore Previous Versions", and restore the version I want. With Time Machine, I need to open another app, and view a sequence of fancy animations to get to the version I want. It slows my productivity down. Spaces - I don't know of a single person who uses virtual desktops - I have several utilities I have tried to use virtual desktops, but I find it rather annoying to switch desktops to check email switch to another one to play my games, etc. I like having all my windows showing at one time. I guess in OS X it would be useful since you don't have a taskbar that shows you, in text, what programs you have open. You have that terrible dock, that mixes open programs and closed programs. Regarding the sidebar, I'll ask one question - how can you see your gadgets and work at the same time? I have a CPU gadget for my quad-core machine, and I keep it on top when rendering huge files. With OS X, I can't view the "widgets" and work at the same time. I *much* prefer Microsoft's implementation.

Regarding your theory of tons of Core Animation apps coming, have you thought about the millions of people not planning to upgrade, or haven't heard about the latest upgrade? Windows developers, at least, cater to the largest audience - it takes time for everyone to move to a platform where developing on it limits your consumer base - with Leopard, in order to use Core Animation, all the users will need to move to Leopard. At least with WPF, Windows users can use those apps on XP. With Leopard, they are forced to upgrade. Oh, and Expose vs. Flip 3d? Flip 3D was *never* intended to be an Expose replacement - it was done mainly to show off what could be done with the new DWM. Since Microsoft opened the APIs, there are 3rd party apps that do an Expose-like feature. Also, on Windows, Expose is not needed, since we have the taskbar and live thumbnails when we mouse over the window - for heavy multitaskers who have 20 windows open at once, this method is far more useful than going into Expose and seeing 20 extremely small windows. "In this artical Paul as gone out of his way to belittle the latest release of Mac OS X which is obviously the biggest since the initial release of Mac OS X itself." Wow. Mac fanboys seem to forget their history - I had no clue that Leopard moves to a completely different kernel, nor that it includes a completely different window manager, nor that it is based on a completely new platform! Where have I been? "the equal comparison of Window's Shadow Copy feature to Leopard's Time Machine borders on the edge of ignorance. " I'll take a simplified, quick way of choosing a previous version than a fancy, 3D animation sequence that takes me more time to find a file, thank you. This is why Macs are for people who don't have much computer knowledge, or who are in art design - Macs have style, but no substance. I could crash a Mac in 10 minutes, simply by multi-tasking. Any more arguments?

"This is why Macs are for people who don't have much computer knowledge, or who are in art design - Macs have style, but no substance. I could crash a Mac in 10 minutes, simply by multi-tasking." Well, I guess that's why you're an expert on computers. You can accomplish something in 10 minutes that I haven't been able to do in all my years of working with OS X. BTW, as a research physicist (Ph.D., Cornell), I really don't have the time or interest to become a computer expert - I just want to use my Mac to accomplish various research tasks, which is something that it does quite well.

@nim55 - "I really don't have the time or interest to become a computer expert - I just want to use my Mac..." If that's the case, then why do you post here? Just to be a Mac troll, one would have to assume. --tayme

I have been using the Mac OS since 7.5 but see very few changes in the X for the average user. I can understand the author's feelings. I read the a Windows drive can now be read and written to by Leopard, if formatted FAT32. Please correct me if wrong, but the max capacity for FAT32 is 32GB? Is there any way to increase the size?

@NateB2 1. I'll concede you that the Vista's Defrag is better overall than XP's. The backend and ability to schedule are certainly improvements. But, you can't even choose what drives to defrag, and there's no way to get feedback on whether a drive even needs to be defragged. 2. The Previous Versions screen is great, but how do you get entries in there? By running the gawdawful Backup utility, which - doesn't let you choose what files to download (note to Microsoft: file types don't cut it, I don't want you backing up the image files in Program Files, or missing files in My Documents just 'cause you don't recognize the extension) - is a very heavy process that takes 30-60 minutes of hard drive grinding every night - doesn't do hourlly backups (unless you tell it to do the aforementioned very heavy process) - and stops dead when the hard drive is full. Time Machine can just start clearing out really out files; with Vista Backup you need to wipe out your existing backups and start all over again with a new Full Backup. - and stores everything in it's own file system that requires Previous Versions or the Vista Restore utility to access properly. It also seems to create Shadow Copies whenever it creates a System Restore point. Which means my hard drives grind for 20 minutes every time I install anything. Wonderful. Plus, those Shadow Copies are on the same drive as the source files, which eliminates half the point of backups - protecting from drive failure. (On corporate file servers, Previous Versions works a lot better. But Microsoft hasn't gotten that functionality to the home properly.) I dunno. Maybe it works for you. Personally, I'd like someone to write a utility that does Time Machine-style backups for Windows. it's not that complicated - more a question of thoughtful design rather than advanced technology.

