In my IT shop, out of 10 of us, 8 went to Macs recently (2 of us manage Windows systems - I stayed with Windows, my "partner" went with a Mac). EVERYONE runs either Parallels or VirtualBox with WinXP or Win7 loaded on it! Mac can't edit the majority of MS documents out there correctly, Entourage is a joke, all they do with the Mac side is browse the web - not one bit of added functionality came with the Macs, quite the opposite. People just want a some kind of change (now, doesn't THAT sound familiar) whether it's a positive OR negative one. As posted earlier, having been surrounded by Macs the past 6 months, and running Windows 7 at home, there is absolutely NOTHING a Mac offers that would tempt me to change. Just the asinine idea of having a application in one screen, while the menu bar for it is on another screen makes me puke. Heck, there isn't even a way to get dual external monitors on the laptop - something PC's offer via a dock every day.

eventually the more programming both companies use to streamline their o.s.'s

the closer they will become looking like each other.

I have both Snow leopard and windows 7, the taskbars do NOT look alike at all!!! they act totally differnent!!!

where is these silly comparisons coming from?? they are totally diff LMFAO @ you wierdos claiming MS ripped it.. infact the win7 task bar is a tweaked out vista task bar!!

http://www.bestlaptopbat...r-battery/sony/HC62.htm
http://www.bestlaptopbattery.co.uk
First of all, how long should your battery last? 2-4 years is generally acceptable depending on how frequently you use and charge the battery. If you travel a lot and use and charge your battery
frequently then you might only get a couple of years at the most out of your camcorder battery.
The Sony HC62 camcorder battery are usually made with Li-Ion camcorder batteries and the very nature of Li-Ion batteries is that they have about 500-600 charges and last at most about 4-5 years (shelf life). They also have a self-discharge rate of about 1% per day so you need to be sure to charge them at least every 6 months.

blank

Ok *listen* everyone. Microsoft did *not* copy Mac OS X dock period! The taskbar you now see is based on Windows 1.0's taskbar and you can check this for yourself! Why isn't anyone saying anything about this: http://msdn.microsoft.co.../magazine/dd942846.aspx

Read!

"The Windows 7 taskbar is the latest in a series of evolutionary taskbar designs that started with Windows 1.0. It represents a design and architectural change with regard to user experience, and offers significant improvements in user productivity. Figure 1 shows the Windows 1.0 taskbar. (Note that the 1.0 taskbar bears more resemblance to the Windows 7 taskbar than to the Windows Vista taskbar.)"

Look at the screenshots and stop blaming MS. Microsoft did *not* copy the dock.

http://msdn.microsoft.co.../magazine/dd942846.aspx

Maybe because Windows 1.0 was clearly inspired by the Mac OS back in 1989?

Well, the elements of the GUI was licensed from Apple, not inspired.

Windows 1.01 (1985) :) Look at the about box.

Sorry, but the original Macintosh was released on January 24, 1984. It was not known as Mac OS yet... simply as System 1.0.

Microsoft did, in fact, license numerous elements of the graphical user interface from Apple to be incorporated into Windows 1.0, which was released on November 20, 1985.

That move actually worked in Microsoft's favor when Apple tried to sue them for copyright infringements. Apple ultimately failed on an epic level, repeatedly making the case that the 'look and feel' was being infringed upon, but could not prove that any individual element of Apple's GUI was original (which they were not).

Ironically, midway through the lawsuit, Xerox filed a lawsuit of their own against Apple... the same Xerox that Apple practically stole (did not license) their GUI elements from. Xerox waited too long to file suit, and was unsuccessful.

Ok I see what you are saying but did the original Mac OS back in 1984 had a dock? This is mainly about the dock. I am not sure whether NeXT Step is related and how much (if related) is.

Here, let me google that for you:

Link 3 on Google Search "NeXT": Wikipedia Entry -

"NeXT was founded in 1985 by Apple Computer co-founder Steve Jobs after his forced resignation from Apple."

@ cool_guy:

Proving that there are similarities between the Taskbars present in both Windows 7 and Windows 1.0 does not prove that there are not similarities with the Mac OS X Dock.

The Taskbar in Windows 7 is quite different from every previous version of Windows. Sure, it functions in a very similar manner to all the previous ones, but there are quite a few new enhancements that make it very unique (and not just more of the-same). Some of those enhancements, such as the ability to pin applications to the Taskbar, are very similar to how applications are attached to the Mac OS X Dock.

