RSSA peek at an early build of the new Win7 taskbar
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published November 4, 2008, 6:16 PM
One of Mac OS X's most successful features has been its zooming apps dock, which has been mimicked in third-party utilities for Windows. Windows 7's new taskbar looks more similar, but its changes are already themselves being changed.
The "pre-beta" edition of Windows 7 handed out at PDC 2008 last week appears on the surface to contain only a slightly revised version of the Windows Vista taskbar, if only temporarily. But developers were actually given hints that an early build of the Win7 taskbar was hidden behind a protective barrier.
Last week, Rafael Rivera, Jr., a contract developer for the Army Department who attended PDC, decided to go hunting for a way around that barrier. Essentially, that barrier only consists of code that does allow qualified accounts access to the newer taskbar. On Sunday, Rivera announced success, and posted an .EXE file that removes the barrier, allowing all Win7 pre-beta testers access to an early build, numbered 6801.
The arrangement of the taskbar changes demonstrably in Windows 7. Most noticeably, the text adorning active tasks, or the applications in which multiple active windows are running, is gone. (It might not be missed very much, because in very active systems, there wasn't much room for it anyway.) What's left are just the icons, which are made bolder. What's more, the main taskbar area can contain not only icons for running applications, but also for those you've pinned there, similar to the way you pin frequently used apps to the Start menu. So some of the icons you see in the Win7 taskbar are for running apps and some aren't; you can tell the difference by looking for the halo that adorns the running apps.
As BetaNews learned at PDC 2008, not even this reworked version of the Win7 taskbar behaves like the most recent builds that are currently being retooled by Microsoft's designers. For example, the pre-beta build still contains the Quick Launch toolbar first introduced in Windows 95; in Microsoft's internal betas, that device has been removed, possibly permanently. The pinning of icons to the main taskbar could render Quick Launch useless; it was already redundant in its co-existence with Desktop icons.
Also present in the pre-beta build but absent in current builds, PDC attendees were told, is a graphical feature Microsoft designers tried for opening up menus beside the taskbar icons. It's something they're calling the jump list, and it's a way to bring up a dynamic menu that applies to active tasks.
But did Microsoft really need the little arrow reminding folks that such a jump list exists? As the company's principal design manager for Windows 7, Steven Moreau, told attendees last week, playing with this older build made his team come to a realization.
Demonstrating the old new build seen in Build 6801, Moreau said, "What you'll notice is, there's a button hanging off of the edge of the icon...Hanging off of the right edge of it is an arrow, it's an 'other' button, something we used to refer to as split buttons -- meaning, there's a primary task and there's another one sort of sidecarring on that.
"Now, this was perfectly acceptable, perfectly successful. You hovered over there, you saw, 'Oh, there's another thing next to Word,' and I can click on it and pull up a menu. It was successful in many regards," he continued. "In abstract, that's fine. When we brought this all together and we started utilizing it, some other little problems started coming up. One little problem that came up was, it was a little bit noisy, the experience of using your taskbar. [Suddenly] everything had an arrow on top of it. It was a little bit noisy and distracting for a function that you really only had to learn once."
In focus tests, the design team found that the thin little arrow provided a very narrow target for people's mouse pointers. There was a realization that this idea that originally appeared to be a brilliant way to condense and simplify the taskbar, could introduce some new nagging problems -- and after User Account Control, Windows didn't need another one of those.
 |
| Samuel Moreau, principal design manager for Windows 7, Microsoft. |
"Then we thought, 'What else are we going to do? It's a really important investment for us; we really want people to be successful, to understand how to use this piece of UX. So what other options could we do? Top, bottom, left, right, where else are you going to put it?"' related Moreau. "Well...what we decided to do was put it on right-click. Very interesting sort of statement there. We had the confidence to say, people will find it. Something that is very core to Windows DNA is right-click. It's very core to how Windows works. And we're taking the discoverability hit for lessening distractions, over the course of using your PC, every day, all day. So you can thank us for not having arrows a year into this experience."
The first official public beta of Windows 7 may yet contain this revised version of the jump list, without the arrow. There's a possibility that Microsoft may have decided to mask this old version in Build 6801 distributed at PDC because it was already effectively deprecated in testing.
Just getting Build 6801 to run in a Virtual PC VM was a slow process for us, and creating new Vista- or XP-based VMs typically isn't that slow. But it's running now, and in the coming days, we'll let you know what we find -- keeping in mind that some of the new stuff we uncover may already be old.
Enabled the Superbar in my install...a few things;
Active/inactive: Active windows show on the taskbar as "raised" with a frame around them.
Number of open instances: On the Right of the icon, there appears a partial frame for each task above the initial one.
Hovering to see the windows in the group takes under a second. each item in the preview has an "X" to close them without opening the actual window (It would be nice if you had a maximize or minimize in case the window was buried...one click instead of two?)
It looks pretty functional, all said. A lot of the comments in here regarding it's usability (or lack thereof) seem to be misplaced. It's very easy to tell if it's active or not, how many tasks of it are active, and quite simple and quick to switch between tasks.
And scott, the install directly to hardware (no VM) on my machine took under 15 minutes (Disc in to downloading Firefox)
Score: 0
|interesting.. i would love to test out this win7 os.
I wonder if it has been leaked to the net yet.. hmm
Score: 0
|usenet, torrent sites...
It's everywhere.
Google Windows 6801.
Score: 0
|Once i read this i can't believe how most people reacted about the new taskbar. Running Win7 beta build 6801 with the "Super bar" unlocked, I can say that pictures do this bar no justice. Even if its not finished.
http://jer-windows.blogspot.com/
The link will take you to the blog of mine where i posted some pictures to questions about resizing and to show that its not difficult to differentiate between running and not running apps.
Score: 0
|Here is a few things that I wanted to share.
I like the idea that Windows 7 will use bluetooth 2.1. Bluetooth 2.1 new stack is natively present in Windows 7. It has faster discovery and easier pairing process.
Also, Windows 7 will have native support for DIVX, XVID, x264 and other popular codecs. If a target device does not support a codec, Windows 7 will transcode it.
They showed a demo between booting a Vista machine and a Windows 7 machine, Windows 7 desktop was much faster available than Vista. In Windows 7, device drivers are loaded in parallel and not serial, also services are started on demand. By doing this, Windows 7 will boot a lot faster then Vista.
Score: 0
|This looks like a bad version of ObjectDock. I hope they take a few tips from them. I found it invaluable on my tablet pc.
Score: 0
|It's far more better than that of crappy Mac OS X. Windows rules!!
Score: 0
|First thing to do with most of these extras is disable them. Microsoft, we want the OS trimmed down, remember?