3. Sidebar It seems to be having a screenful of quick-access utilities is more useful than having some always on, using up valuable screen real estate. How useful is your CPU meter when you're not doing a render? Wouldn't you rather have that screen space for your primary task? What else do you have on your sidebar? Do you really want that there 24/7, or would you rather have the screen space? I think the average user would rather have quick access to a screen with weather, calendar, calculator, movie times, etc. than constantly losing a sixth of their screen to information they will only need periodically. YMMV, I suppose. @NateB2 "At least with WPF, Windows users can use those apps on XP. With Leopard, they are forced to upgrade." My point is, even after a year, THERE ARE NO WPF APPS OUT THERE. Even with the limited Leopard user base, I bet there will be far more Core Animation apps, which says something for the strength of Apple's APIs. "Flip 3D was *never* intended to be an Expose replacement - it was done mainly to show off what could be done with the new DWM. " So, Microsoft uses prime quickbar real estate (not to mention a prime key combination) on every single Windows Vista install ( millions upon millions upon millions of machines) for just a tech demo? And you think that's a defensible position? Seems to me a strong condemnation of Microsoft's UI decision making process. I fully admit the taskbar has a lot of advantages (although the Dock has a lot to), but Microsoft shouldn't just be throwing new UI elements for the heck of it. (Apple does the same thing, occasionally, of course: I'm not sure how useful Cover Flow is going to be in a file browser.)

@thingythingy - "It seems to be having a screenful of quick-access utilities is more useful than having some always on, using up valuable screen real estate." Evidently you have never used Vista. Otherwise you would know that Sidebar can be configured to stay in the background and does not use up any "real estate". Application windows open over the top of it and you can't even see it...Seems to me that you are another Mac enthusiast that is here to convert the masses (read:troll). --tayme

@tayme What do you expect when Paul writes an article about Apple? Grow the **** up if you're going to play the "You either like Windows or you don't belong here crowd" People can have an opinion of Vista just like you idiots can have an opinion of Leopard even though none of you have used it or ever will. I thought Mac users were sheep, you're the definition of a mindless drone who can't think for himself. Go take some prescription medicine to handle your small penis syndrome, maybe you won't be so ****** off.

"Please correct me if wrong, but the max capacity for FAT32 is 32GB?" sorry but you are wrong. 32GB is the maximum partition size that Windows Vista (and AFAIK, Windows XP also) will let you format as FAT32. you can format multiple partitions on a drive greater than 32GB but each partition must be less than 32GB otherwise Windows won't let you format it so. FAT32 itself can be utilized on volumes all the way up to 2TB. Re: defrag "you can't even choose what drives to defrag" that's changing in SP1. "there's no way to get feedback on whether a drive even needs to be defragged." sure there is: defrag.exe -a Re: previous versions "how do you get entries in there? By running the gawdawful Backup utility" wrong. Windows tracks changes to files and keeps them automatically. "Windows automatically creates shadow copies of files that have been modified since the last restore point was made. Typically restore points are made once a day." that's from Windows Help & Support. try using it sometime. "those Shadow Copies are on the same drive as the source files, which eliminates half the point of backups" and this is different from Time Machine how? "On corporate file servers, Previous Versions works a lot better. But Microsoft hasn't gotten that functionality to the home properly" i say to that and to the previous comment - buy an external backup hard drive! and btw: "corporate file servers" do something very simple - it's called "My Documents Redirection". client systems house user data files on a network share. when the user goes to "My Documents" while connected to a corporate LAN, the files are actually retrieved from the file server. the user doesn't know any different. while the server is connected, an offline copy is also synced on the local computer so that when they disconnect it from the LAN, they can still work on the files. automatic backup done simple. XP