Of course, who knows for sure exactly which GUI elements Microsoft licensed from Apple in the early '80s? This may be an evolution of one of 'em. ;)

"The Taskbar in Windows 7 is quite different from every previous version of Windows. "

How so. They enlarged the icons and got rid of the text. That's pretty much it. They've been "grouped" by default since XP and provided thumbnails since Vista....this is evolution, not a drastic departure.

Sure...it may have been their Evil Plan™ all along and they've slowly been adding copied feature after copied feature to make it *look* like the Apple Dock, but seriously? Everyone I know who uses both will swear up and down they are completely different functionality-wise once you get past the visual similarities.

How the Taskbar in Windows 7 is different... hmm. I was actually surprised to see this query come from you. =)

To start off with, the icons are not just larger... they have more than just one purpose now (which used to be simply to run the selected application, and to provide the usual non-application-specific commands under the context menu). Also, "Always combine, hide labels" is just the default setting now for Taskbar icons. The functionality is still there to un-group and show text... though I don't know why anyone would want that now.

Not only does an application icon on the new Taskbar serve to launch a program, but that same icon serves as an application switcher.

Jump Lists, which is one of my favorite new enhancements, keeps track of frequently-opened items, whether it be documents, digital media, or URLs. Either right-click on the icon in the Taskbar, or left-click, hold, and drag upwards to reveal the Jump List.

And, not only can applications be pinned to the Taskbar (either by right-clicking the icon and selecting 'Pin to...', or by dragging them there), but individual items on the Jump Lists can be pinned to their respective menu, too (so certain items don't get shoved off the list).

Aero Peek, which expands on the functionality of the thumbnail previews introduced with Vista, is completely new and unique. They also expanded this feature to include the now-static 'Show Desktop' button, which means it does more now than just toggle as it did in XP and Vista via the Quick Launch icons.

On the eye candy front, the icons are larger, but are also extremely easy to rearrange... not just for the icons that are already pinned, but also for running processes that don't normally reside on the Taskbar once they're closed. The thumbnail previews are larger as well, compared to Vista.

Also, another eye candy element (though essentially useless, but different nevertheless... which is what you asked) is the color assignment on the background of the icons for running processes on the Taskbar. Though I've yet to read anything that even remotely hints at describing (or guessing) how this works, the best that I can figure is that it takes the most prominent color in the icon and uses that for the background 'glass' color... and black, white, and all shades of gray in between don't factor in to the selection. Fire up a bunch of applications and notice the colors of the backgrounds of the tiles. I'd love to know if you think my theory is correct on that one.

An additional feature that I don't necessarily consider eye candy, since it actually adds an element of productivity-increasing usefulness, is the visual indication of file transfer progress. Start copying large files in Windows Explorer, or start downloading something in Internet Explorer, and notice the green progress bar in the background of the icon on the Taskbar during the transfer. Sadly, not many applications aside from the two mentioned take advantage of this feature yet.

FWIW.. you said "drastic departure", not me. =)

"Not only does an application icon on the new Taskbar serve to launch a program, but that same icon serves as an application switcher."

Combined with Quick Launch. The two have existed separately, and are now one.

"Aero Peek, which expands on the functionality of the thumbnail previews introduced with Vista, is completely new and unique. "

Minimal. An expansion/evolution. Not a drastic departure.

"On the eye candy front, the icons are larger, but are also extremely easy to rearrange... not just for the icons that are already pinned, but also for running processes that don't normally reside on the Taskbar once they're closed."

Re-arranging could be done on the Quick-launch bar. Since they've merged it with the taskbar, it is only natural that this functionality flow with it.

"Also, another eye candy element (though essentially useless, but different nevertheless... which is what you asked) is the color assignment on the background of the icons for running processes on the Taskbar."

Almost exactly as you describe. They explained it in the Engineering Win7 blog. They call it a "delighter"....useless, but...whatever.

"n additional feature that I don't necessarily consider eye candy, since it actually adds an element of productivity-increasing usefulness, is the visual indication of file transfer progress."

This and jump-lists are really the only two "new" (functional) features that do not exist in either the Vista taskbar or the Quick Launch toolbar, neither of them come from OS X (which is the point many in this thread are trying to make...hence my response).

The Windows 7 Taskbar is a functional combination of Quick Launch and the Windows Vista Taskbar with a few functionality tweaks. It is not a major departure from what existed before. It is, by far, not a clone of the OSX Dock.

Let them steal whatever they want from Mac, and let Mac make their commercial touting what this person said.