Score: 0
|Get Linux.
If you disable everything that makes it different from XP, what's the point?
Score: 0
|if you want to LOSE performance sure... go back to the GDI based windows basic or classic themes. WPF and direct2D moves the window handling to the GPU and lets the processor do other tasks.. like... process data! especially now days with the majority of modern computers having dedicated graphics, these "extras" really do improve performance.
Score: 0
|wow. you guys need hobbies. same people posting the same insults in the same articles every time. so glad i read the news for the news and not for the comments and drama.
Score: 0
|microsoft continues to answer the question nobodys asking... "is it possible to stuff even more ugly into one product?" and that answer is a continual, resounding "yes." I'm glad this trend isn't hitting the xbox. The UI in that actually looks to be improving, much like windows mobile.
Score: 0
|Im just overwhelmed by this, i better lie down for a bit. *faint*
Score: 0
|there's nothing to get excited about. it's an early beta of the OS and m$ will probably either redesign the whole thing beyond it is usable or the feature will be available in 'ultimate' or 'business' versions only. if it is available at all.
Score: 0
|Oop they just removed the most important and used part of my windows interface : the quicklauch area ...
Because you know the desktop is often hidden behind windows (and devoid of icons in the stupid basic interface) and the start menu just hide the most useful things behind two indirections ...
And to copy the worst part of the mac OS X (the confusion between active and inactive application) is just : brilliant.
More mood hilighters please mr microsoft, to show us the power of your usability labs and focus groups and whatever "studies" and "research" and "investement" and "technology".
What about : common sense ?
Score: 0
|a:) the quick launch still exists in the new taskbar (I am running the latest beta of Win 7 currently) it just looks different (the photo above has the quick launch disabled)
b:) OS X uses brightly lit dots to represent active and unactive apps... quite simple really to tell what is active and what is not...
Guess common sense means something different to all of us :)
Score: 0
|The quick launch doesn't exist in the new taskbar. The photo above has the new taskbar (although an earlier version of it). MS has announced that they will not include a quicklaunch deskband or toolbar for the new taskbar. It will combine the two allowing you to pin programs to the taskbar. Which is similar to how the mac os dock behaves. But it does not lose the DNA of the taskbar. Infact they've greatly improved on the taskbar functionality (not including the pinning of programs).
Also, text next to icons can be enabled by the user, and it will show it only for running programs. And runnings programs will have a colored highlight in their buttons when you run over them (based on the most dominant RGBv in the program's icon), where as non-running programs will have no highlight.
Score: 0
|*sigh*
You can still pin shortcuts to the taskbar, just like you can with quicklaunch.
The only difference? It's now more functional. You can either use it to launch a new instance of the application or switch to an existing instance.
What about : common sense ?
It apparently went the way of : knowing what the hell you are talking about before running your yap on about it .
Score: 0
|Can we make them smaller so they don't take up so damn much space? Better yet, can we have a mode where unlaunched apps have a small icon and launched ones have a big icon? That would simultaneously address some of the problems with removing Quicklaunch (which I will also miss), and better differentiate open apps from non. Let's save space for god's sake.
Score: 0
|So instead of saving space by having *one* icon (used to launch and switch), you want to save space by having multiple icons (one to launched, one indicating launched)???
Or do you mean that the icon would change size depending on it's status? That's a thought, but it would likely be ugly as hell, small icons next to larger ones... Ugh.
I know they have a method to tell if it's active or not, I think a possible compromise might be to make it astoundingly obvious. A pop-out effect for active apps, perhaps?
Everyone wants more options and more functionality, but there's a certain point at which more options make it too complex for it's needs.
Score: 0
|yes you can make the icons smaller. Then it'll be the same size as the current taskbar and it's icons. You can also enable the text so that the running icons have titles next to them and the closed ones don't. does that help differenciate?
Score: 0
|Could always have the unlaunched ones smaller and over on the left (like quick launch) and then move the icon into the "main" area (and larger) when it is launched. Best of both worlds that way.
Score: 0
|Wouldn't having your icons constantly changing places piss you off to no end?
I know it would, me.
*shrug*
Billion ways to do it, their job is to do it the way that works best for the majority of people, not us. ;)
Score: 0
|Actually, even my suggestion wouldn't work for me either. I use quick launch as a personally organized start menu, complete with folders in it. Of course, that is also why the new task bar being discussed would be rather unattractive to me as it is. Assuming they still allow users to create toolbars, it wouldn't be a great loss to me. I could always create my own "Quick Launch".
Score: 0
|Yes, that helps a lot. This combined with only having text for open apps might be the solution for me.
Score: 0
|Yes, I meant the icon would change size based on launch status. I frankly don't care if it's "ugly" and wish more people had less focus on that. Function first, in my opinion.
Score: 0
|You should learn to read before answering.
I perfectly understood the "pin" capability but it does nothing to the trouble of distinguishing running from non running.
And having to hoover over the icon to know if it is active or not is not a progress. At All.
My point is : different things should not look the same.
And Making icons bigger is not a revolution, just an annoying trend.
Score: 0
|Interesting thought...
I have no idea what their plans are for toolbars. I hope they're keeping them around. I have 4 of them. ;)
Score: 0
|Let me quote icey:
You can also enable the text so that the running icons have titles next to them and the closed ones don't.
Also below, I agreed to that sentiment of yours by stating that, IMO, it will release with the active (running) apps either framed or "popped up".
And having to hoover(sic) over the icon to know if it is active or not is not a progress. At All.
You vacuum your icons? ;)
Depends on the length of the hover. If we're talking nano-seconds here, it's not terribly daunting. From the look of the video's I've seen it takes less than a second for the window snap-shots to appear and disappear (in case that's not what you wanted). All seems pretty smooth and responsive, though only time will tell.
Score: 0
|that's what I plan on doing, also. so you can't return it to the old taskbar, but you can make it sorta look like the old taskbar, but with all the benifits of the new taskbar. But i will leave it as default for a while when i get the beta so i can see how much i like it.
Score: 0
|I like it. I'm currently running Windows XP Pro, while my coworkers are running Windows Vista. I installed the prebeta of Windows 7 on a PC here for testing and all the drivers were detected. It runs fairly quick too. Installed microsoft office 2007 and several in house applications with no problem. Have not received any errors either. I think this one will be a winner. I was told it was built from Windows server 2008.
Score: 0
|Guess what... Windows Server 2008 SP1 and Vista SP1 are built from the same codebase, just pulling different components from tree. Same exact kernel. So yes, this is built from Windows Server 2008 SP1, but it's also built from Vista SP1. And soon SP2. All the fixes from SP2 will be in Windows 7, which will also have Windows Server 2008 R2 built from the same codebase as Windows 7. One happy, consistent, and reliable windows codebase.
