RSSFive Vista perception problems Windows 7 must overcome
By Carmi Levy | Published May 28, 2009, 1:25 PM
Poor Windows 7. Months before its official launch, it's already fighting to live down the reputation of its older siblings. It's bad enough it has to fight perceptions of insecurity (I'm looking at you, XP) and bloated incompatibility (Vista, anyone?). But like the poor kid entering a high school after his older brothers have spent years being serially suspended for misbehaviour and general hooliganism, Windows 7 has an uphill battle ahead of it. Whether the perceptions are earned or not is irrelevant. Undoing them is a monumental process either way, and it all rests on the shoulders of a kid whose only mistake seems to lie in carrying the family name.
But undo these perceptions it must. Windows 7 promises to be Microsoft's most crucial launch ever because the company's very future has never been in as much question as it is now. Its two cash cow franchises, Windows and Office, are mooing a little less deeply these days thanks to a seismic shift away from the traditional PC model. While Vista's problems are more perception than anything else, there's no escaping the cruel reality that the age of Windows-everywhere-by-default is over. As conventional desktop and laptop PCs give way to all sorts of new form factors running all sorts of new operating systems and connecting to the outside world in all sorts of unconventional ways, Microsoft can't afford another lukewarm Windows launch.
So far, at least, Windows 7 looks like Microsoft's best bet yet to lay to rest long-held perceptions that its OS offerings are bloated malware magnets that needlessly clutter end-users' lives. Before Microsoft declares ultimate victory, however, it needs Windows 7 to overcome five key perception challenges:
1. It's a security nag
Microsoft blew it big time with its nag-in-a-box approach to Vista security. While more savvy users could easily tweak the settings to stop the annoying reminders from popping up every third mouse click, most users lack the time and ability to dig into the guts of the OS and make the changes themselves. Windows 7, which promises to ship with even more robust security capabilities, will at least be configured out of the box to be somewhat less annoying than a late night infomercial pitchman.
2. It's a security black hole
Dominating the market for so long makes you an easy target for all sorts of malevolence. Hackers and criminals target Windows because it's more fun to inflict damage on hundreds of millions of Microsofties than a few million Linux users. As much as critics like to knock Windows for being the security equivalent of Swiss cheese, Microsoft's become quite effective at identifying vulnerabilities and closing gaps. Windows 7 should only extend that robustness -- assuming end users continue to hold up their end of the bargain.
No discussion of Windows security is complete without putting it into an Apple context. While Apple fans fervently believe their beloved Macs are completely impervious to viruses, Trojans, worms and related nasties, the sad truth is Macs have gotten off because their single-digit market share wasn't large enough to make the investment worth it for hackers. As Apple's market share continues to grow, that will almost certainly change.
(And before you slam be for being anti-Apple, a bit of disclosure: I've got an iMac and a Mac mini in my home office, happily coexisting alongside Windows Vista, XP and, horrors, 98. I love my Macs, too, but I don't believe in blind worship.)
3. Macs do stuff that Windows can't
I get that some things may be easier or more elegant on one or, to be fair, the other. I often find myself shifting work between Mac and Windows machines because my brain works better in that OS for that particular task. For everyone who says only a Mac can do video or music production, I can find two people who beg to differ. I have no problem being a multimedia maven on my Vista machine, and my experiences with Windows 7 betas convince me the experience will only improve. It's time to discard 1980s-era OS-based xenophobia. Times have changed.
4. It's bloated
Microsoft knew it had a problem when users openly campaigned to extend XP's availability and support. The fact that Vista has almost zero presence in the fast-growing netbook space illustrates how critical it is for Microsoft to return to a lean and mean OS methodology. We don't need slick-looking interfaces that subsequently bog down system performance. We need elegant, simple environments that make the best use of whatever modern hardware we may be using.
Now that Microsoft has decided to remove the silly three-application limit from Windows 7 Starter Edition, Windows users looking for a light and agile OS that runs on lower-powered hardware no longer have to downgrade to XP. Windows 7 on netbooks is the clearest message yet that this is not your father's Vista.
5. It has lousy compatibility
Microsoft deservedly took it on the chin for chintzy driver compatibility when Vista was first released. It's done a much better job reaching out to hardware vendors throughout the Windows 7 development process to minimize the number of stranded pieces of hardware this time out.
Can you ever hit 100% compatibility? No. But the scanner that I never managed to get working with Vista worked just fine with the last Windows 7 beta. And, no, not even my Macs could make that claim.
