Personal Vista Review

yep just wait after 2 weeks of usage :)
it will get slower just like xp (hey i am still using vista on my other computer)
just my 2 cents of observation...

Hi There. I'm a long time dual XP/SP2 and OSX user. Which Vista "edition" are you using"?

The interface is extremely snappy and attractive on my 6600GT. It really takes advantage of my 1.25GB of RAM. Every single program (aside from iTunes) that I use on a regular basis is running better under Vista than it did under XP.

What is your basis for this observation? Are you using benchmarks?

The improvements to Explorer are noticeable, and it adds functionality to the best default file viewer on a major OS platform (in my opinion).

Can you be more specific about this general comment? I abandoned use of Explorer in XP long ago so I'm really interested in hearing about these improvements. Most Vista reviews I've read so far give the "New Explorer" a less than favorable review.

I have noticed that it is more stable than XP, which by SP2 had already evolved into a very stable operating system.

What is your basis for this observation? Are you having fewer crashes per day than with XP/SP2?

The per-application volume leveling is fantastic and I have already taken advantage of it.

I'm not familiar with this feature in Vista. Can you elabotarate?

Thanks.

Thank you. Good post. Try Path Finder on OSX--it's a great App, what the OSX Finder should be and much more. You still didn't say which Vista edition you're using.

Looks like I am not missing much.

I"m sure Vista is decent. XP was getting pretty damn old and needed to be replaced.

I'll likely wait and then see what VM program runs Vista the best and add it but I've other upgrades to make before then in RAM and HDD.

But in the short run, to me, it mostly seems like change for the sake of change. I do tech support and I have wasted so much time not knowing where things are. "Damn it's not there in Vista, it's somewhere else." keeps hitting me.

I think Microsoft moved everything around to pretend that Vista was really something new. And now everyone has to relearn everything. And the Control Panel now is really out of control. There are like 50 different control panels for virtually everything.

This was my short lived experience of Vista. It maybe takes getting used to but putting the UI aside, I prefer XP. And I prefer OS X to that.

I love this operating system.

Steve Ballmer has killed groverat and is now posting under his name. :wow: Someone call teh FBI.

Vista is professional looking and snappy though. Hopefully Leopard will be too.

Groverat,

Are you a dual platform user (XP-Vista/OSX)? If so, have you ever tried Path Finder on OSX (21 day free full trial)? If so, how do you think it compare to the new Vista Explorer? I'd be interested in your views. Thanks.

I haven't tried Vista yet, but it seems to me they did the following:

1. Ripped off Mac OS X even more (Aero, Windows Flip, Gadgets)

2. Made the control panel even more ludicrously complex.

3. Made it look better overall

4. Made it arguably more stable and secure

Now, #2 drives me insane. I HATE the XP control panel. After years of using a Dell laptop for work, I still cannot find where things are to change settings. The worst is trying to figure out a network problem. There are about 17 places to look. Finally, you realize that a there a checkbox unchecked buried in the advanced settings under Internet Options (not network connections, mind you!). You didn't uncheck it either...it just got hosed one day. I am typing on an XP machine right now. I feel dirty.

spindler:

With the changes to the Vista UI, Microsoft has caused the loss of billion of dollars worth of productivity.

hahahah what?

lfe220:

My laptop is a Powerbook with OSX.4.

I have never tried Pathfinder or any other Finder/Explorer alternative and I likely never will. The OS should provide that basic functionality, and (in my opinion), Windows Explorer has always been superior to the Finder and still is. If I have to install an entirely different file management system to make it workable then the OS itself is not worth my time.

The Finder works, but I hate it with a burning passion. It feels fat and childish.

spindler:

hahahah what?

lfe220:

My laptop is a Powerbook with OSX.4.

I have never tried Pathfinder or any other Finder/Explorer alternative and I likely never will. The OS should provide that basic functionality, and (in my opinion), Windows Explorer has always been superior to the Finder and still is. If I have to install an entirely different file management system to make it workable then the OS itself is not worth my time.

The Finder works, but I hate it with a burning passion. It feels fat and childish.

Too bad you have such a narrow minded view on this issue. No operating system is perfect. For 20 bucks, you're missing out on one the best apps ever written for OSX. Path Finder v 4.6 blows the doors off of the new Vista Explorer. It has file management features that Vista Explorer will never come close to. I suggest you read the Explorer analyses by such Vista luminairies as Mary Joe Foley, Mark Manasi, Ed Bott or Paul Thurrott.

Path Finder also has other capabilities that go beyond file management but you'll never know since you've closed your mind on the topic because you "hate" the antiquated OSX Finder. It's akin to saying I won't use XP because IE 6 stinks (it does) and I'll never use Firefox (which is great) since it's not part of the Windows OS. What kind of fractured logic is that?