Score: 0
|Technically, Windows Server 2008 doesn't have a service pack out for it yet. The about screen for Server 2008 does say SP1, but that was a carryover from Vista SP1, which is the same codebase as the Server 2008 RTM version. The first TRUE SP for Server 2008 is going to be the Vista SP2 package, which will serve as a SP for Server 2008. Make any sense?
Score: 0
|it's not just a carry over from vista SP1. It's just that when Server 2008 shipped, it had all the SP1 bits in it already. It's just like when they ship versions of windows with SP1 or SP1a or SP1b every once in a while, including all the latest bits. That way you don't have to run windows update and download 80+ updates out of the box to bring it up to date. Had they shipped server at the same time as the client, then yeah, you'd need to manually upgrade the server to SP1. But since they are the same codebase and it includes the SP1 bits. So even though there isn't a seperately downloadable SP1 for server, it is SP1. And that also removes any confusion bout why Vista SP2 and Server SP1 are the same package. It's just 1 SP2 for the both, and server will be called SP2. Make any sense?
Score: 0
|Windows 7 will be the best operating system ever
Score: 0
|I think that this will be a lot better then Vista. By reading CNET, Zdnet and a few others, it has gotten some good reviews for a prebeta OS.
I believe that people who have not used the Prebeta Windows 7, should not judge the software. Try the public beta that will be released either by the end of this year or early next year.
Since I have to wait to give it a try, I will wait to give a thumbs up or down on it but I will say that I like what they did to the calculator from the screen shots. It was about time that got an upgrade.
Score: 0
|I like what they did to the calculator from the screen shots. It was about time that got an upgrade.
Feh.. It's just a UI upgreade, no new functionality. The *least* they could do is put a few more numbers on it, I mean...0 through 9??
/that was sarcasm, BTW.
Score: 0
|Is nearly everyone here immature teenagers...? Why do I keep reading...
Score: 0
|Maybe because you belong to the other BN user group - BDSM?
Score: 0
|It actually looks a bit confusing to be honest, not sure I like it. Can't really get my head around how this is more useful & user friendly really.
Score: 0
|Its apparent that you are completely missing the point.
Functionality?!?
You are supposed to look at it and then "ooooh" and "ahhhh".
Score: 0
|It's certainly meant to be more functional.
Having up to 15 applications open at once causes chaos with the taskbar in Windows at present. This goes some way to improve that situation, but can indeed still be worked on.
Score: 0
|Stop replying to my posts please - I have no interest in your views.
Score: 0
|13 "apps" open here at the moment. I'm not seeing this "chaos" yet. But now I'm really afraid to open 2 more! :p
Score: 0
|Completely understandable for one so limited in ability that they "Can't really get my head around how this is more useful & user friendly really."
Score: 0
|You need to respect what Aires just asked you foxfyre. I for one find your rants directed at me both comical and entertaining so please don't stop with the insults but if someone doesn't want to hear from you, respect that.
Score: 0
|"You are supposed to look at it and then "ooooh" and "ahhhh"."
Oh the irony...I am pretty sure what you just stated is Macs unofficial motto.
Score: 0
|can someone remove this "users" spam from the site please?
Score: 0
|hehe now even Windows classic theme looks cool so the days of Win98 UI are gone :) but have no idea if they will update that ugly Vista basic theme with cool new bitmaps though I prefer Aero over it
Score: 0
|Win7 ain't gonna win me on the basis of the resolution of the quick launch bar and a few "jumpy" GUI twists.
Where is the real innovation MS?
Score: 0
|*laughing*
You're another one of those ignorant twats that thinks all Vista was amounted to a "new GUI", right?
The improvements to the core in Vista and Win7 have been posted countless times. Since you've astoundingly managed to ignore *all* of them, why don't you give us an example of what *you* would consider "real innovation", eh?
This should be good...
Score: 0
|Speaking of an "ignorant twat".. You're a fine one to talk.
You really only get the "real" features if you buy the top version of these OSes for hundreds of dollars more. MS places too many artificial limitations in order to force people to buy the top version as well. Other OSes don't place such restrictions on their users and allow people to have the full use. Ms' OSes are primarily eye candy as it is anyways. Unlike you I speak from 25 years worth of real world experience with MS' products. You speak out you your a** only, as always. All libertopians speak out of their asses as well.
Score: 0
|Excuse me?
What features would those be? (Oh right, you've never actually used Vista...how would you know?)
MS places too many artificial limitations in order to force people to buy the top version as well.
Yeah, I hear "Ultimate" is selling like hotcakes....moron.
Other OSes don't place such restrictions on their users and allow people to have the full use.
Software has been sold in "versions" for decades. SE, Pro, Home, you name it.
Ms' OSes are primarily eye candy as it is anyways.
Clueless as usual, but we expect it from you, so no shock there.
You speak out you your a** only, as always. All libertopians speak out of their asses as well.
*yawn*
Right. I can list the features, the benefits, the costs, and even direct folks to other useful resources. You? Nothing but the typical MS-basher rhetoric. "MS is eye-candy"...
Seriously. Get a new line.
Score: 0
|Spoken like the frustrated fascist genocide loving twat you are.
25 years experience? And you have stuck with Windows for all of that time? Scary! Dude, there are more substantial systems out there! But one would think that in 25 years you would know that! Duh!
But then Linix falls over itself trying to look like Windows! But we are so Free! Weeeeee!
Fascinating how you can so successfully come across like a 14 year old gamer sponging off your parents as you live in the attic. Stick to playing your games.
Score: 0
|I hope they realize at some point that a lot of people want DIFFERENT things as far as how the user interface looks and works. They need to integrate a tool with the capability of something like WindowBlinds that will allow people to customize the look and feel of their menu and/or the entire UI.
Yes, they need a DEFAULT UI that looks GREAT and WORKS great. But they need to realize there are a lot of folks out there who want to be able to customize and embrace that concept in the fundamental architecture.
Score: 0
|A lot of people will just learn to get along with it though. And most people there who really feels like customizing will go find some customizing software no matter how customizable it already is.
Score: 0
|Yeah, MS can't do that because they would be considered monopolistic again.
- Windows Blinds or the other many ui enhancement programs fill the need for those people.
Score: 0
|*laughing*
Yeah...because there aren't third party tools for those folks...
Oh...wait
Don't like the interface? Buy Windowblinds, you cheap bas****.
Score: 0
|As I had said before, you're a fine one to talk. People who live in glass houses ........