Although it's still too early to divine whether or not Windows 7 will save the franchise for Microsoft, we do ourselves no favors by writing it off simply because of broad-based -- and often wrongly-formed -- perceptions. Like that high school kid forced to live down his older brothers' reputations, we at least owe him the courtesy of hearing him out and letting him perform on his own merits before we cast judgment. People, after all, can change. Families can, too.
Carmi Levy is a Canadian-based independent technology analyst and journalist still trying to live down his past life leading help desks and managing projects for large financial services organizations. He comments extensively in a wide range of media, and works closely with clients to help them leverage technology and social media tools and processes to drive their business.
Am I the only one that doesn’t like W7? I haven’t really noticed it being that much faster than, Vista and I hate the start menu, at least with Vista you can still use the classic start menu, why remove that as an option? And I used to just drag shortcuts to the taskbar, I can’t seem to do that with W7, and no email client, so MS is actually taking stuff away from Windows, yes I know you can download plenty for free, but why remove the email client after all these years? It takes almost as much space as Vista, even if it was a free update I wouldn’t want it, I only ever build my own computers so I won’t be getting a copy of W7 with a new computer, and to be honest even if I did buy a new computer I would format it and put Vista on, I only bought Vista two years ago, there is no way I’m buying a new OS for a few years yet, maybe Windows 8?
Score: 0
|i think the biggest perception to overcome is the misconception that those who purchased vista will "pay" again and buy win7.
true, that many are loyal to microsoft.
but was rushing vista out to market, rough as a raw diamond loyal to the consumers?
clearly, microsoft is trying to atone through win7.
Score: 0
|"i think the biggest perception to overcome is the misconception that those who purchased vista will "pay" again and buy win7."
Anyone buying a new PC after October will be buying Windows 7.
...as it has been for decades.
Clearly, you're implication of no-one buying Win7 didn't take that into account. :)
Score: 0
|The biggest perception to overcome is that what we do with our operating systems is essentially run apps.
Windows Vista/7 doesn't really do that *significantly better* than Windows XP.
Consumers might be willing to simply throw out the old and get the new for speed improvements, but businesses look at computers as tools first, extraneous features secondly. We're getting to the point where the cost of the operating system and the various tools provided by Microsoft are the *top expenses* in computing. Eventually, businesses are going to say, let's start cutting costs from our most expensive areas.
You can't say Linux isn't ready for the desktop, Large enterprises with large profits like IBM, Amazon, and Google have Linus or a free variant running both on the front lines, or on the desktop, and have done so successfully. If they can do it, almost any business can. This has got to freak MS out a tad.
Score: -1
|MS doesn't need to overcome anything. Nobody in their right mind will consider getting a Linux/Mac machine even if Vista stayed the only MS OS for the next 5 years. Value-wise (which is even a MORE important parameter in bad economic times) the Mac is always gonna be an option for the rich. The poor, and their supporters (myself included) would always get a Windows machine so they can install the $2000 worth of pirated software they know and love on it hehehehehehe -- making it do MUCH MORE than a Mac could ever do. Looking for warez for the mac, and learning all its quirks sounds like spending 5000 manwork hours that I'm simply not willing to spend. *I* control which PCs my family/friends buy since *I'm* the go-to person for hardware/software advice. Apple can buy me out for approx 5000hr x $50 and that'll bring them a few hundred future clients. Till then, I ain't switching camps.
Competition must not be just slightly better, but CHEAPER, and much-much-much better to justify me "spontaneously" switching camps.
MS could have even stayed with XP/Vista for 10 more years and probably the vast majority of folks would remain Windows-addicts... But it's very nice of MS to compete with the Mac/etc adding more cool-but-not-really-essential features... ;)
This is a geek website. If you got down off the high mountain and spoke to the "common people", you'll notice 95% of them don't even know what OS they're using... XP/Vista/Win7 it's all the same crap to them. And frankly, they are all pretty much the same. Slight improvements are cool, but nobody is willing to pay for them. Whatever comes on the machine is what people are gonna use, as long as it runs all of their current sh*t hehehehe (Windows software naturally).
Score: 1
|How are those keyloggers, rootkits, spyware, adware, viruses and worms you get from pirated software working out for you? Let me guess, like the other morons out there who download this crap, you actually believe your system is clean?
Score: -5
|I get my warez from the source, the warez groups, who NEVER inject trojans since they've got a 20yr reputation to maintain... Now if you get your stuff from emule....then you made a valid point.