....also, set up a RAID system on a single server, plus a tape backup, and you have the user's files on no less than 4 drives PLUS you have previous versions enabled on the server, as well as previous backups to rely on. also, what is the deal with Time Machine?? as far as the images and animations go, it seems that you can only restore a snapshot of the entire folder and not each individual file. that's just dumb. "THERE ARE NO WPF APPS OUT THERE" you aren't looking too hard. try Office 2007 for one. also, considering that the version of Visual Studio that's designed to allow for coding in it isn't even released yet, nor is the server operating system that integrates .NET Framework 3.0, i would imagine many companies aren't jumping in quite yet. so far, there are several though: http://showcase.netfx3.com/ given that the proper development tools aren't out, those companies seem to be doing just fine. XP

Reflections, I think you need to see a doctor for that irritable bowel syndrome of yours. In every post of yours, you're either ****** off at Microsoft or one of the other commenters.

Actually Waethorn, I am correct, as you admit that the maximum size of a FAT32 partition is 32GB. That's what I meant, and to refute it by stating that you can have multiple partitions of 32GB on a volume does not make me wrong. That's not what I asked. But thanks for answering that there is no way to create a FAT32 partition larger than 32GB. But if you are so smart [which you obviously are] then tell me why didn't Apple chose not to support NTFS? You can read and write to NTSF [from OS X] on your local network, but cannot use a NTSF local hard drive [such as USB, FW, IDE or SATA]. Why for God's sake, why? Remember, I am not in IT, I am an MD. Thanks in advance. U da man.

@Waethon I use Vista every day. Why do think I'm so irritated with it? ;) Yes, the Sidebar can be configured to run in the back. Of course, than there's no easy way to get at it except click the tiny little tray icon or minimize everything (but not hit Show Desktop, 'cause that hides the sidebar as well) Just more poor design. I don't really feel like going into the details of Backup argument. If you can tell me how to make Vista make an automatic archiving set-it-and-forget-it method of creating backups on a secondary backup drive, please let me know. As far as I know, if I want to do it Shadow Copies and Restore Point, it's done on the same drive as the source files, and will run the full 20-minute backup routine every time I create a Restore Point or install an application. Neither of those is acceptable, particularly the backups on the source drive part of it. If I want to do it with the Backup Utility, once a drive is full, it won't automatically clear out old files, so I need to wipe out the backup and start again once the drive is full. In any case, I think the discussion about this point, plus the fact that there's three separate mechanisms - System Restore + Shadow Copies, the Backup Utility, and of course the CompletePC Backup - none of which fulfill the basic mechanism of a plug-in-and-drive-and-forget-about-it user-friendly backup system - prove my point about Microsoft's poor design. Time Machine *does* work as a set-it-up-and-forget about it solution, performs the history requirements of Shadow Copies, performs the Backup requirements of Backup, and performs the complete PC backup requirements of Complete PC, all in one package. I'm sure you can spout all sorts of excuses about why Microsoft's system is allegedly better, but simple common sense can see it's just a mess.

Office 2007 doesn't use the .NET Framework, much less WPF. There is a downloadable WPF utility for printing Outlook calendars, though, I'll give you that. Which is probably the most useful actual application out there. Certainly better than that excessively lame "Showcase". Anyway, arguing this point is pretty pointless right now. Check out the Mac shareware seen after the release of Leopard to see the impressive work that Apple someone motivates it's developers to produce. Heck, I'll even give a few more months for Visual Studio 2008 to come out.

@Reflections - You must not read too well. I have been using Apples since before Macs were around, and Macs since the first ones. I currently own a Mac running Tiger and I will use Leopard at some point...my point is that you Apple shills refuse to give MS any credit what-so-ever. Thanks for your concern, though...and have a nice day!!! Oh, and consider growing up and watching your language. --tayme

"Well, I guess that's why you're an expert on computers. You can accomplish something in 10 minutes that I haven't been able to do in all my years of working with OS X." TBH, I killed a 10.4 based mac pro quite easily with too many applications. They drudge extremely slowly when you use too many apps at once and try to switch context between them. When it's time to write a paper, Latex, 5-6 browsers (with a couple of tabs each), Visio, Excel, Outlook, Powerpoint, and about 80 million instances of PDF reader... Macs don't like that level of memory use it seemed to me. Granted this was only a two socket mac with G5 processors, but nonetheless when it was purchased by the university, it costed oodles. For us forgetful chaps, Windows all the way.