Score: 0
|Exactly what *are* you smoking? You could at least *try* making sense once in a while, you know. How on Earth would you even have the slightest clue as to whether I am a cheap bas**** or not?
Sure, I'm a bas****, that much is obvious. ;)
But cheap? Bought Vista the day it came out. Own two cars, 5 computers, my kids have more toys than God...you get the picture.
Score: 0
|Does ANYONE on this site have a clue as to what a monopoly or a monopolistic practice is??????????????????????????
Score: 0
|Indeed we do.
And we even do not have the luck of an artistic blur.
Score: 0
|idiot!! google it and find it out
Score: 0
|The question is: Does the EC or DoJ?
The answer to that will lead you to why many think "monopoly" is a word that has a slightly different meaning to what it actually has.
I do take back what I said about Apple last week. However, I still think it is ridiculous how they supply a tools to make applications, and then refuse certain ones on such an arbitrary basis with no forewarning.
This had me jumping on the word monopoly because I equate it exactly to the practise Microsoft had (still have) of bundling IE with Windows. It is precisely what Mac are doing, but they're enforcing it as the only browser also.
Maybe me pointing it out is asinine, but I'd like someone to point out the differences between the two practises.
Score: 0
|Number of victims.
Lack of alternative platforms.
That pretty much sums it up.
MSFT had a huge majority in the market and the people had very few, if any, viable alternatives.
Don't like the iPhone? Get a G1. Or any number of smartphones the market is glutted with. This wasn't an option for the majority of Windows users in that time-frame.
Score: 0
|FFS, man. I have enough puppy-dog trolls already. Go find someone else to harass.
If you can't reply with a rational argument, don't bother. I have enough retards replying with nothing but personal attacks and childish stupidity.
Score: 0
|If MS offers said product in their OS for no cost WHY would anyone pay for it?
Sounds like a monopoly to me...We can look back at Netscape on that one, Netscape had a paid for version IE was free, who won again?
Score: 0
|It was meant sarcastically, you dumb@ss MS fanboy.
Score: 0
|What's wrong PC_Troll, mad that Prop. 8 banning gay marriage has passed? Seriously, there are other states you can move to.
Score: 0
|Try leaving your mother or young daughter around me and they'll tell you just how much of a "f**" I am. :)
Score: 0
|Let me just correct my mistake, I just meant to say that am gay
Yours truly
Steve Jobs's gay partner
Score: 0
|Case in point...
These idiots cannot carry on rational discussions so they resort to "gay jokes".
You just can't have rational discussions with 3 year-olds...
Score: 0
|It wasn't because it was free, nor was it specifically because it was bundled with Windows.
Sure, that helped, but... ;)
Netscape was suffering from exactly the same BS IE6 was going through. No effort, no outlook, no drive.
By the time Netscape woke up, it was too late.
Score: 0
|OSX is the most clunky OS I've ever used. People get off on it's looks and knowing they're helping to "fight the man". Plus owning a Mac is a huge status symbol like the guy that leases the new BMW every year. "I have money to burn! Look at me!"
It's like they took all the bad parts of the old Amiga OS and painted it.
OSX's file management is a joke and using anything beyond what is presented to you in the first layer of the GUI is like crapping out a Honda.
Score: 0
|Sounds like PixelSmack is on smack.
I can get to virtually ANY Application, document, or file period in a couple of seconds on my mac without ever reaching for the mouse. It's called Spotlight and it "just works" and VERY well because it's integrated at the lowest level into OSX. M$ has tried to copy it but (like everything else) it is really just a pale imitation.
As well, Apple Macs are generally considered a better investment for anyone who has over $500 to spend on a computer. They run better, look better, hold their value better, age better, have better support, come "standard" with a modern and better OS (OSX) that everybody tries (and dies) to copy, AND run Windoze better than the vast majority of PC's - all for the same $.
Get out of the crack house and get yourself a mac instead of talking out your butt. It may cure your addiction to PC crap.
Score: 0
|Cool I can hit the windows key and have anything I want in seconds too,
Not sure how you copy a search program when it has existed in xp since sp2 but again whatever...
Yeah, hate to break it to you but the internals in your Mac are no different then any other PC, the only difference is if your parts break you can't just easily swap out whatever to get it working again.
They look better? its a white farking box for crying out loud get over yourself...
Hate to break this to you but the price you pay for Apple is because of the OS, you take that away and you have a regular PC like everyone else.
Oh but in a white box my bad...
Score: 0
|Everybody tries to copy OS X?
LOL, Mac OS X sucks, it's only about UI and Mac is all about cool looking cases and nothing else!
Don't they copy anything?
Switch user, Time machine, parental controls and so on...they were all present in Windows first then Mac OS X copied (in your sense) from Windows.
Now they are again copying Microsoft by making a 64-bit kernel. Innovative features are first introduced in Windows then those crap OS X writers implement them in their OS later.
Windows provides much more useful features to users than crap OS X does. Windows vs Mac OS X: http://www.betanews.com/..._learn_today/1225564999
You gotta see those posts and get brainwashed!!
LOL
Score: 0
|Mac sucks! go get Windows which is much better than any other OS in the market!! OS X is a joke
Score: 0
|Hey jerkwad, your posts are as asinine as i7s, except that he occassionally gets a few things right - even if it is purely accidental.
You, on the other hand, are a complete idiot.
Yup, and MS invented the 64 bit kernel. Is that why its STILL not EFI compliant? Do you even know what EFI is?
UNIX has been 64/32 bit compliant and fully implemented since the mid 90's - you know, back when you were touting Win95 as the greatest OS in the universe! Oh1 But gee, I guess your mommy did not explain that to you. And it was never explained on the back of the cereal or game boxes your are limited to reading.
And switch user!? Are you kidding me!
UNIX has had user control since its inception! But then you would need to understand what it is in order to know that.
How about you simply start with trying to implement sandboxing in Windows (and no, that is not the litter box you routinely use that you will claim to have invented as well) - as soon as you find a replacement for ActiveX! LOL!
Score: 0
|That makes you an idiot too. I was talking about OS X, not UNIX. OS X will have a 64-bit kernel but right now it doesn't have one. Switch user feature was first introduced in XP and then rotten Apple introduced that feature in tiger. Just read the post properly before barking. Got it!!
Score: 0
|Whether unix has supported it or not, does not mean that mac os x made it available to the user.
Yes, windows made fast user switching available before mac os did.
Yes MS made the first widely mainstream 64-bit OS, that runs the first mainstream 64-bit version of photoshop. The vast majority of Vista PCs are now shipping with 64-bit Vista by default. And no... you don't need to have 64-bit versions of software to run them on 64-bit Vista. It runs 32-bit software with no performance drop from 32-bit Vista.