If it was free I might do it, but I'm not paying $20 for it.
I'm with you. I tried it. It was very nice. But I'm not paying for it.

Apple just needs to step it up in regards to the Finder.

Windows Explorer has always been superior to the Finder and still is.

:lol: :wow: Are you lost? Should'nt you be here? ( http://forums.windowsforum.org/index.php?act=home) But really now. ;)

If it was free I might do it, but I'm not paying $20 for it.

I don't mean to pile on, but do you pay for virus and spyware protection on your vista/xp machine? Does this bother you?

I didn't pay $300 for Vista (MS employee hookup).

Vista isn't a piece of "copycat" software any more than OSX is.

I haven't ever paid a dime for anti-virus/anti-spyware software. AVG and Avast! are good free AV apps and all the best anti-spyware apps (including Windows Defender) are free.

What is meant by "MS Employee Hookup"? Not a "borrowed" unlawful copy I trust.

Grisoft's AVG is indeed a magnificent free anti-virus software program for XP. I've used it for about 4 years. It's small foot print is just great.

Windows Defender, now free, is the best of Breed Anti-Spyware program for Windows. However, what did you use before MS made it freeware on 10/26/06?

I dont understand all the assaults on the finder, it works perfectly fine for me. I organize my files, I view my files, I do what I want with my files with no problem whatsoever.

For the matter whether Vista looks professional, it does have an overall better shine than XP but IMHO may be too glaring to use all day compared to the toned down image of OSX.

Ha ha. Vista has a whole new set of names and groups the network crap differently yet again. I was on a call and the customer's Vista networking screens didn't even match mine somehow.

Let's see how many names networking has gone through since Windows 98:

Network
Network connections
Dialup and Network Connections
Network Neighborhood
My Network Places
Network and Sharing Center (in Vista)
Network Explorer (in Vista)

and many more. Microsoft can barely design a control panel for a mouse without it getting overly complicated. Networking by its nature is the most complicated thing and it just spirals out of control as Microsoft is clueless about how to organize things in a top down logical fashion.

Microsoft can't design anything logical. I'm convinced of that. Think back to Windows 95 with the introduction of the Start button. You have to press Start to shut down the computer? WTF?

Network settings (or anything involving any sort of communication whatsoever) are the worst. As I sit here and look at XP's control panel, I have five "network" type icons, not inlcuding things installed by my school district.

1. Internet Options
2. Network Connections
3. Network Setup Wizard
4. Windows Firewall
5. Wireless Network Setup Wizard

I mean, seriously. If I have trouble as multi-platform prosumer level individual, what does Bob the Builder do when he has a problem?

What is meant by "MS Employee Hookup"? Not a "borrowed" unlawful copy I trust.

Grisoft's AVG is indeed a magnificent free anti-virus software program for XP. I've used it for about 4 years. It's small foot print is just great.

Windows Defender, now free, is the best of Breed Anti-Spyware program for Windows. However, what did you use before MS made it freeware on 10/26/06?

My experience is that all windows virus and spyware prorams that I've used are very intrusive and quite annoying. AVG is among the worst. Oddly I find Norton the least. I've programmed it to run at night while away from work.

I don't get it either. I was essentially a Windows user before I was a Mac user, and I have to say the Mac OS Finder makes me much more productive. It's easier to use, looks nicer, etc. Finding things is a snap. I use both platforms every day, and there are days where I just can't wait to come home and open up the MBP.

Google "John Siracusa Finder Mac" and you'll see all the reasons why the OSX Finder should be sent to the scrap heap. John is one of the best Mac OS analysts on the planet. Even if you still want to keep the feeble Finder after reading his articles, you'll learn a lot about Mac OS in the process.

I'e heard others say the same yet I get an AVG pop up window every time I boot up and the system wakes from sleep. It's also three clicks to get rid of it. Very annoying.:mad:

Adjust your settings correctly, This never happens on my Sony TX160 or my (now sold) Sony SZ330. All I get are morning downloads (if needed) of the Virus database after wake-up or hibernation. I also configure AVG for weekly scans (your choice for this time setting). Mainly, AVG is not a drain on system resources like Norton. You won't believe the speed difference on your computer once you mercifully kill Norton.

Drop Dead Fred ... I think I need to watch that movie again.

gov, I for one think you're nuts. I'm not using Vista, granted, but I know in XP I CANNOT STAND the interface. The lack of Expose drives me bonkers, for example. Even the appearance of everything looks so similar, everything kind of blends together. I often have to type the first letter of the folder I am looking for to see amongst a list. I'm not sure why...it just doesn't stand out. Perhaps it's the yellowish color in the classic interface, which I need to use for performance reasons. Vista looks like it's better, I'll grant you that. I just know that as someone that uses both platforms almost every day, I have a lot of trouble with Windows and very little with Max OS X.