Will84, I have not crashed a Mac in years, but cannot say the same for XP on numerous computers. The ones that I custom built run better of course. [except when I overclocked too far without appropriate cooling, but that was my bad] I have a Mac Pro Tower that runs numerous apps without a glitch. You say that you have a Mac Pro, but then say it has 'two socket mac with G5'. Now I know that you are full of BS as the Pro Towers and Pro Books are Intel, not G5's. The only thing that you got correct was that it did cost oodles.

Here are the major features touted by Microsoft on their website for the Home Premium version of Vista being shipped with nearly all new PCs. Windows Aero Windows Flip 3D Instant Search Internet Explorer 7, with tabbed browsing and web searching right from the browser Windows Sidebar and gadgets Windows Photo Gallery Windows Easy Transfer New performance self-tuning and diagnostics technologies Windows SuperFetch Built-in diagnostics Even the most ardent Microsoft fan should be underwhelmed at that list. You have to upgrade to the Business or Ultimate versions to get any back-up features. If Back-up is such a minor feature why isn't it included in all of the Vista versions for free? Answer that Paul. Back-up is listed as a major feature of Vista Ultimate, which Microsoft charges quite a lot more for. Another feature of Leopard is full 32 and 64 bit optimisation. Why can't Microsoft provide this "minor" upgrade for Vista? Core Animation?, very minor, not even worth mentioning. Some of the top secret features not demonstrated last year were: Cover flow & Quicklook throughout the Finder and in Time Machine. Stacks in the new look Dock and more advanced Spotlight search queries. I don't remember hearing anywhere that the top secret features were going to be major and groundbreaking. It was only Mac fans and the media that blew all expectations out of proportion. Also, Paul please give us a list of all the secret features that were left out due to Apple being plagued by delays. I also think reality is completely distorted in Thurrotland. Apple may deserve some jibes for being late a few months. But Vista was late by years, comparing the two is not only distorting reality it's just plain loopy. And in case you think Apple's list of 300 features is lame, check out Microsoft's "100 reasons why everyone's so speechless". Anyway, comparing the features in Leopard to Vista, I think Microsoft should scratch the top 7 off that list above and re-list them as minor.

"tell me why didn't Apple chose not to support NTFS?" you just answered your own question. where is their eSATA support too? ;) "will run the full 20-minute backup routine every time I create a Restore Point or install an application." you are so dead wrong. anybody else want to testify that it doesn't take 20 minutes to install an application, or that their system isn't tied up writing files for 20 mins after an installation finishes?? NTFS file systems don't automatically overwrite old files either. they are tagged by the file system and aren't overwritten until space starts running out, or are deprecated according to timestamps and usage, or if system checkpoints are removed manually by the user. "If you can tell me how to make Vista make an automatic archiving set-it-and-forget-it method of creating backups on a secondary backup drive, please let me know." easy. launch Backup & Restore Center, click "Back up files". it asks if you want to create a recurring schedule after it does an initial backup. how simple is that? "the fact that there's three separate mechanisms - System Restore + Shadow Copies, the Backup Utility, and of course the CompletePC Backup" and each mechanism has it's own, separately customizable option, unlike Apple's. "all in one package" so is Microsoft's solution - it's called WINDOWS. "I'm sure you can spout all sorts of excuses about why Microsoft's system is allegedly better" one good reason comes to mind - CompletePC to DVD. .... one thing that should be noted here. the best new feature in Leopard that you're getting all worked up and excited about is a BACKUP UTILITY?!? honestly, that's just sad. "Office 2007 doesn't use the .NET Framework, much less WPF" not exactly. more like the other way around. the same tools and development process used to create the new Office 2007 UI was used as an inspiration to implement what you see now as WPF. XP

"You have to upgrade to the Business or Ultimate versions to get any back-up features." WRONG! Backup & Restore Center is included in Vista Home Premium. **CompletePC** isn't included in that version. "Apple someone motivates it's developers to produce" [sic] if the iPhone OS, iPod nano/classic OS/UI, Safari, and iTunes are any indication, they should really be motivating their bug-tracking and security development divisions. XP

"Here are the major features touted by Microsoft on their website for the Home Premium version of Vista...." you forgot Windows Movie Maker HD and Windows DVD Maker. (hey, they're still better than iMovie '08!) XP

From Waethorn WRONG! Backup & Restore Center is included in Vista Home Premium. **CompletePC** isn't included in that version. Thanks for correcting me, I was using the compare table at http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsvista/editions/choose.mspx and accidently missed the tick. The only point I was trying to make was that Paul labels many of Leopard's features as minor, yet Microsoft claims the same features as major highlights of Vista on it's Website.