My systems are cleaner than what your systems can ever be... 0-day exploits ain't gonna touch me, cuz, well, that's what a HIPS system is for. Google it my pseudo-expert boy...
Score: -1
|@iTard:
You'd be amazed how experienced users of the USENET and Torrent Sites can get all kinds of software *without* worrying about malware. Hash checking, comments, and of course, scan-before-you-use seems to work just fine for most of them.
But then, you *never* have a clue what you're talking about. (Probably because you do most of your talking out of your ass...)
Score: 0
|It's in the bag, baby.
Score: 0
|I installed W7 RC on 3 computers, two desktops and one laptop. The laptop is quite new HP, everything was installed flawlessly, and the two older desktops (one custom made, 6 years old) both work with no problems. Install took about 20 minutes, and everything is up and running immediately. Every program I have tried, has worked 100%, even old ones that was only supposed to work with XP. For me, I see absolutely no downside whatsoever to upgrading to W7. Its snappy, compatible, and (for me) secure. Make sure you got Defender, firewall, and a good antivirus program (W7 now even recommends and makes it super easy to find and install antivirus programs). Good Job Microsoft!!!!
Score: 1
|Come on, let's stop being Neanderthals here and get out of the stone ages of computing. Mac OS X Snow Leopard will be so far ahead of Vista service pack 2 a.k.a. Windows 7, one needs their head examined if you're not seriously considering a Mac by now.
Truth be told, Mac OS X Tiger is still more advanced and intuitive than Windows 7. Be liberated from Microsoft's half baked Mac clone operating systems and get the real deal...
Score: -10
|For the sake of good discussion...
Shut. The ****. Up.
Score: 3
|"Vista service pack 2 a.k.a. Windows 7"
Hey genius.... Everyone knows Vista SP2 is already out. You're going to have to do better than that. Try SP3 or SP2.5. You'll still be an idiot, but you won't look *totally* clueless.
Score: 2
|Me thinks thou doth protest too much.
Score: 0
|This is a very good discussion. I have been involved with PC s since DOS, then Windows for Workgroups 3.11 right up to present day. I have used Vista since its beta stage and although it has improved with SP1 and SP2, it is still a disappointment. I am now involved with the Beta and now RC version of Windows 7, I use the 64bit system as I did with Vista. And I can say without doubt that Windows 7 RC is a vast improvement over Vista, so much so that I have now installed as my main system, which I normally never do until RTM release, so I have installed all the stuff I used on Vista including games like GTA IV, its start up and shut down times are vastly improved over Vista Its much snappier than Vista in everyday use, smaller install footprint and RAM usage. If the RTM continues this then overtime I can see many XP users moving over to it. I do think MS should remove the Ultimate version and incorprate it in Premium Version as there is no real benefit on buying Ultimate as proven by Vista Ultimate in which very few so called benefits ever appeared. MS should also offer a free upgrade for current VIsta users and lastly, MS should really bring the price down because of the Vista mistake and encourage XP users to buy. To sum up, so far I love the improvements in Win 7, and MS should eat humble pie a bit more with the other points I made.
Score: 5
|I have been using the Windows7 beta since it's first public beta release and I still have yet to see it do anything that makes me say "I should buy this", sorry MS XP still works.
Score: -2
|I agree. I have XP Pro x86 & x64. I run x86 for work simply because XP x64 is pretty poorly supported (IMO) for everything that I do (since computing is a *personal* experience...no reason to go further into this).
My home rig is running Vista Ultimate x64, and only because I have a free copy through work. It has ran with 0 problems, and yes, UAC IS ANNOYING.
I also have a test box running Windows 7 x64 with the same specs as my home rig, and it runs significantly faster and I have had 0 problems with any software or drivers.
Personal Prefs for MS OS's:
1) WinXP Pro x86 OR Win 7 x64
2) Vista Ultimate x64
Since my employer gives me free copies of any MS OS, I will still convert to Windows 7 when it releases. However, if I had to pay for it...I would not immediately jump over until I felt the need to run > 4GB of RAM.
