Skewed??

I found this a few minutes ago. It's a little dated but still interesting. I always wondered how Mac haters thought.

Check it

Oh yeah here is one for Tiger.
Check it.

Gotta love this part, "Apple Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger" is the strongest OS X release yet and a worthy competitor to Windows XP. Though it is marketed by Apple as a major release, Tiger is in fact a minor upgrade with few major new features for end users"

IronMac said:

I found this a few minutes ago. It's a little dated but still interesting. I always wondered how Mac haters thought.

Check it

Click to expand...

i wouldn't say he was a mac hater, just biased towards windows since that is what his website is dedicated to.

in fact:

I've been a Mac fan my entire life.

Click to expand...

hmmm

Described by Apple as "a super-modern operating system" and "the newest major release of the world’s most advanced operating system," Tiger will, in Apple's words, "change the way you use a computer." That, of course, is completely untrue. Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger" is, in fact, a minor upgrade to an already well-designed and rock-solid operating system.

Click to expand...

and from another article "How it works: Inductive user interfaces"
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/longhorn_task-based_ui.asp

Now, because I present this information, I'm somehow labeled a Microsoft lover and/or an Apple basher. That's silly. But Apple has done very little to make its UI better per se, beyond simple enhancements to what is, again, a classic desktop OS. There's nothing wrong with that. Frankly, Apple's crowd is technical enough to deal with it. But saying that such an OS is "easier to use" or "more elegant" than Windows is wrong. Mac OS X is attractive, and arguably "better looking" than Windows XP, though that's a subjective declaration. But it is most certainly not "easier to use". And that's not "Apple bashing," it's just the way it is.

Click to expand...

well mac os x isnt perfect is it? he does make some points that are true but os x is a still the best os around

I have to comment , I've used windows quite awhile, then I had to try a Mac. I chose the PB because I like to go outside to surf and listen to iTunes.. I found OX as eay to use as XP, better response time when opening programs or even surfing.. I also have a Pentium 4 2.2 GHz, when doing a speed test my PC is faster, but when it comes to surfing my PB loads faster and can surf faster.. I use a tweaked up Safari and a tweaked up Firefox, they both are fast, Firefox is faster on my PB than it is a my PC. Since I went Mac, two of my friends have switched over, they also love it, what they like the most is no spyware programs to update and no AV to worry about.. That site, windows helps pay the bills, also from the way he is talking chances are he uses a Mac. OX is not perfect, but from my limited time using my PB, I can not find anything wrong. Sorry for going off subject and ranting, but I love my Mac.

I wouldn't call this guy a Mac hater/basher either. He does seem a little misinformed and inexperienced with Mac, but not a hater. For example:

The Dock, which inexplicably houses both running and non-running programs, is still as confusing as ever.
It isn't confusing when you take a look to see that the running apps are marked by the underlying triangle.

Mac OS X lacks a central starting point, leaving new users to wander about the interface with the mouse pointer, looking for something with which to interact.
Which is what the aforementioned Dock is for...:black:

windows are still animated with a Genie effect when minimized
Which can be turned off in the Dock preferences

And Mac OS X still lacks any sort of iterative or task-based UI elements—such as those in Windows XP—that walk users through common tasks such as importing and printing photos, recording or listening to music, or working with documents.
umm...Mac Help?? Also, most of these tasks are done automatically, so no direction is needed.

when you switch between users on a high-end Mac (another feature mined from Windows)
Multi-user OSes and user switching are nothing new, and were certainly not 'mined' from Windows



All in all, he does make some good points, about the updates being minimal, and the price not exactly being proportionate to the amount of updates. He doesn't appear to be bashing anything really, he is just not very familiar with the Mac OS and does seem to be biased towards Windows.

I did also read his comparison of "app based" and "task based" approaches to completing things. I don't agree with him at all when he makes the statement:
"A task-based UI is good for two things: Getting any user started with an unfamiliar but common task (Printing a photo)"
His own explaination on this (printing a photo) for Windows is 4 steps long. By his own definition of this same process for Mac...
"n OS X, generally, you would think "iPhoto," load it up, and look for the print option, which is pretty easy."
...he more or less contradicts himself on which 'method' is easier or better.

He also shows a very strange "jab" at OS X:
(and why do some things in OS X require a single click [Dock items] while others require a double-click [alias on desktop]?).
This is no different in Windows. Things in the Quick Launch only require one click, and shortcuts on the desktop require a double click to launch.