"The only point I was trying to make was that Paul labels many of Leopard's features as minor, yet Microsoft claims the same features as major highlights of Vista on it's Website." and yet even when you discount the developer features, there are still far more noticeable changes for end-users than what Apple provides in such a minor update. btw: to set the record straight, Time Machine is a JOKE! here's why: "Time Machine requires an additional hard drive (sold separately)." -Apple's Leopard site so you can't keep previous versions without spending money on additional hardware. similarly, Photo Booth doesn't work with G4's, and it's backdrop effects don't work on G5's (not even the "quad"-G5's). AHAHAHAHAHA! XP

"Minimum requirements for 1-to-1 video conferencing... 320-by-240 1.8 GHz G5, 1.66 GHz Intel Core Duo 300 Kbps Internet connection (up/down)" wow!....just....wow.... ;) XP

Waethorn, the 'additional hardware' forTime Machine refers to an external or network drive. And Leopard will work on Macs as old as 6 yrs, longer with CPU upgrades. Does Vista? No. The other side of the coin is that many new Mac gadgets require OS 10.4.10, which would force many to upgrade. Just buy a Sansa, They work fine. These post are way off topic. The point was that this upgrade is not very spectacular as hyped. The average user will see almost no difference, but the average user will not upgrade anyway. Only you geeks and uber-geeks need to feed your OCD. Peace.

""Time Machine requires an additional hard drive (sold separately)." -Apple's Leopard site so you can't keep previous versions without spending money on additional hardware." Any idiot that would back up a hard drive to the same hard drive must be getting advice from a stoned Canadian.

"I bet there will be far more Core Animation apps, which says something for the strength of Apple's APIs." I wouldn't call that the strength of an API, but rather a motivated (read: sheep-like) base of users. Perhaps that's too strong, but Apple is more than content with forcing their developers to outright change the way they do things with each new version of the OS. One of the "problems" if you will of Windows is that there is such a widely installed user base that MS needs to keep in mind compatibility of older software. When you have corporate customers that would ask for Bill Gates' head if they did what Apple does, you can see that this has nothing to do with API's, which are actually quite strong on the Windows side. It's a matter of the market. "The only point I was trying to make was that Paul labels many of Leopard's features as minor, yet Microsoft claims the same features as major highlights of Vista on it's Website." However, Paul did not talk about Windows. He was speaking in reference to Leopard in this instance. Although Paul is known to flip-flop a lot, he does have on record many criticisms about the lack of new features (or the lack of promised features for that matter) in Vista.

"Any idiot that would back up a hard drive to the same hard drive must be getting advice from a stoned Canadian." Previous versions is not a disaster recovery type of feature, but rather an "oops, I deleted a file" feature. Although it does more than that, by archiving previous versions (hence the name) of a file so that you can go back in time (ha ha) to a previous version of the file. No one really considers that a backup solution. Just like a SAN snapshot, it still depends on the reliability of the primary hardware being intact. So everyone please buy an external hard drive to back up your stuff. Another thing to mention, but how many people back up their hard drives and actually keep the external hard drive still plugged in, or keep it at home? You really need to bring the hard drive off site in order to have a truly robust backup strategy.