In the end, it will not hurt Microsoft's bottom line. How long have we listened to all those Mac vs PC's adds. How much has it really helped their market share? With the iPod, iTouch, iPhone, iMac, and Mac Book, they have only manged to increase their market share by a whopping one percent in the last year. With all that firepower, they have not really been able to make huge inroads into the Microsoft's market share like FireFox did to IE8.

Mac hasn't given me any reason to try OS X. Why would I spent $1,800 on a laptop to try OS X? More people might be willing to try it if they could install it on a PC or Virtual environment without having to hack it.

You're quite uninformed. "Mac hasn't given me any reason to try OS X." I think it's quite clear why you have not tried OS X...

Not really - just realistic. Why would I spend nearly 2 grand for a machine that does the same thing as my current laptop that cost literally half the price or less? There's no incentive what-so-ever.

People claim that the virus vulnerability is a huge reason to switch to mac, but while I do definitely have a virus scanner on my desktop, I've literally been hit a whopping ZERO times by viruses (granted my antivirus has caught a few things that were potentially hazardous, but it was still stopped before anything happened!).

I just am really sick of others claiming that everything was stolen from mac (even if it's brand new) and that everything that MS has done in the past 5 years have all been inspired or copied directly from any of the Mac OS's. Get your head in the game and realize that while Mac has all these fancy new comericals, people still don't want to buy something that is twice as expensive ... especially during times of recession.

Just one word resume MS attitude on this case: Hypocrisy. anyone can see every software release took ideas from others. It is good to take an existing object and improve it. The problem is when you take an idea and make a worse implementation of it. That is the case with MS, when they copy something, they usually make it worst, not better.

For the new taskbar took from Mac OS, took from Acorn OS, MANY years ago. The case was: Apple took the Acorn idea and improve it, MS took the Apple and well, there you have it... A good idea, but not polished. It does more than Mac OS dock, but it is clunkier and uglier... Still, MS use to win with this implementations....

LOL, If everyone believe what is written and paraphrased then we would be in a real mess. Wait, how about the economy and global warming are they playing with our minds? I tell you this is just a conspiracy theory....

I use all OS system I can get my hands on OS X, XP, Vista, Ubuntu...... all have a niche but I still will vote for the MS OS' any time.

The whole 'Mac' inspired is directed at the Taskbar, yet as a user of both, I don't get how people make this assessment.

Win7 is more a combination of concepts of Win95 taskbar and Win98 with toolbars than having anything to do with the Mac Dock.

Also, why do people seem to forget the Mac Dock is essentially a copy of concepts introduced in Windows 1.0 - source it - as this existed years before Next even.)

If anything the Dock is a application launching and switching metaphor that comes directly from the Windows world in the 80s of all places. Sure it is prettier, but functionally, is more like Win 1.0 combined with Win95's 'channel flipping' concept.

What to see the famous Apple Dock 15 years before Apple adopted it:
http://blogs.msdn.com/e7...ion-of-the-taskbar.aspx

All these trivial arguments over who did it first.. Jeez... The entire world is full of first and after that it's all about making whatever came first better or different. Both OS's have their flaws. Both have the superiorities. Get a life and realize that it's always going to be the Chicken/Egg argument. NEXT?

Microsoft is smart hehehe.. You take TEST SUBJECTS who "somehow" "by chance" (by test prereqs) had Mac OS experience, sit them in front of Vista, and ask them if something needs to change.... Ehh Gee Boobla Dee...

Then obviously you say that your GUI changes are due to "consumer demand"...

Unlike the crazy Mac people, us PC people LOVE TO HEAR that we're using SOMEONE ELSE'S STOLEN ("borrowed".."enhanced".."modified") TECHNOLOGY, FOR MUCH CHEAPER. It actually started from day one with the IBM...*drum roll* C-L-O-N-E-S.

Yeah, go ahead and buy the "original" you good sucker. I'll proudly take the immitation 9 out of 10 times.

Oh God, I can't wait for the new Apple ads that will follow after this classic admission that Vista 7 is a Mac OS X knock off. *Drooling with anticipation*

...only it works on tons more hardware, with tons more applications, and, oh...it's not a Mac OS X knock-off.

But yeah, other than (everything you say)....you're right. :)

It does work on tons more hardware with the lion's share being low cost (including the dreaded netbooks) systems. Mac Systems have long since provided virtual machine solutions for taking any needed applications with you when you make the jump so the tons more applications is only a technicality. You will, of course, have to leave all the Viruses, Worms, Trojans and other Malware behind but that should not be too taxing :>). On second thought, the bad boys can follow in the Windows VM. The other day I heard the first argument that I accept for running A/V protection on OS X. In a mixed computer environment, no one appreciates a Typhoid Mary and the Mac can be a carrier even though it does not get sick. We Mac users need to consider taking the A/V plunge in order to be good citizens in a Windows dominated world.