Score: 0
|Nice to see this coming from a Mac user! :-) Times have changed and keep changing too. There are many perceptions out there that are just not true! (Example, Macs are better for multimedia, etc) Although there might be some basis for the generality, the ironic fact of everything is that is now using the same architecture as PCs! (x86). Even Linux boxes use the same x86 architecture! It all comes down to CODE, software. The day will come when the hardware won't matter anymore. Example, I plan to - when I can afford it - to get an Intel Macbook pro. I am doing this not to feel superior than PC users, but to open doors to new software possibilities! Now that Macs are Intel based, I can use Boot Camp and keep all of my Windows Apps, and also I can also use Linux on a Mac as well! This means, I can run ANY software on the planet. Pretty cool idea! The irony is that only Apple is making this possible...
Score: 1
|I've come from XP to Win7RC. I'm also an experienced Mac user and a Linux hobbyist.
7 is a shock. a good shock. My home computer, 3 or 4 years old, runs it faster than my recent clean install of XPSP3, and has all the bells and whistles left on. It runs proggies like the latest Photoshop faster and sharper than on either XP or my work Mac (ditto the rest of Adobe), there isn't an item of hardware it didn't correctly discover (most at first boot-up), it had no problem with a really old and quite obscure USB scanner from Russia.
I did have to elevate a couple of installs but with one area of exception every application I'm used to using installed and run well, most better than under XP. (the exception is anything with a registry cleaner).
Like a Mac, many of the built in apps like DVD/CD/BR/Image burning are excellent (I installed my beloved ImgBurn but I don't need to use it). I've never before felt that about my MS OS.
7 has a very strong feeling of a tightly integrated friendly package but retains the MS strength of adaptability.
I'm sold.
Score: 3
|1. Apple has clearly stated that there is no way to prevent a Trojan. Once the user opens the door and rolls the Horsey in, the plaza inside is ripe for the taking.
2. Did you try VueScan with your scanner on your Mac? It supports ancient and unsupported scanners. Apple never purports to support everything. What they do say is it's easier & less problematic. (I've not had enough experience with Vista to say if Vista fixed shrug and pray though I doubt it.)
Score: 0
|7 still has an annoying bug on the laptop I use where it pauses annoyingly for some javascript and media calls after a sleep/hibernate. Quite annoying, hope it's addressed.
Score: 0
|1. This is what you get with poorly implemented, bolted on security (more like insecurity). OSX, GNU/Linux, Solaris, etc... are built from the ground up with security in mind, which is why their security is so seamless.
2. Windows gets exploited because it is insecure by design. Apache Web server has a bigger market share than IIS, yet IIS gets exploited all the time and Apache rarely does. OSX does not get exploited every other day like Microsoft Windows because it is much more secure. Period.
3. There is a reason video and art professionals use Macs...they are better for it. The tools and OS are better. period. Out of the box, iMovie and iPhoto get you started. Then you can move up the list to Final Cut and even up from there.
4. At its heart, Windows 7 is Vista with a few fixes. The sad part is they are going to force people to pay for it yet again. How much for that single user license again? ROFL.
5. Vista SP2.5, i mean Windows 7, is another mess from Microsoft with a poor driver model and poorly designed APIs. That is why stuff does not work.
6. Analysts sell out, that is their business model. How much did Microsoft pay you to sign your name on their marketing BS?
Score: -11
|1. Check out the numerous kernel vulnerabilities for Linux. Then check the individual distribution vulnerabilities. Typically in the hundreds every month.
OSX may be built with security in mind, but it continually fails first when a hacker contest picks at it.
2. IIS does not get exploited all the time, and hasn't since Code Red. Insecure setups get exploited all the time, and Windows and Linux have both seen hacks based on the applications and insecure setups of each. Man blame wordpress and Adobe if you want to pick apart vendors with crappy security. (OK blame MS for autoplay, what a horrible idea that was and is)
3. Probably an equal number use it on 64-bit Windows workstations with Premier CS4. The advantage with Microsoft here is you can scale to your heart's content with a much wider range of hardware to fit your needs. While Apple does make a nice looking system, I'll take a custom designed workstation every time, and for far less money.
4. I Agree. I think Vista Post SP1 has not gotten enough credit as being a Good OS. But since people don't really care about the OS as much as they do the newer/faster hardware, the cost to new machine purchasers will be the same or less than 3+ years ago.
5. And one can argue that OSX has terrible game support. Or that Linux has pretty crappy driver support. (Or better than all OS's combined, since Linux can support legacy hardware long after Microsoft has abandoned.) Or Solaris isn't a very well supported OS. All OS's have their flaws.
Score: 2
|mjm01010101, You need to prove your point that OS X has terrible game support.
Score: -2
|shhh don't scratch his rose colored glasses...Wait for the hacker to do it. Just think in a few days we will see apple come out with 'simular' features of windows 7 and then the apple zombies will take to the streets to claim Microsoft stole that from apple.