Score: 0
|It's not even for the OS. It's for the name "Apple".
Score: 0
|Is anyone else seeing this?? The "Mac Loyalist" is switching sides!
Score: 0
|Didn't MS put out a 64bit version of Windows XP specialy for the itanium processor, which was the first system to use an EFI?
Just wondering?
Score: 0
|Internetworld7
internetworld7
internetworId7
See the difference?
It's three different accounts.
Score: 0
|Yup.
Score: 0
|I am sure you have some point aside from the one on your head regarding the kernel, as OSX runs 64 bit programs just fine. Gee, but they decided to move on a smooth integrated 32/64 bit compatible route allowing the need for only one version of the OS for both worlds, didn't they? That @#%& Apple, they allowed it to run on 32bit CPUs! Unlike your 32 bit Windows that freaked at the thought of moving to the 64 bit Itanium as there were then no 32/64 bit x86 processors, and subsequently provided AMD with a substantial window of opportunity. The fact that the kernel has not been fully 64 bit simply saves additional calls being implemented. And its interesting to note that Vista still cannot deal with the 64 bit EFI BIOS developed by Intel for the Itanium. Its just one more of the myriad items left on the floor when the rush to finally get Vista out the door became a bit too frantic.
And sorry fanboy, just because you think you can complain about OSX does not limit the rest of us to the same limited worldview as you possess. OSX is just one desktop implementation of UNIX.
The features that Apple has chosen to roll out based upon their needs are not an indication of the lack of features already mature and available in UNIX.
Here, we'll cite an article regarding an MS authored whitepaper regarding UNIX and Windows:
"An older MS internal whitepaper from August 2000 on switching Hotmail, which MS acquired in 1997, from front-end servers running FreeBSD and back-end database servers running Solaris to a whole farm running Win2K, reads like a veritable sales brochure for UNIX, but concludes that the company ought to set the right example by ensuring that each division "should eat its own dogfood."
The whitepaper, by MS Windows 2000 Server Product Group member David Brooks, has been posted on the Web by Security Office, which says it discovered the item and numerous other confidential MS documents on a poorly protected server. There are a number of other fascinating documents posted, in which the careful reader will find a veritable treasure map for hacking the citadel, but the one I enjoyed best was the comparison between Win2K and UNIX.
Among the observations is a very basic one about security: "A fact about UNIX is that it is easy for an administrator to ensure that there are no irrelevant services running. As well as giving the potential for maximizing performance, it is useful to be sure that there are no random TCP/IP or UDP ports open that could be used as a basis for an attack," the paper notes.
Next there's kernel stability: "Both the UNIX kernel, and the design techniques it encourages, are renowned for stability. A system of several thousand servers must run reliably and without intervention to restart failed systems," the author notes, and adds that, "Apache is also designed for stability and correctness, rather than breadth of features or high performance demands."
Then of course there's the cost of ownership, which MS insists, against overwhelming contradictory evidence, gives Windows an advantage: "FreeBSD is free. Although there are collateral costs (it's not particularly easy to set up) the freedom from license costs is a major consideration, especially for a startup."
And it's easy to minimize a UNIX system: "It is particularly easy to cut down the load on the system so that only the minimum number of services is running. This reduced complexity [and] aids stability and transparency."
Whereas: "A Windows server out of the box is an elaborate system. Although it performs specific tasks well (such as being a web server) there are many services that have a complex set of dependencies, and it is never clear which ones are necessary and which can be removed to improve the system's efficiency."
Another good thing about UNIX is that everything is out in the open, for admins, anyway: "It's easy to look at a UNIX system and know what is running and why. Although its configuration files may have arcane (and sometimes too-simple) syntax, they are easy to find and change."
Whereas in Win2K: "Some parameters that control the system's operation are hidden and difficult to fully assess. The metabase is an obvious example. The problem here is that is makes the administrator nervous; in a single-function system he wants to be able to understand all of the configuration-related choices that the system is making on his behalf."
Another strike against Windows is the GUI: "GUI operations are essentially impossible to script. With large numbers of servers, it is impractical to use the GUI to carry out installation tasks or regular maintenance tasks."
Then we have the ease of UNIX administration: "Most configuration setups, log files, and so on, are plain text files with reasonably short line lengths. Although this may be marginally detrimental to performance (usually in circumstances where it doesn't matter) it is a powerful approach because a small, familiar set of tools, adapted to working with short text lines, can be used by the administrators for most of their daily tasks. In particular, favorite tools can be used to analyze all the system's log files and error reports," the author explains, and notes further that:
"Over the years, UNIX versions have evolved a good set of single-function commands and shell scripting languages that work well for ad-hoc and automated administration. The shell scripting languages fall just short of being a programming language (they have less power than VBScript or JScript). This may seem to be a disadvantage, but we must remember that operators are not programmers; having to learn a block-structured programming language is a resistance point." Furthermore, "PERL ... is more of a programming than scripting language. It is popular for repeated, automated tasks that can be developed and optimized by senior administrative staff who do have the higher level of programming expertise required."
We find also that the Windows image size can be a real inconvenience on a big farm: "The team was unable to reduce the size of the image below 900MB; Windows contains many complex relationships between pieces, and the team was not able to determine with safety how much could be left out of the image. Although disk space on each server was not an issue, the time taken to image thousands of servers across the internal network was significant. By comparison, the equivalent FreeBSD image size is a few tens of MB."
And finally, we're reminded that Windows often needs a re-boot when a UNIX admin can simply edit a configuration file, stop the process in question, and immediately run it again with the new configuration.
This is also a great advantage when things go wrong: "A service may be hung, and rather than take the time to find and fix the problem, it is often more convenient to reboot [a Windows machine]. By contrast, UNIX administrators are conditioned to quickly identify the failing service and simply restart it; they are helped in this by the greater transparency of UNIX and the small number of interdependencies."
Another item worth mentioning, though not directly related to a UNIX comparison, is the cost of load-balancing technology and its supporting software. Using Windows load balancing service requires Advanced Server, whereas using Cisco's Local Director needs only Server. The costs, we discover, are dramatically different:
"Although Hotmail uses Microsoft software without license fees, we must consider this project as a model for real customers. Use of WLBS requires Advanced Server, but Server provides all the other features used by Hotmail. Using list prices, the cost comparison for a farm of 3500 servers is: Using WLBS (hence Advanced Server): $15M+ / Using LD and Server: $6M+"
Also very entertaining is the dramatic difference between the internal whitepaper and its public version on MS TechNet in terms of facts.