Drolling over ads?
What a frigging looser!

"It does work on tons more hardware with the lion's share being low cost (including the dreaded netbooks) systems."

You say that like it's a bad thing. My $700 3 year-old notebook is still running just fine. Running Win7 (@4.3 WEI), even. Hell, my $75 (Craigslist) ze2113us HP notebook is running Win7 just fine...How's the iBook doing with SL?

"Mac Systems have long since provided virtual machine solutions for taking any needed applications with you when you make the jump so the tons more applications is only a technicality"

Yeah...technically, you still need to run Windows. :)

"You will, of course, have to leave all the Viruses, Worms, Trojans and other Malware behind but that should not be too taxing"

Left 'em behind ages ago. It's called "having at least half a brain". Yup. Half will do. Probably less.

"We Mac users need to consider taking the A/V plunge in order to be good citizens in a Windows dominated world."

Nah, Mac users can have half a brain as well. (Haven't actually met one quite that blessed yet, but I am sure it's possible...), *grin*

@ rauckr:

"...so the tons more applications is only a technicality."

That's a pretty big technicality when the applications don't run natively.

@ PC Tool: "You say that like it's a bad thing" Just ask Dell and HP how they like the netbook impact on their bottom line. This development has something to do with the fact that Apple market value now exceeds Dell + HP.

"How's the iBook doing with SL?" I wouldn't know since the iBook predates my Mac conversion (~ 2.5 years) and I have better things to do with my time than SL. Not that there is anything wrong with it for those who are so inclined :>).

"Yeah...technically, you still need to run Windows. :)" That may be a Scarlet Letter to some but it doesn't bother me at all especially since I can do it at ~ native speed with VMware Fusion (or close enough not to impede productivity). I tend to be pragmatic. I want all native apps so I can "cut the cord" but we are not there yet.

"Left 'em behind ages ago. It's called "having at least half a brain". Yup. Half will do. Probably less." I wish the same virus-free luck to the rest of the Windows community although the news reports suggest they are not quite there yet. I have not moved to Windows 7 yet but no one will be happier than I if it is bullet proof. After all it was inspired by the best. Sorry, the devil made me say that. I hate myself when I give in to the dark side.

@ yountmj: "That's a pretty big technicality when the applications don't run natively." What you say was true before the rise of virtual machine technology. Now it is limited to the cost of VMware Fusion ($80) and the cost of Windows (varies depending on version and starting point).

Come to think of it, If you are starting with Windows XP and going to Windows 7, it is a mess requiring a full copy of Windows and the reinstallation of your full app suite. Hope you still have all your disks, install keys and other required data. Also, I hope your apps don't track the number of installs and lock you out when you try to reinstall. Of course, we can't hold the Mac responsible for this goat rope since it applies to the whole Windows community. The real shame is it does not need to be that way if a Vista disk were provided to kick-start the upgrade.

I couldn't care less about the value of Dell and HP. I care about the cost, usefulness, and the life-cycle. So far, the Windows-based PC side hasn't let me down. I cannot find any justification to move to a more expensive (and in my experience) just as prone to failure product.

So, rauckr...

I'd be really interested to know what, exactly, made you switch. We know it isn't price or software, since you're paying more and you're still using Windows in a VM... I doubt it's "viruses", because you seem like an intelligent enough bloke, so...what is it?

We just replaced a 1st generation MBP here for a brand spanking new one and I will make sure I will be getting the old one to play around with. Blow me away. What can I do with the MBP that I haven't even known I was missing, but have been longing for all this time? ;)

@ PC_Tool: You don't care about the value of Dell & HP. Fair enough but it does say something about the health of the industry. NetBooks are killing Windows hardware vendors. They are racking up big sales volumes and not making any money on these low margin products.

"I cannot find any justification to move to a more expensive (and in my experience) just as prone to failure product." If your experience is that Macs are just as failure prone as Windows machines, your experience is atypical. Look at the customer satisfaction numbers. Mac is at the top of the heap and has been there since Hector was a pup (or at least since the arrival of OS X :>). We can claim that all Mac users are star-struck zombies but that is nonsense. Most people are pragmatic regardless of which platform they prefer. Fan boys are a small (but vocal) minority on both sides.