Beyond the visual aspects and "finding stuff" aspect, I find that XP sucks at multitasking, particularly for iTunes and downloading updates. What would you say about Vista in tis regard (I know, you can't comment on iTunes right now)?

How is putting the system into Standby? My Dell D610 is very quirky.

External displays? Mirroring? Mine is operable but, again, quirky.

Load time of apps? Not so good on this end.

I realize we're talking different hardware, of course. I'm interested as to what you think of Vista's improvements in these areas.

If I had pirated it I am the last person in the world to hide that. I pirate all kinds of stuff. I have a stupid amount of pirated movies, software, and music. MS Employee Hookup isnt a euphemism, its the truth, and it really isnt important to the discussion.

It is relevant. What's with all the weasel wording? Just say you have a $399 piece of software that you "got" for nothing from an MS employee.

In Vista I have 7 different view options (Tiles, Details, List, Small/Medium/Large/Extra-Large Icon). That is flexibility.
There is a nice breadcrumb trail at the top (clickable at every point).
I have a graphical representation of the filesystem to the left that I can shrink and expand. I can put any file in the window anywhere in the OS simply by dragging and navigating spring-loaded windows.
In detail view I have 8 different sorting criteria (which I can turn on and off).
I can right-click cut-or-copy/paste documents anywhere.

Not even a drop in the bucket compared to what Path Finder can do, Gee-Rat. For example, can you see a preview of any file (text, numeric, graphic,etc.) in a preview pane when that file is selected in your file manager? Can you edit that text file right inside your file manager? How about a complete metadata summary of that file in another simultaneously viewed pane? Can you "cut and paste" 11 or 32 or 68 distinct files in distant parts of your file sytem and put them in one newly created folder without moving out of your file manager? Can you burn that new folder still staying in your File Manager? Can you compress those files in that new folder and email them to your MS Hookup buddy, still not moving out of your file manager view? No, huh? Too bad.
And that's only a smidgeon of what you can easily do with PF.

can you see a preview of any file (text, numeric, graphic,etc.) in a preview pane when that file is selected in your file manager?

Yes.

Can you edit that text file right inside your file manager?

No.

How about a complete metadata summary of that file in another simultaneously viewed pane?

Yes.

Can you "cut and paste" 11 or 32 or 68 distinct files in distant parts of your file sytem and put them in one newly created folder without moving out of your file manager?

Yes.

Can you burn that new folder still staying in your File Manager?

Yes.

Can you compress those files in that new folder and email them to your MS Hookup buddy, still not moving out of your file manager view?

An e-mail window will open up, but yes.

dutch pear:

I haven’t tried rebuilding. I can’t imagine why it would be corrupted already.

here we go
grov kept thinking that people who paid 399 for that piece of junk will be satisfied. YOU might be satisfied because you have your microsoft hookups and for some other people who pirate it, it doesn't matter either but be in the shoes on a person who paid 399 for a piece of junk software...
yeah...

I have no idea what you are trying to say. Can someone please translate it for me?

Too bad you have such a narrow minded view on this issue. No operating system is perfect. For 20 bucks, you're missing out on one the best apps ever written for OSX. Path Finder v 4.6 blows the doors off of the new Vista Explorer. It has file management features that Vista Explorer will never come close to. I suggest you read the Explorer analyses by such Vista luminairies as Mary Joe Foley, Mark Manasi, Ed Bott or Paul Thurrott.

Path Finder also has other capabilities that go beyond file management but you'll never know since you've closed your mind on the topic because you "hate" the antiquated OSX Finder. It's akin to saying I won't use XP because IE 6 stinks (it does) and I'll never use Firefox (which is great) since it's not part of the Windows OS. What kind of fractured logic is that?

Path Finder is pretty cool. Thanks for the "hookup"... :smokey:

If you wish to talk about vista visit a pc forum & sastisfy yourselves there

For what I do, Windows has the best applications and I prefer the file browser.

Word 2007 is better than any word processor I've used on the Mac.
Firefox is the best browser of all and the Windows version is better than the OSX version.
uTorrent is the best BT application I've used.
Outlook 2007 is the best e-mail client I've used.
foobar2k is the best music player I've used.
Media Player Classic is the most flexible video player I've used.

Now, I do miss two apps every time I'm not on my Powerbook:
1) Adium - Hands down the best IM app out there. I love it and Windows has no real multi-protocol IM client that I like (trillian is OK).
2) Handbrake - Simple and powerful h.264 encoder. MeGUI for Windows is far more complicated.

I really would be fine with either OS, though to have OSX be my only OS I would probably be forced to spring for a Finder replacement like Path Finder. For now I just use my Windows machine to handle my file management.