For example, TechNet assures us that, "administrators generally find benefit from porting 'cron' jobs to Windows Task Scheduler events. Both Microsoft Interix 2.2 and SFU allow administrators to port 'cron' files to Windows 2000 without any changes in most cases, allowing administrators to gradually transition scheduled events and scripts without impacting operations i.e. at migration scheduled events can still run as 'cron' jobs. After the migration, the 'cron' jobs can be migrated to Windows Task scheduler events. The Windows task scheduler has better integration with event logs."
But the whitepaper had found that, "using FreeBSD, such tasks are scheduled by the cron service. Jobs are scheduled by being listed in a file, one line per job. Changing the file is easy to accomplish using the command line (or rdist), and replacing the entire file is a good way to ensure that each server has exactly the schedule of jobs that the administrator intended. Jobs can be scheduled to execute once, or at intervals down to one minute.
"Although the Windows Task Scheduler service is fundamentally able to look after such jobs, the interfaces provided in Windows does not measure up to the task. The usual interface is the GUI, which is appropriate for setting up jobs on a machine at a time, is labor-intensive and error-prone.
"The command at is deprecated, is not able to schedule repeated jobs at a frequency of less than one day.
"The command jt was offered by the Task Scheduler team, but it is unsupported and awkward to use (it was intended for testing).
"None of the three interfaces offers an easy way to replace the current task schedule entirely. The team met the need by running the cron service provided in Services for UNIX. As described earlier, relying on Services for UNIX (or any other package subject to extra license costs) provides a bad model for other customer deployments."
So once again we see that TechNet is more a source of rhetoric than information, just in case their painfully-cheerful security bulletins had left anyone in doubt.
It is terrifying to contemplate the efficiency bonus MS would have enjoyed if it had only been willing to base its entire corporate operations on UNIX instead of eating its own dog food. The software monopolist might today be in the bizarre position of being the world's only consumer of unices."
http://www.securityoffic.../mssecrets/hotmail.html
http://www.theregister.c.../21/ms_paper_touts_unix/
And have you ever heard of su and/or sudo? Of course not! It has been available for OSX since its inception, and for UNIX long before, in addition to the fundamental su command.
We sure are lucky MS taught the world how to do this! LOL!
And as far as your 'runas' command, the Windows Admin does not have the same priveleges as Root. Ever try to modify the Local System processes as Admin?? Ooops!
"In Unix-style computer operating systems, root is the conventional name of the user who has all rights or permissions (to all files and programs) in all modes (single- or multi-user). ... BSD often provides a toor ("root" backwards) account in addition to a root account for better usability while performing administrative tasks. The root user can do many things an ordinary user cannot, such as changing the ownership of files and binding to ports numbered below 1024.
...
It is advisable to create a normal user account instead and then use the su command to switch when necessary.
The sudo utility can also be used instead to allow a measure of graduated access.
Many operating systems, such as Mac OS X and some Linux distributions, allow administrator accounts which provide greater access while shielding the user from most of the pitfalls of full root access. In some cases, the root account is disabled by default, and must be specifically enabled...
In Windows NT and later systems derived from it (Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Server 2003 and Windows Vista), there may or may not be a superuser. By default, there is a superuser named Administrator, although it is not an exact analogue of the Unix root superuser account. Administrator does not have all the privileges of root because some superuser privileges are assigned to the Local System account in Windows NT. The Local System account can be accessed by the user by making Task Scheduler start a command prompt, which is then launched as Local System (the account Task Scheduler runs on), allowing you to run anything as Local System.
In Windows Vista or later, you can use User Account Control to run a process with elevated privileges (for example, by right-clicking (Windows 2000 users must hold the s*** key while right-clicking) on the program and selecting Run as administrator). In earlier version of Windows, the command runas fulfils this task..."
Score: 0
|Tool, do you happen to know what BIOS is used in the native 64 bit version? Does it still depend on a 3rd party licensed BIOS as the 32bit version does?
Score: 0
|Native? Are you talking about the x86/64 or the Itanium?
Itanium (and Itanium2) use the EFI. They have to.
Standard x86/64 Windows versions (other than the itanium specific versions for 2000/XP) didn't support EFI until Vista/Server 2008 and will boot from traditional (legacy) BIOS (still supported in Vista/2008/Win7).
It sucks really. We should have all been using EFI a decade ago...
Score: 0
|Just to clarify.. You may want to specify what 64bit platform your talking about. Rather then using a blanket statement like 64bit.
PPC? X86-64? Itanium? Spark?
(I think the Cell is 64bit compliant too? Maybe... Not sure)
Score: 0
|Jinky, I've added you to my friends list. I couldn't have said it better. Switching to a Mac has been an incredible adventure for me. I haven't looked back and I couldn't be happier. A Mac is one of the best things to ever happen to me.
But yeah, it's obvious PixelSmack is on smack. When taking a critical look at both operating systems Mac OS X is so far ahead of Winblows. In fact Tiger offers more than Windoze Vista 2nd edition a.k.a Windoze 7. Life is good on a Mac.
Score: 0
|No I don't have any other point aside from the one that I mentioned. From next time read and understand properly before barking!!
Score: 0
|It's a shame it is not compatible with the majority of programs available out there. :/ What a drag.
Score: 0
|Did you really just say a Mac is one of the best things that's ever happened to you?
I mean, we've got...first time making out with girl, first time having sex, getting married, going on an exotic vacation, buying a new car, having children...
Somehow a Mac falls in there?
Personally man, i'm a cool guy that likes to nag on Mac users. Nothing against them personally, and in fact my girlfriend owns a Macbook and that's her preferred system...
but you are just weird.
Score: 0
|Sorry guys let me correct my mistake again, what I meant to say was Mac OS X is for losers. Windows 7 will rule the computer world!
Your's truly
Steve Jobs's gay partner
Score: 0
|Yet another Mac inspired feature in Windoze. You guys really need to thank Apple for this or better yet get the real thing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0aS5t222_4
Score: 0
|Oh rats I was wrong. He's still here trolling.
Tsk Tsk.
Score: 0
|Truth and trolling are two different things. The only thing I'm capable of is giving Apple Macintosh truth. I'll leave the trolling to you and your kind.
Score: 0
|As the Mac must look to NEXT...
Score: 0
|Then start doing so and give NEXT the credit.
The Mac in no way initiated the use of the Dock.
Score: 0
|It may have been inspired by the Mac...but at least this one is useful. ;)
Score: 0
|oh get over yourself, ever hear of surface tech? presented by MS well before apples iphone.