Failure prone comes in many flavors and includes the dreaded BSOD and all sorts of hardware/software interactions and failures to interact properly as well as hardware reliability. It also includes the customer support we experience when there is a problem. If your support person can barely speak English in an intelligible fashion and is lost once you get away from their list of script terms, your perception of the product suffers. I will be honest and say that Microsoft's problem is far more difficult due to the tremendous diversity of hardware and application software they support. Also, I cannot speak to any version of Windows after XP but that applies to ~70% of Windows users. I will be moving to Windows 7 at some point. I hope it is great and, at this point, have no reason to believe otherwise.

"I'd be really interested to know what, exactly, made you switch." I am a engineering consultant and have been working in this field for > 40 years. I need hardware and software that just works and my clients don't need excuses. I have also found that the Mac is the best platform for running Windows. I currently have a conflict between Windows XP and the Driver for my HP OfficeJet Pro L7555 printer that periodically leads to a BSOD. I work in a mixed Windows/Mac environment and, at any time, may be preparing a report and researching technical papers on the Mac side while a specialized circuit simulation runs on the Windows side to generate input to the report. A Windows BSOD has no effect on my report preparation (or Internet searches) and I can continue working while Windows recycles. Once again, Windows 7 stability may render these issues moot.

Modern A/V software can largely protect us from viruses, worms, trojans and the rest as long as the protection is up to date ( it does cost money) but there is a drag on response time while the A/V software sifts through e-mail and files. System scans are another response time drain. I have run OS X for ~ 2.5 years with no A/V software on that side and not a hint of any system attack by anything. I do not even know anyone running a Mac who has ever had a virus problem but I am not dumb enough to claim it is impossible. It is a theoretical but not a practical problem at this point. I was lazy and did not immediately get A/V software for the Windows virtual machine when I made the switch to Mac. I was hit with a virus within a matter of days. I was able to roll back the VM to a previous copy predating the infection and was clean within a matter of minutes. Needless to say, I had A/V software installed within the hour. I was running XP x64 and found few A/V options at the time. Kaspersky provided the solution and I have been using it ever since. I also purchased and periodically run a Registry cleaner application (another cost). I also purchased defragmentation software (another cost) and have it scheduled to run in the background on the Windows side. NTFS seems to fragment and HFS+ does not (anecdotal evidence, no proof).

In truth, I can't point to anything you can do with a Mac that you cannot do with Windows. Windows is an exceedingly powerful environment with a blizzard of sophisticated applications. No hardware/software environment is perfect and everyone must choose the one that works best for them. I have worked extensively with every version of Windows from 3.0 to XP. The Mac platform was an interesting curiosity to me until the rise of virtual machine technology. I realized that I could have a rock stable Unix OS and bring my critical Windows applications with me. I am not a naive kid and have never been sorry I switched. I judge my productivity to be substantially higher than before. The total cost of ownership can be quite different than the initial purchase price. Your mileage may vary.

"If your experience is that Macs are just as failure prone as Windows machines, your experience is atypical."

We've had several in house for many years. Of course it is atypical, because we use Dell Business-class workstations instead of the home-lines...which are also atypical.

Of the last 4, the first G5 went into the shop for motherboard replacement twice (This was back when it *was* "Apple Hardware"). The second one (Intel) has been very well behaved. The first MBP was wonderful, the second has been in twice: Once for a replacement CPU (may have replaced the logic board/entire unit...not sure), and the second time was a bad RAM issue.

That's 50% failure rate, even more if you count by the times in, not just by units. Our Dells hardly suffer anywhere near that rate.

Bad batch? Sure. I guarantee it, in fact. I know Mac units use by and large the same hardware used in the majority of high-end Windows-based PC's. All hardware can fail, hopefully sooner rather than later.

FWIW: The Dell folks come here to fix stuff...we don't have to take it to a "Bar." :p

"Modern A/V software can largely protect us from viruses, worms, trojans and the rest as long as the protection is up to date ( it does cost money)"

It costs money? Since when? Sorry...wrong answer. You'll get yourself labeled a MacTard if you keep that up. You and I both know A/V doesn't have to cost a dime.

"I also purchased and periodically run a Registry cleaner application (another cost)"

Why? If anything, this is the reason you're experiencing problems in Windows. This is not only not necessary, but can damage your system stability/reliability greatly.

"I also purchased defragmentation software (another cost) and have it scheduled to run in the background on the Windows side."

Again...why? Defrag comes with Windows...can be scheduled, and if you absolutely *must* use something "non-MS", there are many free alternatives. Defraggler being my current fave.