Now if only ATI could write a stable driver for windows 7 err or windows vista or windows xp or heck even OSX.
For what its worth, my testing of windows 7 shows it to be pretty stable and it seems to manage multicore processors better.
Score: 0
|1. I agree. This is one area where Mac OS has the right amount of nagging.
2. Way too many Mac people think the fact that there are few bad guys writing viruses, spyware, etc for Macs means they're more secure. I would say they're less secure... Many Mac apps are written such that they need too much access to the system to function. Their security just isn't tested enough.
3. There are some apps for each platform that aren't available on the other, or they aren't equal on both platforms. MS Office is the prime example; only recently has Mac Office started closing the gap. I think that some of it must be the mentality of the programmers that each platform attracts. Mac apps look prettier, but there's no reason Windows apps can't look nice too. (The same thing goes for iPhone vs Windows Mobile.)
4. I only run Vista on newer hardware, so I never had much to complain about here, but from my testing so far, Windows 7 looks like much less of a resource hog.
5. The biggest compatibility issue I had was running 64bit. Also, some of the Mac drivers that people include in their assessment of compatibility are just generic drivers that don't allow access to all of a devices capability. I've seen this with many printer drivers in particular.
Score: 1
|"Also, some of the Mac drivers that people include in their assessment of compatibility are just generic drivers that don't allow access to all of a devices capability. I've seen this with many printer drivers in particular."
Yeah, kinda puts a new spin on the old adage "it JUST works".
Score: 0
|I've been trying out the RC and even at this stage it beats the cra p out of Vista.
Score: 1
|I upgraded all my stuff for Vista so again never had a problem with Vista. That and my scanner needed updating anyway. Has a negative scanner on it now. Have actually had compatibility problems with Windows 7 ironically. Nothing major. And Windows 7 is using memory mroe than Vista. I've also had 4 crashes on Windows 7 RC1. Very hard to crash Vista. Still feels like a service pack right now. Slightly improved, but if one had vista, I'm not sure I'd be willing to spend anything over $50 for a slight improvement.
Score: -2
|Well I've actually been running Windows 7 on several different platforms including the betas and the RC, and while it's considerably less intrusive UAC wise, it's driver compatibilities, and alleged "improvements" are marginal... so... it's same old same old from good ole' MS !
Score: -2
|"3. Macs do stuff that Windows can't" come on now...
Even my mac licking friends admit the Mac can't do a fraction of what the PC supports and they are always playing 2nd fiddle in support but what matters to them is that the Mac does what it does to their liking.
Score: 1
|@ preinterpost
Really? Can you name one thing that a PC can do that a Mac can't? Okay, before you begin I cede the gaming aspect. Personally, I have an xbox for gaming but true - Macs are lousy gaming rigs though not technically limited in OS or hardware terms but in instead in practical terms as the game title list is minuscule.
Tell me what task I cannot do on a Mac that you can do on a PC? I'm betting whatever you list I can name a Mac app that will do said task.
Score: 0
|How about a Mac equivalent to AnyDVD that would do CSS descryption, Bluray and HDDVD DRM removal on the fly? I can't think of a proggie on Apple's platform that would do said actions...
Score: 0
|- Run Openoffice decently.
- RUN OSX on custom hardware. i.e. decent hardware that Apple doesn't build. Linux and MS you have more choice.
- You downplay games, but the gaming market is so huge on PC's, that this is a very important area macs miss out on.
Score: 0
|YAY for bootcamp! :)
Edit: I hate commenting on the wrong level...
Score: 0
|BootCamp means you're using it as a PC...not a Mac. ;)
Score: 2
|Can you get there from here? My honest answer has to be; I'm not sure. I'm troubled by the number of variations of Windows 7 available. The last number I read was nine. That number needs to shrink considerably. I think most people will only use the variations that have XP as an option.
Score: 0
|Most people will use the same version of Win7 that they did with XP/Vista.
Home (Home Premium)
Pro(Home Premium/Business)
The rest are only going to be used by a minority of folks. In fact, I doubt we'll see anything but Home Premium on store shelves...and for the rest of them, the OEM's will make the decision, not the consumer.
Score: 0
|1) This one is a valid point, and ten minutes with Win7 will show you that Microsoft fixed the problem. I always disabled UAC in Vista, but on Win7 I've actually kept it on since installing RC1 and haven't found it annoying.