Score: 0
|You truly are a moron, its amazing really
- This is a PRE BETA of Windows 7 its not even finished yet
Its running on a 1 Ghz processor with 1 gig of ram netbook, hows Apple doing there?
- You do realize Apple borrows as well, they take from Linux so I guess that makes it ok?
- They also took ideas from Windows - system restore existed long time before time machine did. Technically widgets have been around since windows 95 called active desktop
- Mac's entire GUI was NEXTSTEP
- MS has had something similar to Expose for years
you can have windows side by side
you can cascade them
you can group them
With Vista you can use flip 3d &
Stack Windows (also do the above mentioned)
- Compiz - Fusion must have taken from Apple too because the interface is comparable also mention that a lot of Linux distros have a Mac/Windows Hybrid for the GUI
Yes it maybe inspired but Windows did to the dock what Apple did to system restore.
Also technically MS had the Dock first it was called quicklaunch and has existed in Windows for years.
The new taskbar seems to be improving on quicklaunch and adding something more to it.
But once again, EVERYONE Borrows from one another because if they didn't and you could only get that feature and it was detrimental for use for everyone we would call that a monopoly
Score: 0
|When it comes to handy features for every kind of users, Windows is way ahead, and now Windows 7 will take it's user interface way further. Just compare that UI of Windows 7 with ugly Mac OS X's Aqua. And you guys should thank Microsoft because Apple is making a 64-bit kernel inspired by Microsoft. LOL
Score: 0
|Why do you even bother telling him the truth? He is such a moron!! CrapMac f**got
Score: 0
|You?
The truth?
*Laughing my a** off*
Aren't you the complete and total moron that once said...
By internetworld7
posted Jun 23, 2008 - 10:37 PM
When I last checked, Apple was #1 in every market they compete in.
Yeah...that was a doozy. At least you're good at bringing in the laughs, man.
Score: 0
|Unless Steve himself is chanting "Apple is just a BSD Distro with a Next GUI" he won't listen...
Score: 0
|and you must be one of us, but still in closet.
Score: 0
|Yes guys get a Myaaah and waste your money on it. I will get paid if you do so because am hired by my rotten Apple team. So if you buy one, I will get $100 for it. So keep doing so
Yours truly
Steve Jobs gay partner :)
Score: 0
|Yup, the MacOS has stolen its GUI from Windows.
Sit down!
Score: 0
|Ironically, FreeBSD with a Next style GUI IS superior to Windows!
Score: 0
|Where the hell did he say that?
You really like making s*** up, don't you?
He made no accusations, you're simply taking what he wrote to the absurd. A poor substitute when one can't argue based on reality...
Sit down, indeed. Take a breather.
Score: 0
|That's not a fact, its opinion you do know the difference, right?
Score: 0
|Spoken like a desktop gamer. Expand your horizons and work on distributed Enterprise systems for awhile and find out why UNIX dominates.
It is a fact.
And then take agander at the annual DHBrown evaluation of OSes and wonder why Windows is always last...
Score: 0
|Yup, and the entire Mac GUI is Nextstep - funny, Next was simply an UNIX implementation of the Mac GUI with an integrated development environment - in other words, the MacGui with UNIX scripting capabilities - after Jobs was tossed from Apple.
And read shell-odor's: "When it comes to handy features for every kind of users, Windows is way ahead, and now Windows 7 will take it's user interface way further. Just compare that UI of Windows 7 with ugly Mac OS X's Aqua. And you guys should thank Microsoft because Apple is making a 64-bit kernel inspired by Microsoft."
And all of the myriad features that Apple 'copied' from Windows. Albeit being ignorant of what UNIX provided almost from inception.
Of course UNIX has been 64 bit since the mid 90's - you know, back when Bill was denouncing the fly by night Internet thing... And now you can't buy a 32bit version of the the MacOS. Yup, Windows leads the way.
That must be why backends running Oracle, DB2 and Websphere, just to name a few, are dominated by Windows hosts...NOT!
Almost sounds interesting if one lives in a Windows only worldview. But utterly nonsensical if one has lived in the world of 'larger' more powerful and capable OSes.
Yes, genius, my comment was hyperbole! Unfortunately you fail to understand its meaning. We must not have explained the meaning prior to its use - only this time we aren't using acronyms.
It really gets old listening to the same Windows apologists who feel like they have to claim to be the first with every feature. Just as it is listening to i7's asinine rants.
There are plenty of pros and cons that could be intelligiently discussed - but not here in the land of the fanboys who yell about their favorite and yet are ignorant of the alternatives.
Score: 0
|Twisting what people say to launch yet another tired rant.
...and when called on it, as usual, you hit to left field and condescend.
You're going to start getting Aries response to you from everyone. Won't *that* be fun?
Score: 0
|...Like you already do? You tell us...
Score: 0
|Actually, when people reply to me with an actual tone of discussion, we get on fine.
Whereas, regardless of the tone, anyone who dares reply to you (or post anything at all when your in one of your manic states) gets their head bitten off.
See the difference?
Score: 0
|You really are quite arrogant?
You can't ever reply with just an answer but rather a snide remark
I don't use my pc for gaming but you know go on assuming like you always do.
Its still not a fact
Fact the Earth is round - it can be proven
OSX is superior to Windows GUI - opinion because this can be contested and depending on individual needs you would be wrong.
Score: 0
|Wasn't that the truth?
(I see you really like that quote, I'm gonna have to work hard to create some new ones for you)
Score: 0
|Oh, so YOUR opinion is superior to others?
Amazing from one who maintains performance and design and elegance are purely preference and are thus only opinion.
There are objective measures of design and efficiency.
But what is really hilarious is that you think I am simply comparing the OSX GUI with the Windows GUI, when my primary focus was on the larger world of UNIX functionality. As some of us do not only live in the realm limited to puny PC desktop environments. And its interesting that OSX and Linux are simply the 'smallest' scale UNIX products. And your entire Windows universe, including the Server products don't offer much more functionality.
Fact, fanboy.
Go read the MS memo regarding moving HotMail to Windows from BSD.
http://www.securityoffic.../mssecrets/hotmail.html
http://www.theregister.c.../21/ms_paper_touts_unix/
Just out of curiosity, why was it that MS moved to a GUI from the commandline? As they commanded the largest marketshare even then, why did they feel compelled to copy what was obviously an inferior environment? And now, as they copy still more features. I know, I know, you just can't stop that innovation jurgenaut!
Hell, Windows would do well to simply adjust the downsizing sizing of the windows to scale just larger than the displayed Window contrents rather than simply full screen or too small. But others have had that for 25plus years!
Score: 0
|What's wrong with being a desktop gamer? Get off your high horse, you ass.