"Your mileage may vary."

As with anything.

*shrug*

Not seeing it. I don't experience the BSODs and driver issues you seem to have been plagued with...could be hardware, could be software, could be that damnable "Registry Cleaner".

Then again, I am a gamer, so Parallels is out, and I do quite well with my Home-built. As far as business use goes, I can have 3 people working on their own PC's for the cost of *one* Mac Desktop, but I can understand if it were *only* me, (as it seems to have been *only* you), the case might be different.

Well, to each their own. I was really hoping for an A-ha! moment. No worries, been hoping for one with Linux for decades...

But seriously, One tech to another: Ditch the registry cleaner. ASAP.

@ PC_Tool: Thanks for the suggestion.

As another tech to another, might I suggest Piriform's CCleaner (same developer as Defraggler, that PC_Tool recommended). It's an excellent periodic maintenance utility covering many areas, including the registry.

Concerning the registry though, use caution, as always. Nothing's perfect, and it is a delicate beast of a database. =)

@ PC_Tool: The BSOD has been reported on-line to Microsoft repeatedly. The Windows Error Reporting service always comes back with the following:

Blue screen error caused by a device or driver

You received this message because a hardware device, its driver, or related software has caused a blue screen error. This type of error means the computer has shut down abruptly to protect itself from potential data corruption or loss. In this case, we were unable to detect the specific device or driver that caused the problem.

Since the problem started a soon as I installed the HP printer I previously described, confidence is high as to the root cause. The Mac with a VM has spoiled me because I can continue working while Windows recycles. I have automatic daily snapshots of the VM so that, even if the BSOD corrupted the hard drive, I can gracefully recover. I also have Time Machine doing hourly data drive back-ups so I can recover from any data-related problem.

With regard to AV software I am aware there are free alternatives but no major company (that I am aware of and I have many of them as clients) uses any of them. The major AV vendors are large companies and the software revenue pays for an army of personnel tracking threats and working on solutions. I don't want to risk my business computer / data files on a freebie AV program. There may be perfectly reliable candidates out there but I won't play you bet your company on any of them. If I were simply using my computer to send e-mail and surf the Internet, I wouldn't be paying for protection. I am running a business.

I also know there are overly aggressive Registry cleaner applications that do more harm than good. I am using CleanMyPC - Registry Cleaner and have never had a problem with it damaging critical Registry entries. I have used it to keep Windows from becoming sluggish over time as the Registry swells up to many megabytes with fragments from every program, driver etc. that has ever been installed on it. As I said before, I know with high confidence the cause of my BSOD issues. I have a huge number of very sophisticated applications installed on my machine. Believe me when I say I would know if the Registry were being damaged by the cleaner.

I use a premium drefrag package (Diskkeeper Premier from Executive Software) that runs in the background and suspends when you actively work Windows. I had been advised that I would notice a performance increase if I kept the fragmentation at a very low level while I am heavily stressing the machine as is the case with heavy duty engineering simulation / analysis work. I can report anecdotally that that seems to be the case based on consistently low simulation run times. There is zero science behind my experience.

"Then again, I am a gamer, so Parallels is out" I completely concur that serious gamers will not be happy running Windows in a VM due, at least, to Graphics limitations. I am not, and never have been, a gamer. No one solution is right for everyone.

I tend not to respond to you imbeciles anymore.

...but PC_Troll might. He's been back recently. Maybe you can play your stupid little "superiority based on made-up BS" games with him.

Keep suckling on that Jobs Coolaid, I7. At least someone at MS had the -class- to give props to the competition, something the Jobs camp doesn't have the character to do.

@ PC_Tool I object to this intemperate remark on behalf of imbeciles everywhere:>).

So windows copies Mac? What about time machine, alt-tab commands, command prompt windows, remote connectivity to a different machine, minimizing to a single icon of the program, windows explorer dual navigation panes, address bar and control panel? Those existed in a PC first. Just because Apple has great industrial design doesn't mean they are the end-all be-all in Operating Systems.

Where are your sources, internetboy?

try this, open up vmware on your mac, run win7 and xp.. you will find that win7 is so much slower than xp :( kinda sad.

Yes, win 7 is slower than XP on the same hardware but it does more. Win 7 has full text search, more visual effects, better security, etc... You could increase performance by turning off transparency, search indexing, etc... Then you would have XP again.

Take the average PC specs the day Win 7 was released.
Take the average specs the day XP was relased.
I bet Win 7 runs faster than XP did on release day.