I do agree on many of your statement but Office 2007 is not good... i still hope that for office 2008 mac they do not include the absurd interface on office 2007

I love the Mac GUI as much as one can, but I agree with Groverat that the Finder is very limited in terms of moving files around. It is great for the little that it does but it doesn't offer enough.

Let's say you want to move folders from one folder to another. Let's say you want to move them UP two levels. There should be a way to pop off a second finder window, THAT IS SET TO THE SAME PLACE AS THE FIRST, and then move up the two levels. then hit ONE key to put them BOTH in icon mode to easily drag them from one to the other.

OTOH, I don't want a big old mess where you have TOO MANY options, like Windows. Some people who have very good eye coordination skills might be able to look among so many features and use them quickly, but for me, it just gets in the way.

I bought Vista and love it.

I agree what Grover has said. I would post more but would rather sit back and laugh at all the slams I am about to get.

Let the bashing begin.

P.S. All of my guys in my group at work run Vista. Have since beta. They are happy. Soooo I guess you are wrong.

like i said your mileage may vary... i know a lot of people who hates vista even when they get it at a discounted price or lower

I want to move my files around. I want to rename them. I want to sort them with various options (date modified, size, filetype, whatever). Get the hell out of my way and let me do this.
Why cant I have a real list view?

In Vista I have 7 different view options (Tiles, Details, List, Small/Medium/Large/Extra-Large Icon). That is flexibility.
There is a nice breadcrumb trail at the top (clickable at every point).
I have a graphical representation of the filesystem to the left that I can shrink and expand. I can put any file in the window anywhere in the OS simply by dragging and navigating spring-loaded windows.
In detail view I have 8 different sorting criteria (which I can turn on and off).
I can right-click cut-or-copy/paste documents anywhere.

Apple should have a better file system navigator than Microsoft, and it is inexcusable that they dont. I shouldnt be in OSX thinking Man, I wish I could use Explorer right now, but I do, constantly.

1) Groverat, please politely ignore (as you have been doing) those who are trying to send you off to a PC forum. The discussion here comparing Vista and OS X features is one of the more civilized I have seen and I am enjoying it. Kudos to you for your manners, as well as to the polite Mac advocates.

2) A preference is just a preference, and if you prefer how Explorer works for you, that's fine. But I would like to understand better your stated reasons for your preferences, and I also wonder if you have played with all of the OS X view options available to you. The following items are more specific questions about your quotes.

3) "In Vista I have 7 different view options (Tiles, Details, List, Small/Medium/Large/Extra-Large Icon). That is flexibility."
Not to be pedantic, but that just looks like 4 options to me. The Icon sizes are just suboptions.

In OS X, you have 3 view options. I will call them Icon, List Details, and Column.

a) The Icon view is comparable to Vistas, but instead of 4 size options you have 28 sizes selectable from a slider in View->Show View Options. This is customizable to apply to all folders or different settings & sizes for each individual folder. Also the folder view background can be white, any color, or even a picture. There are other View options for Icons, such as check boxes for Snap to Grid, Show Item info (photo size, or # items in folder), Show icon preview (useful for pictures), or Keep Arranged by with optiions for date, size, etc. This seems plenty flexible to me.

Vista may have some similar flexibility in its folder viewing options, and perhaps you prefer being able to select the 4 typical icon sizes more directly in each window. For myself, I prefer using one icon size for most of my windows, but I like being able to customize a window to default to a larger size (say for pictures with preview turned on).

b) The OS X List Details view is like Vista or XP Details view. You say In detail view I have 8 different sorting criteria (which I can turn on and off). So does OS X. From View-> Show View Options, you can also enable/disable 7 optional sorting criteria (the 8th, or first really, Name, is always enabled). The typical window shows Name, Date Modified, Kind, and Size. But you can also show Date Created, Version, Comments, and Label. You can also choose a small or large Icon to sit beside the Name. From within the Details window, you can drag the 7 optional columns around to show in any order. You click on a column to sort, then again to reverse sort, just like in XP (and presumably Vista).

Bonus feature: The Date Modified column in OS X smartly reformats as the column width changes. At a wide setting, it may say August 18, 2006, 2:00 PM. As you shrink the column width, it abbreviates the month Aug 18, 2006, 2:00 PM then changes to more compact notation 8/18/06 , 2:00 PM, then finally just shows the date 8/18/06. This is nicer than just truncating the string. What does Vista do?

You can also select the option to show folder sizes in the detail view (handy for checking for disk space bloat) or not (reliving the CPU of that chore for faster viewing response).