2) Considering Vista is NOT "a security black hole", and XP in recent years improved on the security front, I think people got over this one several years ago and is no longer a valid point.
3) As you yourself point out, this is an ancient concern that not a single person even considers anymore, so why do you even include it in your list?
4) This is another valid point, and I'll admit that I was incredulous when I saw people talking about putting Win7 on netbooks, but I've since come around.
5) Somewhat valid point, but haven't Microsoft and the hardware vendors ironed out most of these problems by now? Vista RTM is about two and a half years old at this point, so any existing compatibility issues are the fault of the vendors at this point.
Score: 4
|Thanks for your perspectives on each of these points. I appreciate your taking the time. Couple of things:
2 &3) Considering how often I still hear complaining about Windows security vulnerabilities, I'm not content to admit that people have gotten over it. These perceptions - valid or not - remain top of mind for most consumers who know little about what makes an OS tick. Apple's done a wonderful job exploiting them, and I included these points in my list for precisely this reason: to debunk the perception.
5) I think a lot of peripheral vendors simply decided to sunset their old hardware and let consumers fend for themselves. The ones that cared about future brand value took the time to develop Vista-compatible drivers. The others probably decided early on to opt out. I wouldn't call it "fault" as much as it is a business case. If they felt the future value of business justified investing development resources in an updated driver, they did it.
In the case of WIndows 7, a less drastic jump to the new driver model and more proactive partnership with peripheral vendors will hopefully ease the crunch around and just after the release date. Needless to say, it's something I'll be watching closely.
Score: 2
|well, what does microsoft expect?
that it's loyal users who spent several hundred dollars on the clunky vista will turn around and forgive microsoft and spend another few hundred dollars on win7?
perhaps, there will be a few but most will refrain.
Score: 0
|Actually, I agree (to an extent) with this comment.
I bought two computers with Vista pre-installed on them, one a laptop in Feb of 07, the other a Desktop about a year ago. On the laptop I was forced to downgrade to XP, as the hardware was simply not up to the task of running Vista, even after SP1 and the numerous performance increases. While I do look forward to the many improvements Windows 7 brings to the table, the only thing I really care about (the primary reason I would upgrade) is the touted performance improvements. But then, should I really cough up a couple hundred dollars for what I believe Vista should have been in the first place?
Score: 1
|The days of anyone buying an OS in a box to upgrade existing hardware are pretty much over.
What DOES Microsoft expect? Quite simply: to continue to dominate OEM hardware sales and freeze out alternative OSs on otherwise Windows-compatible hardware SKUs.
I can promise you that the XP and Vista laptops in my home office will run these OSs until the day they physically fail. But if Microsoft plays its cards right, I might just pick a Win7-loaded netbook instead of one running Linux. That's what Microsoft fears most - losing that default-pick position on new hardware purchases.
Score: 0
|Apple should seize the Netbook market by introducing some sort of "Mac OS X Mobile Edition" & license it to HP, Asus and Sony! :-D
Score: 0
|According to the hackintosh folks, Mac OSX already runs on netbooks quite well. (Untested by myself... until I can get the retail install CD running on vanilla hardware (no TPM) without hacks I'll stick with what I've got.)
Score: 0
|It'll be interesting to see if Apple will ever step into the Netbook arena. It will probably be asked and discussed next week at WWDC.
Score: 0
|Gads, how did a Digg list get on BN?? Did the intatrwebz crash?
//scratch that...
I think this is the most level-headed article I have *ever* seen on BN. Thanks, Carmi!
Score: 1
|Many thanks. You've absolutely made my day.
Score: 0
|I agree. This is perhaps the best article I have read on betanews for a long time. Thank you for a very unbiased article which was easy to read and to the point.
Score: 0
|pecosbill - Macs = OpenGL
OpenGL = sucky gaming, one thing about DirectX is it blows OpenGL away for gaming. Period.
astromac - How about something as simple and oh so useful as right click cut, right click paste for files?
And while I HATE UAC on Vista and even on 7. I SO hate being prompted for my password for EVERYTHING I do on my mac. EVERYTHING, no "remember this for this session" nothing at least on Linux you can tell it to remember for your logged in session. Hands down 7 Wins that round.
As much as I don't like Linux, I like OS X even less. And I am amazed at people who think it is the best thing since sliced bread.
Score: 2
|Something thats missing from BN, ain't. Theres always Tim's stories. Always an enjoyable read.
Score: 0
|