I have mulple internal drives in my PC and Mac. I have been using an IDE to USB2 cable for external backup as well. However, while it stillworks on my PC and OS 10.4.9, it no longer works with OS 10.4.10, an issue that has been present since the update was released. I am unhappy. the 10.4.11 release better fix this. My USB flash drive are recognized, and I do not want to reformat my Porsche ext USB drive, as I just did to create a FAT32 partition of 30GB as well as an NTFS partition of the remaining 270GB or so. [My DVD player has a USB2 port that only recognizes FAT32, and I wanted to store some DIVX movies for the kids' easy access]

"Any idiot that would back up a hard drive to the same hard drive must be getting advice from a stoned Canadian." and who's advice is that? not mine....any idiot that can read would see that. previous versions of files are stored locally on Windows though, not requiring a backup, which works not only for home users, but also domain networks with lmited access. users can restore previous versions of files without requiring a backup operator. also, in many businesses, external hard drives are forbidden, and files are stored on a locked server using the aforementioned My Documents Redirection (or any other network folder share for that matter). users can still roll back changes to their data files in those situations. Previous Versions is a much faster and simpler way of rolling back file changes than launching Time Machine, but then, who needs productivity when you have fancy graphics and unnecessary additional hardware, eh losta? seriously though, it's a flippin' BACKUP UTILITY! this is what happens when you move someone from the graphic design department to the software design department that has no previous experience. (more like, from screensaver to UI design - what, did they hire the After Dark team for this PoS??) "Previous versions is not a disaster recovery type of feature, but rather an "oops, I deleted a file" feature." actually, it's an "oops, I overwrote a file" feature. "You really need to bring the hard drive off site in order to have a truly robust backup strategy." a better strategy is to have two or more, and rotate through them. large eSATA hard drives are still far cheaper than tape drives and media. XP

"Yes, the Sidebar can be configured to run in the back. Of course, than there's no easy way to get at it except click the tiny little tray icon or minimize everything (but not hit Show Desktop, 'cause that hides the sidebar as well)" Windows key + spacebar. Problem solved.

@lotsaignorance: ""Time Machine requires an additional hard drive (sold separately)." -Apple's Leopard site so you can't keep previous versions without spending money on additional hardware." Any idiot that would back up a hard drive to the same hard drive must be getting advice from a stoned Canadian." You clearly have no concept of what you are talking about. Previous versions (aka Shadow Copy) != Backups. (Oh, and != means doesn't equal). Previous versions is there to roll back a file in case of user error. Backups are there for disk or hardware error.

"Plagued by delays and missing any of the exciting "secret" features promised a year ago..." Oh Paul, that sounds like you in the summer of 2006 with Longhorn/Vista. You whined and complained about delays and dropped features and broken promises only to give Vista a four Paul Head review. I can see the future: you'll get a copy of Lepoard. You'll post 184567392 photos of you taking the CD's out of the box. You'll use it for a week. You'll post a nine part review about how most of it is so-so but one feature is awesome and you'll give it a three Paul Head review for some reason or another. Blah de blah blah.

This is just like the old saying, "The pot calling the kettle black." After enduring over a year of very childish insults from Steve Jobs, Apple and the iMinions can't take the criticism. Steve must have programmed a reto-active distortion to user program. Leopard doesn't deliver the big bang that Steve-O promised and it borrowed from Vista. Bottom line is which company has 93% of the desktop market....... MICROSOFT! That ultimately, pardon the pun is the bottom line. Leopard is coming in with a wimper, while Vista charges ahead picking up steam. Even if you get every Mac owner to switch to Leopard, its still 5 percent of the U.S. desktop market. 3% of the World desktop market. Apple is still stuck at number two. The only OS its going to hurt is Linux. While Linux adopters will continue to test and use that fledgling OS, it will never become a mainstream OS. It will be an underground OS with none of the environment to challenge Apple or Microsoft. The features in Leopard aren't worth the switch. However, the features from XP to Vista are worth the switch. Vista covers everything now that Apple used to do and has essentially assimilated OS-X. Internet Explorer 7 loads much faster than in Safari. Even the Apple page in Safari is slower than IE7. After playing around with the lastest Macbooks, that my Toshiba Lifebook is quicker. Even with all the changes, OS-X is functionally no different that the original Mac OS of 1984. Its the same experience with more applications but the same user experience. Nothing has evolved with OS-X. The Vista interface is vastly different from Windows 1.0. I feel that Apple keeps their operating system dumbed down for those who aren't techno savvy. Finally, after chatting with computer technicans in the Dallas area, they are having more difficulty with OS-X than XP. They spend more time troubleshooting OS-X problems than XP problems. From the guys to fix them, thats the ultimate proof that OS-X is still second string.