Im not just trying to just tally features here. You said Vista is flexible, and I am just trying to demonstrate that OS X is as well.

c) The OS X Column View, as originally developed for NeXT, is an interesting alternative. It shows folders and files with a new column for each level of descent into the file system folders. It seems like it would be very efficient for moving around the file system quickly. I dont actually use it much, but neither do I generally like the list view in XP. I just prefer the details list for most browsing. But this is, in fact, a view method that many people like, and I dont believe it has a Windows equivalent.

d) Vista/XP List view. I presume you mean the option of just listing the names. I see that there is benefit in this for looking at folders containing many files. In OS X, you could virtually get the same effect by setting Icon view icon size to smallest setting and set to arrange by name. Yes, I know this is not the same as being able to quickly tioggle between Icon and List views. But again, I am not really a fan of List View in my XP at work, and if I had a folder with many files, I would want small icons in Icon view anyway, so I would set it this way. All the same, your point is accepted, that this feature is not directly available in OS X.

e) Tiles. This seems like just another equivalent of OS X Icon view with preview and Show item info enabled. The Vista Extended Tiles view does have more info than OS X Icon view can provide, but do you really use this?

4) There is a nice breadcrumb trail at the top (clickable at every point).
Nice feature. Always visible path to where you are. I can see how you get used to it.

In Mac OS X, I set the Toolbar for all windows to include the Path Icon. I click it and it shows me the breadcrumb trail also clickable at every point. One click instead of the path being always visible, bu t I dont find that a big deal. Longtime Mac users also know you can get the same info by holding the Command key down while clicking on the folder name at the top (Title bar) of the Finder window.

5) I have a graphical representation of the filesystem to the left that I can shrink and expand. I can put any file in the window anywhere in the OS simply by dragging and navigating spring-loaded windows.
Nice feature. But I see the same capabilities in OS X, just arranged differently. In OS X List Details view, you can shrink and expand the folders in just the same way as Vistas graphical representation. Vistas approach is a hybrid of the OS X List Details view and Column view. Vista uses 2 columns of sorts, with the folders on the left column and the file list for a particular folder on the right. OS X List Details puts them all in one column, and Column view puts one column for each directory level. Vistas approach is OK,but I would hesitate to claim it is clearly better. Its more just what you are used to.
Of course, OS X uses a sidebar that is much like Vistas Favorite Links shown in the image you posted. I think I prefer this approach, allowing more space for the favorites than using it for the folders of the whole system. And of course all the folders in all the views and sidebars are spring-loaded in OS X as well.

Thinking about it some more, I see how this feature can be handy. I get the same functionality by opening 2 windows to move files around, and Vista sort of gives you 2 windows in one. Hmmm... Still just seems different, not better. Maybe Id change my mind if I used it, but its not what I would call essential.

6) I can right-click cut-or-copy/paste documents anywhere.
In Mac OS X you can Control-Click Copy/Paste documents anywhere, though not Cut/Paste. I honestly hadnt noticed the lack of Cut/Paste for files because I always drag and drop.

7) Question: Has Vista fixed the manual refresh view nonsense in XP? In other words, if I move a file into folder in XP, it may not immediately show up in the view of that folder. I have to manually select Refresh view. Also, if I edit a file in a folder and then I look in the Details view for that folder, it is gone ... no it is just at the BOTTOM of the LIST and out of the sorted order !!! Manually refresh view to fix it. Big pain. I hope Vista fixed this.

Its late. Good night.

Steve

When I have trouble with organizing the files via the finder, I'll let you know. Apple employs the 80% solution - that is, to avoid feature creep madness, apple strives to satisfy 80% of the users out there. Trying to satisfy the remaining 20% is impossible as it just leads to interfaces with a zillion cnotrols.

I agree. I can organize quite effectively with the finder. I never have trouble finding something, especially with Spotlight.

Let's try this one last time. The best article ever written about the Finder is here:

http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/finder.ars

John Siracusa, the best and most articulate (non-evangelist too boot) Mac authority explains the plethora of problems with the Mac Finder and proposes elegant, logical and easy solutions to the long standing FTFF problem. Read, enjoy and learn.

If I am moving a file from one part of the file system to another part of the file system that is distant, then it is far easier to just cut, navigate, then paste. Very very handy.

But not as handy and easy as Drop Stack in Path Finder, Gee-Rat ole buddy.

BTW, based on your posts on this forum, you don't at all emulate your hero Sir Stephen Henry Roberts.

Gee-Rat, calm down mate. It's just a passing observation based on limited data. Sir Stephen was a truly great human being well known (among other things) for his ability to unify disparate groups, particularly through education.

For the Mac folks out there, the new Vista Windows Explorer really is a fine piece of software. Check out this short review of VWE with an open mind.

http://articles.techrepublic.com.com/5102-10877-6093171.html

One thing I love about Vista...NOT!!

My work laptop is on a docking station. I have a 20" widescreen LCD attached to the docking station. I use the 20" for my main monitor and the laptop screen to put some windows I might look/use later.

If I lock my machine (restroom/cafe/general BS'ing around), everytime I unlock the machine it reverts back to the original setting as if I just docked my computer. It will not remember how I have the monitors arranged in the display settings.