Why stop there? I bet DOS runs much faster than XP on any machine. If you're only using speed as your metric then DOS is the OS for you.

Windows 7 is not at all slower then XP. There are a million reviews on the net that prove this. Open your eyes and find them. Plus for those of us useing Windows 7, it's clear as day it's not slower.

If you are running windows on a mac apperently you are not that into mac.

Agreed. I've installed Windows 7 on a machine identical to my XP machine (in fact, the Windows 7 machine has *less* RAM, but they're otherwise the same model and everything), and I'd say Windows 7 actually runs faster. I was quite surprised.

Internetworld7 - are you stupid? All revisions of OSX are indeed just incremental revisions. They have not been NEW operating systems. With each new point release they fixed MANY bugs and looked for performance tweaks. Even Vista can claim that performance was boosted with each service pack.

Again, I point you to DOS. It doesn't do much, but if you want speed then DOS is it.

How about this? Run Win7 on native hardware against XP... VMWare benchmarks mean next to nothing... especially considering that XP has had a full 8+ years of maturity when running under VMWare... how sad that you couldn't figure this out for yourself...

Uh, yes... Windows7 is a new operating system after Vista... The version of the framework that it is built on is greater than that of Vista. Greater than 2 million lines of new code was written for Windows 7. Im most people's minds, that counts as a new version as opposed to an incremental upgrade.

How about this. Run Mac OS 8.1 on your Intel Hardware...

OH WAIT, you can't.. :P

Seriously? You've never heard of Basilisk II? *sighs*

Or SheepShaver, which can actually run up to OS 9.0.4 on Windows...

If one is doing real work on the computer and are pragmatic, you use what works. Windows has far more apps than any other OS and apps are the driver for software purchase decisions. Luckily, we can choose a rock stable OS (Snow Leopard) and bring our critical applications with us using a virtual machine to catch Windows when it stumbles and falls. I, for one, do not choose software because I'm "into it". Windows 7, if it is as stable as predicted, may alter our view of the landscape. Time will tell.

Who really cares who they stole what from. Oh yeah the lawyers do. Microsoft has been stealing from everyone for years. Actually everyone steals from everyone. I do like the new windows 7 taskbar, even if they stole it from apple. Which really they didnt. Cause Aside from little tidbits it's just a natural progression from the quick launch bar. I wanted a bigger change. Like why dock the taskbar to the left, why not center it. Makes more sense now then ever.

I found this: http://windowsteamblog.c...-feel-of-windows-7.aspx

I would think it is plausible to say there was some OSX inspiration in Win 7. The new taskbat is very dock-like which I still don't like. There is also some KDE influence in the task bar.

Likewise, have you seen KDE/Gnome recently. There is a ton of Windows influence there.

Likewise again, there are huge influences in OSX from Windows. One could even argue there is more Windows in OSX than there is OSX in Windows.

My point is that every product is influenced by every other.

oooh... a taskbat. I *want* one of those. Can I use it on co-workers too? ;)

yes, a taskbat.

So....

Where can I get me one of those? ;)

@ PC_Tool: I'll trade you two taskbats for one dingbat if you are really interested.

Ooh... My co-worker for 2 taskbats?

I'll have to think about that one...

Windows 7 "inspired" by Mac? Uh, hell-OHH, Windows 7 was MY idea.

No, Sir, it was MY idea!

Even the commercials were inspired by the best :>).

Who cares if its "LIKE" a mac. If Mac is going to keep being who they are and have there OS run on just there systems thats there choice. If the masses like some feature, then Microsoft is going to do what they can to put that in there OS. I haven't use Lepard, but I'm sure there are parts of that OS that Microsoft came out with first.
The real point is Mac is creative in there thinking, until they can get a Mac into the mainstream (the Business world) Windows is always going to be king.

Mac is a computer line, Apple is the company making it.

Ahh yes, queue fatty, internetworld7 and a new Mac commercial in 3...2...1...

LOL couldn't of said it better than that.

so, easy to use graphics equal 'inspired' by Mac OS X? i do not see a quote saying Windows 7 was inspired by OS X, rather UI inspired by the Easy to Use aspect of the OS (Fix your headline betanews) & big deal?

i think the whole argument has been taken out of context, on the plus side, Windows 7 is easier to use now and hardly looks like OS X

need an editor? offer still stands, looks like one is needed with all this fact bending and headline twisting

“One of the things that people say an awful lot about the Apple Mac is that the OS is fantastic, that it’s very graphical and easy to use. What we’ve tried to do with Windows 7 – whether it’s traditional format or in a touch format – is create a Mac look and feel in terms of graphics,” ... he said that.