Score: 0
|Are they #1 in anything besides MP3 players?
Score: 0
|See kids?
This is what happens when you sniff glue.
Even though a company has less than 10% of the market share, you'll still make asinine claims that they are #1 in every market.
No tardboy, it wasn't.
Score: 0
|I just hope that Microsoft learned it's lesson from Vista.
Don't confuse customers with to many versions.
Improve performance and reduce it's foot print on system resources.
This should by all counts be called Vista SE (Second Edition).
So far I have heard of people running Win7 on systems with as little as 512Mb of RAM, and work on Net Book's. If this keeps when Win7 goes gold might end up being the Vista that Vista should had been.
For good public relations I think that Microsoft should give all those that bought Vista, Win7 for free or at a greatly discounted price.
Score: 0
|The discounted price comes by purchasing the upgrade version instead of the full version. Don't hope for much more.
And no... it really shouldn't be called vista SE. 98 SE didn't change 98 by nearly as much as windows 7 is different from vista (in the UX and features department).
Score: 0
|I have the beta.
The "super" bar is disabled but with a few hacks and tricks you can enable it.
The entire OS is vista SP2 right now, in my opinion.
There is no difference other than labels and link locations.
Score: 0
|There is no difference other than labels and link locations.
O RLY?
Startup Repair?
HomeGroup?
60+ Control Panel applets (including, finally, a Display Color Calibration tool)?
Sounds like someone here may have the beta....but hasn't actually *done* anything with it yet.
Score: 0
|How easy is it to get this to dual boot with Vista?
Score: 0
|PITA. Backup your Vista installation (I am sure you can find a copy of TrueImage somewhere) and install it if you are interested.
Haven't tried the "superbar" hack yet. From what the original creator of the hack said, it's not fully functioning. Not sure I want to see it only half-functional.
Score: 0
|I hope they continue to change it, because it's butt ugly right now.
Score: 0
|the new interface, while functional, is shyt ugly. I don't want any more glass than in window frames.
It was delightful in Vista/7 6801, try something between the new and those.
Score: 0
|I could care less how it looks, I care more on how it works. Looks can be changed by Microsoft later or by third party add-on's.
I care that it works, it's stable, and does not bring a top of the line PC to its knees.
Score: 0
|You must be blind or something...i think it looks awesome..and i hope they keeping going in this direction. "Jealous ones envy"
Score: 0
|"I care that it works, it's stable, and does not bring a top of the line PC to its knees."
You don't have to wait on Microsoft for this. You can get all of that and much more with a Mac. It's a "PC" done the right way:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHK8Irb3P5E
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDNuq94Zg_8
Score: 0
|Look to the future for here lies the answer that you seek:
http://www.apple.com/macosx/snowleopard/
One OS to rule them all.
Score: 0
|As long as you don't need a capable portable...
Score: 0
|Either getamac is "you" or you worship this person, either way kind of scary.
If you at least had a clue the world might hold its breath but you are here simply to cause fights, you provide no knowledge, no rebuttal just diarrhea of the mouth
Score: 0
|ROFL
Thats innovation, really??
All things that have existed in Windows for quite some time
LOL Microsoft Exchange Support, now thats the kicker...
64 bit - is nothing Apple related it has to do with the processor and mobo so thats more support not a feature of a new OS
Oh good Quicktime a new update maybe won't suck as much this time...
OpenCL is nice but everyone has been using DirectX for years don't see everyone jumping on this yet...but I could be wrong.
Multicore Support has existed Since XP granted not as good as Vista but still not a feature either just support.
Score: 0
|LOL. That's the OS that will rule the ignorant f**gots world!! Windows 7 will kill Snow Leopard--feature less crap. You are just like that Steve Jobs, he just knows how to bark and so do mac f**gots!!
Score: 0
|even the new DirectX 11 has support for what openCL is trying to do. Give people access to the GPU for computing power. Looks like MS is gonna beat apple to the punch this time.
Score: 0
|Ahh I was not aware of that, thanks
Score: 0
|Yep, they keep putting bandaids on a dying leopard - Brilliant.
You know there is a reason the author of the core of OS X works at Microsoft, as even he knows the limitations of the OS kernel he invented. (Go look it up.)
As far as usability, security, stability, OS X hasn't been able to compete with Windows since XP, and that is an OS that was released at the same time as OS X.
Some of the thing I love about SnowLeopard is the 'features' they are adding that users think have been in the OS for years already. For example: 64bit - OS X only enables application extensions to address the 64bit memory areas, OS X is NOT 64bit. (When you need new drivers for all your devices, that is the version of OS X that will be 64bit.)
PS XPx64 and Vistax64 are full 64bit OSes, with all the 64bit features and kernel level optimizations. This is why Vistax64 runs about 15% faster than Vistax32.
The CPU scaling features are also a fun laugh, considering Apple has been putting bandaids on the BSD/MACH kernel that inherently has scaling problems as a consumer level OS due to the monolithic nature of the kernel design. This is something Windows NT desgined around and over came back in 1992, as it doesn't have the weight of a microkernel design, nor the limitited kernel queues of a monolithic kernel.
(This is why NT can make radical changes to the kernel and driver sets, ie WDDM, as it isn't restricted by either kernel technology extreme as found in OS X or Linux.)
Also for the poster above, XP wasn't the first version to support multi-core. XP & Win2k Retroactively were the first versions to open the licensing so that multi-cores weren't seen as multi-CPUs and restrict multi-core usage based on the OS licensing model. And it was actually added for HT intially, since a HT CPU shows up a two separate CPUS.
NT has been able to do multi-CPU/multi-core since it was designed - back in 1992.
Macfans, stick to UI debates if you want a chance to win an OS X vs argument, and even then a lot of the functions you enjoy in OS X were 'invented' by Microsoft, just in case MS ever gets patent/sue happy and you lose a great amount of functionality of your computer. (Select & Modify to squiggle spellcheck to even several drag and drop concepts as basic as text.)
Score: 0
|You should be careful with using the word "f**got" here. There's quite a few of them at this site like terminalx, cesscam66, Hollywood_, PC_Troll, another guy who also goes by the username Internetworld7 except he uses a capital I and I use a lowercase i.
Plus these guys are really upset that Prop.8 banning gay marriage has passed in California.
Score: 0
|LOL another Mac fanboi trolling the Microsoft postings.
Score: 0
|turn ur glass to the graphite preset or black... and turn off transparency... that's probably what i'm gonna end up doing because i like black window frames.
Score: 0
|Someone's obsessed...
Some hidden sexual orientation confusion in your closet there, tardboy?
Score: 0
|