Its a known issue with the nvidia mobile drivers but it bugs the $hit out of me. :grumble:

omg will this guy shut up already about god damn file views. who really gives a shit. some people actually do WORK on computers. what amused me most, was his list of applications that he needs most in windows... firefox and media player classic! lmao! oh and please explain to me how word 2007 is really so much better than word 2004. Actually don't.

what a frickin genius :rolleyes:

omg will this guy shut up already about god damn file views. who really gives a shit. some people actually do WORK on computers. what amused me most, was his list of applications that he needs most in windows... firefox and media player classic! lmao! oh and please explain to me how word 2007 is really so much better than word 2004. Actually don't.

what a frickin genius :rolleyes:

Actually Gee-Rat is spot on with regard to the slimmed down Word 2007. It's really a significant upgrade of the illogically laid out overpriced bloatware formally known as Word 200x. The ribbon interface is super and you can actually find needed tools grouped logically by function at the top of your screen. No more archeologic digs in the wrong menu wading through layer after layer of submenus. It's supposed to be coming to the Mac later this year or early 2008. You may be knee-jerk reflex knocking it now but if it comes to the Mac with the same logical ribbon interface design and functionality, you're going to want a copy (hopefully a legal one).

Actually Gee-Rat is spot on with regard to the slimmed down Word 2007. It's really a significant upgrade of the illogically laid out overpriced bloatware formally known as Word 200x. The ribbon interface is super and you can actually find needed tools grouped logically by function at the top of your screen. No more archeologic digs in the wrong menu wading through layer after layer of submenus. It's supposed to be coming to the Mac later this year or early 2008. You may be knee-jerk reflex knocking it now but if it comes to the Mac with the same logical ribbon interface design and functionality, you're going to want a copy (hopefully a legal one).

actually, I have no problem with office 2004. The ribbon interface doesn't interest me at all, after all I can customise my toolbars, or if I want to I can run in full screen. Given that student edition for office is less than 100 I don't really feel it is overpriced either.

How many of you actually use any of the applications and operating systems being discussed here?

I got my Vista Ultimate and Office 2007 next to my MBP
Installed Vista and Office 2007 on their launch
I'd rather use my Office 2003/2004 than 2007 or OS X than Vista :no:

How many of you actually use any of the applications and operating systems being discussed here?

I use XP as well as OSX. I've not tried Vista so I'm trying to temper my comments on it. My business uses a windows based app. Our vendor has advised us not to upgrade to Vista at this time so I'll not see vista untill then.

Besides finder, is there anything else about OSX that you do not like?

For what I do, Windows has the best applications and I prefer the file browser.

Word 2007 is better than any word processor I've used on the Mac.
Firefox is the best browser of all and the Windows version is better than the OSX version.
uTorrent is the best BT application I've used.
Outlook 2007 is the best e-mail client I've used.
foobar2k is the best music player I've used.
Media Player Classic is the most flexible video player I've used.

Now, I do miss two apps every time I'm not on my Powerbook:
1) Adium - Hands down the best IM app out there. I love it and Windows has no real multi-protocol IM client that I like (trillian is OK).
2) Handbrake - Simple and powerful h.264 encoder. MeGUI for Windows is far more complicated.

As others have mentioned more harshly, that set of apps doesn't really mean much in the way of comparison.

Word 2007's interface is a mess but the thing I've been missing for ages on OS X is a word processor that is as powerful as Office but launches as fast as TextEdit. Pages is good but it's a mini-indesign and it's not really all that fast.

I dislike both the Windows and Mac versions of Firefox. I don't really notice much difference between them. Safari is better IMO.

uTorrent I've never used but Azureus works fine so no complaints there.

Outlook, I don't really do serious mailing so Mail is fine for me. I don't see Mail lacking in features that I'd need.

Music players, I just love itunes. It's so simple and powerful for finding and categorizing music. For movies, Windows media player is awful. I can't even fast forward movies most of the time and no editing support. I edit clips all the time in Quicktime.

If Apple just added some more powerful editing to TextEdit then I think they'd be set for most people's basic needs. Reports suggest that leopard has a snappier interface so if it's faster and less bloated than Vista (which their advertising would sugegst), has a new more refined theme (which the unified interface theme seems to point towards). So Leopard vs Vista, I think we have a clear winner naturally with the exception of gaming. But I fear that will always be the exception.

But still we wait. :\

Have you actually used those apps under XP or Vista?
Have you actually used Vista for more than a short period, stepping up to it with a purpose other than trying to prove to yourself that Windows totally sucks?