“We’ve significantly improved the graphical user interface, but it’s built on that very stable core Vista technology, which is far more stable than the current Mac platform, for instance.” ... he said this also, but the other part makes the news and blog headlines.

where does that say 'Windows 7 (the OS itself) was inspired by OS X' as the headline indicates, nowhere, as far as i can tell. i just think his words got skewed is all.

Windows 7, Easy to Use, Yup. that ain't a bad thing, but anyone who claims 7 UI is somehow a copy of OS X needs goggles

i mean come on, anyone on XP still? set your quicklaunch icons to large, apply a skin and holy s*** you've got the Windows 7 superbar, minus all the fancy options/menus/effects, the superbar is simply an evolution of the taskbar and a welcome one at that

Dear roj: read the article next time before posting. You'll look somewhat less like an imbecile:

'Simon Aldous representing the Worldwide Partner Group gave credit to Apple for creating an operating system that folks in a Microsoft study appreciated. But then, according to PCR Online, a publication for computer and software resellers, Aldous went one step further and said Microsoft took that inspiration and, then with Windows 7, "create a Mac look and feel in terms of graphics.'

Well, let's see.

First off, Apple has never "created" anything. In this latest incarnation, they ripped off BSD and glued a "shiny" on top of it. Secondly, every company with a graphical interface ripped off Xerox Parc and added various aspects of "shiny". Thirdly, the Mac look and feel is, as I pointed out, remarkably restrictive, so whether or not MS wants to do spin on that (and it is spin), the fact remains that Windows is FAR more customizable and thus NOT a Mac look and feel.

Take that as you will...

Well... they do create something: they have some very creative, minimalist and pleasant to the eyes shells for their ripped off software. To me, the core of Apple's success is incredibly tasteful Industrial Design and a brilliant approach to marketing. That's it. All the other stuff? OS X, iLife, etc. etc. has either been ripped off from someone else or acquired. When it comes to actual hardware or software innovation, Apple's contribution is close to zero.

LOL!

Win7 inspired by the Mac?

OK, an operating system that is eminently customizable is inspired by a tightly controlled, non-customizable, "do-it-my-way-or-the-highway" approach.

Sure Jim.

Yup yup yup.

Some people have WAY too much time on their hands.

Innovation?

Stringing together existing technology and applying marketing genius isn't innovation.

Creating technology is.

Apple *bought* Pixar. So that's crap...along with pretty much everything else.

Stable?

*nix??

Since like...when? Check out the Ubuntu support forums. Hell, check out the Mac OS X forums and tell me about stable.

Hell, lets even assume microsoft copied 'em just for kicks...a Mac OS X like OS that runs on *anything*? Yeah...I guess you MacTard Elitists *would* have a problem with that, wouldn't you? You wouldn't be able to feel quite so "special" anymore.

but don't worry...you're definitely special....

WHAT!? How can you call Pixar an innovation on Apple's part? I buy a company and suddenly I am the cause of all of their *innovation*? Complete Crap!

Yet another uninformed idiot joins the ranks...

"But the inner workings of Windows 7 still contains the same crap registry, where all the malware and virus's will find a home."

"The Unix based OSX system, absent of that registry, is supremely stable, and used by the Pentagon eveyday. Damn, I don't even use antivirus software, and my Mac don't slow down or crash."

I always have a good chuckle at this one... Please, post one single link that proves this... Just one. The registry is a CONFIGURATION DATABASE that eliminates the need for .ini files. Secondly, things cannot "call the registry a home"... It's a configuration database, idiot. It cannot store binary files of any sort. It provides pointers to binaries on your system... Also, depite what you Macinspired fools think... Almost every operating system MUST maintain a database of what is installed and also to track user preferences. So, Mr. Genuis... explain to us how Mac (or any other *nix system) maintains the applications and preferences?

Wow, and I thought internetworld was an idiot...

@ PC_Tool: Jobs paid filmmaker George Lucas $10 million for a small firm called Pixar that specialized in computer animation. Then he turned it into a multi-billion dollar monster.

Rackr:

The comment I replied to tried to use PIXAR as an example of Apple's innovation.

"Embrace and Extend" is not an innovation. Hell, it could be argued (wrongly) that Apple copied that from Microsoft. ;)

I'm not saying PIXAR is bad, or that they haven't been insanely successful. I've thoroughly enjoyed their movies (esp. their short-clips) and have nothing against them.