1. I used many those apps under XP AND Vista. Note that I used both XP and Vista since launch of each software. and yes I still think that Office 2007 interface is "fugly" and if Office 2008 on mac is like that, i won't pay a single cent for it.

uTorrent is great and I actually use it on my PC. But Xtorrent on Mac does the job very well. (Torrent search on the apps ftw)

Firefox is great on PC but pretty slow on Mac but I got other marvelous browser on mac such as Camino, Omniweb, Safari. On PC, I have to either use Firefox or IE7 (spit on IE)... note that I never use Opera and never will.

Never used foobar before because I use iTunes on both my PC and Mac and it works like charm (yes on my Vista too)

Mediaplayerclassic... meh i only watched South Park, Family Guy, and other new dvdrips which can play very well on VLC Media Player. (I have both VLC and MPC on my PC and I do have VLC on my mac)

2. I used vista since launch and yes I still have it right now right next to me MBP and I hated it. I am planning to re-install XP after I finish transferring my stuff to my Extrernals.

Now, it seems that the uniform concern about OSX is the Finder. I used PathFinder and it works very well. I do not have a lot of files on my hard drive so I do not have any problems organizing it (both Mac and PC). I guess to each its own but I think Vista's explorer, while it's great, it is only useful for some group of people and you are probably one of them.
Regarding the icon size, Hell i never even touch them on both my PC and Mac so it is again only catered to some group of people.

Also, regarding "The lack of options in right-click contextual menu"
I want to ask you wnat do you want?? because for me, I use my keyboard to copy and paste and that's all that I need from my right click. I do not need 30 lines options on my right click and have to skim through everything just to cut/copy/paste.

Regarding, App is running while all the windows are closed
Just press (Apple+Q) nothing hard. Yeah get your hand to work chop chop.
Or if you're that lazy, I don't see any performance drop on my MBP when I open a lot of applications for daily usage.
Maybe if you open a crap load of photoshop and other heavy apps it will start slowing down but so far, I usually open at least 10-12 applications (including parallels) and it hasn't slowed down yet.

Lack of options in right-click contextual menus (I guess because Apple thinks I’m too stupid to know how to click a right button, but somehow not too stupid to remember how to activate Expose, stubborn jackasses).
You need to be more specific. What is missing, exactly?

It's been a while since I've seriously used Windows, but the only thing I remember it having in contextual menus that the Finder didn't have was the New Document submenu and Copy/Paste/et al.

App is running while all the windows are closed. It doesn’t really trip me up, but everyone I try to get to use my Powerbook hates it because it is counter-intuitive (more stubborn Apple jackassery).

That's complaining that an apple doesn't have an orange peel.

This is my number one frustration with Windows. I'm glad you don't like Apple's method, which is why there's choices in the world, but it is neither counter-intuitive nor jackassery.

It's is how real people work.

Note that most serious Windows programs use an MDI window within a window interface to get around this: no one likes waiting 5 minutes for Photoshop to open up just because they closed their last window.

I'll say this, Mac OS X is much better in terms of multi-tasking, was easier to much easier to search for things on your hard drive, had the advantage of expose, and much more secure in terms of kernel access. I also like my removable disks showing up on my desktop. Having to good hunting through the my computer screen for my flash drive can is a pain. Disk showing up on my desktop and double clicking to see the contents is easy.

On the flip side, I agree with much of what groverat says about the finder. The applications menu in the start menu is far easier to use than the to having to hunt down the applications folder in OSX. Yes, I know the hack of putting the applications folder on the dock, but you shouldn't have to. Most novice users or switchers aren't going to be able to figure that solution out anyway. The lack of any kind of navigation aides in the finder's list and icon views can make things confusing. All you have is the ability to press the back or forward buttons.

Vista also has one major advantage over OSX, it's on familiar hardware. Upgrading to vista doesn't require adapting to a much different (and sometimes conflicting) hardware philosophy and it it many cases you don't even need a new computer. Vista really doesn't have to be better than OSX, they already have the users. It just has to be good enough to keep them.

Marvin,

I've been a dual platform user for about 20 years. I much prefer OS X (supplemented with a lot of great, cheap small apps like Path Finder iClip, 1passwrd, etc.) but, by necessity, have become an XP power user. I've always particularly detested the Word module in the MS Office Suite (both Mac and Windows) but again, by necessity, had to use it

I've been using the trial versions of Word and Excel 2007 on my Sony TX160 for about a week. I couldn't disagree with you more about the ribbon interface. It is not a mess. It's very logical, easy to use and speeds up complex doc creation by an order of magnitude (at least for me). I like the functional tab feature of the ribbbon. When I'm in the formatting tab, only the formatting tool icons are displayed close at hand and easy to access. When I'm in the Table of Contents tab, only what I need for this operation is displayed in the ribbon. Ditto for Tables which I use frequently for the many statistical reports I have to write. It also integrates exceptionally well with Excel, something that is very important to my needs in report writing.

I can only hope that the new Mac Office 2008 is as good as this Office 2007 demo I'm now using on the Sony. I have read in reviews and on Windows user forums that a lot of long time Wintel users of Office products hate the new ribbon interface because after many years of use, they had learned how to navigate the menu-submenu-submenu-submenu... centric Word bloatware program. Now they're confronted with something totally new, very tab and icon-centric, something very Mac-esque, and they hate it with unbridled passion. You would not believe the outcry against Office 2007 on the MS evangelist sites.

Having said all that, I will never ever use Vista because of the inherent bombshell hidden deep within its kernel. For those who don't know about this bombshell, read the article by world renowned New Zealand security expert Peter Gutmann, " A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection"

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html

This paper has set the Windows world ablaze and may in part be responsible for the slow implementation of Vista. I highly recommend it to all. Here's how the paper begins"

"Executive Summary

Windows Vista includes an extensive reworking of core OS elements in order to provide content protection for so-called premium content, typically HD data from Blu-Ray and HD-DVD sources. Providing this protection incurs considerable costs in terms of system performance, system stability, technical support overhead, and hardware and software cost. These issues affect not only users of Vista but the entire PC industry, since the effects of the protection measures extend to cover all hardware and software that will ever come into contact with Vista, even if it's not used directly with Vista (for example hardware in a Macintosh computer or on a Linux server). This document analyses the cost involved in Vista's content protection, and the collateral damage that this incurs throughout the computer industry.

Executive Executive Summary

The Vista Content Protection specification could very well constitute the longest suicide note in history [Note A]."

Though I'm a strong devotee of Apple, the company (I have lots of stock) the Mac, iPod etc., I'm first and foremost a devotee of great technology wherever it comes from. After first hand usage, Word and Excel 2007 appear to be excellent products. I hate to give 1 stinking dime to MS but I'm afraid I will have to pony up for these 2 new Office products. Unless of course Gee-Rat can hook me up with his MS employee. Nah, that won't work. I don't "borrow" or "copy" software from others. I think the authors of the software deserve to be paid for their work. Gotta run off now to more important stuff like NCAA hoops.

like I mentioned, not everybody like the Office 2007/possibly 2008 on mac ribbon interface. I am one of those people who hates it and you like it. :) to each its own

if the 2008 office on mac comes with that crappy interface. i won't pay a penny for it

well, then I think you can save the money becaue as far as I know, Office for Mac will be using the same style, the tab base interface just like the 2007...

Firstly, icons in Vista aren’t exactly small (256x256 @ 32bit color). I am a total UI whore and the first thing I do with any OS is crank up icon size on the desktop to the maximum. I LOVE giant pretty icons and Vista delivers.

Seems like this icon whore do not have much taste (sorry about that). Vista's icon is big, but not pretty. This is the same kind of design that Windows have been doing, inconsistancy and lack of good dsign guideline. Icons in Windows Vista is definitely high res, but then, they're hard to read, hard to recognise, and if they're small, they're unclear because of bad coordination of light and shade.

Now, you can’t choose between every single icon resolution from 16x16 to 256x256, but the slider size change in Finder seems more like a “look what we can do” gimmick than anything that might actually be useful. Vista gives me 3 or 4 icon size settings and I find this is ample.

That's a pretty personal choice, isn't it? Why do you think people do not want the sizes in the middle of the smallest to the biggest? It's not a gimmick.

Column view is a waste of screen space. What do I care what other folders are in a folder that I navigated away from 3 clicks ago? It is confusing and not good for moving things around. I never use Columns view.

I find Column view very useful. Just like you care about the path bar Vista offer right now. You obviously want to know where you're in the system and column view did that in a very elaborative way. In fact, I set column view as my default view.

If I am moving a file from one part of the file system to another part of the file system that is distant, then it is far easier to just cut, navigate, then paste. Very very handy.

As I said, in Windows, cut and paste is the easier way to move files, whatever file navigation or views is not helpful in Windows environment, it's just too clumsy and counter-intuitive.

Have you used the Ribbon?

Your quickness to judge reeks of some pre-existing bias.

did you read my post above??
I mentioned that I have vista and office 2007 right next to my MBP and yes I do hate it. And if Office 2008 for mac comes with that interface i won't pay a single penny for it.
Wish they have option to revert back to original interface like Windows XP and Vista "Classic Control panel" option which by the way I used since day 1 with both XP and Vista. (just can't get used to their new XP and Vista control panel)

It may be "fugly," but have you USED it, in other words, for lengths at a time, paying attention to how it works. The way an interface look is a tiny part of whether it's good or not.

I have used it since release up to this second (yes I have it open right now) but I do not like the office 2007 look and i will install back to 2003 after reformatting my vista and re-installing back to XP... :)

Shut up M$ SUX!

Your reply gives new meaning to the word obtuse.

Actually...no. :no: