[MCQ]

So, our good friend Paul Thurrott has a review of Tiger up on WinSuperSite.

http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/macosx_tiger.asp

Random faint praise with the classic Thurrott marketing spin and attacks weaved in for good measure, but fun to read anyway.

One great quote, with context:

Originally Posted by Paul Thurrott The marketing that accompanies Tiger's release is no different: 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. It will not change the way you use your computer at all, and instead uses the exact same mouse and windows interface we've had since the first Mac debuted in 1984. That isn't a complaint about Tiger, per se: It's a high-quality release. But Windows XP Service Pack 2 (SP2) was arguably a similar advance over the initial release of XP compared to what Tiger offers over Mac OS X 10.3.

Just something fun to read over the weekend.

[Oompa Loompa]

There's only one word that comes to my mind... and the word is:

XEROX

(Mr. Thurrott, I've got a helluva Wonkabar waiting for you.)

[Moogs]

What an assclown.

[omem]

I don't think it is that laughable. Its just a clear vision of the picture.
I agree with most of what he says, but still I'm really excited about Tiger.

[rollercoaster375]

He's calling SP2 equal to Tiger? This is what SP2 did: add DRM, some stupid Virus protection, a popup blocker, and block the "Download Now" link on mozilla.org.

[Moogs]

Yes, truly a visionary update. MS is rotting from the inside out. Still a force because of the "legacy marketshare", but they are losing their footing and mindshare, as people realize just how crappy their products really are compared to other options. And not just OS X but Linux and other systems.

Corporations are moving away from all-MS systems because of ridiculous licensing schemes and unreliable product, small businesses and educational institutions are in many cases starting to go all-Mac when the time comes for their upgrades... and of course with the advent of the iPod and more modern iMacs I think consumer marketshare will continue to rise slowly too.

Die MS, die. I would be thrilled if they became a smaller player (say owning only half the world's marketshare overall) and were forced to make their OS and server products not suck. Ballmer needs to go before that can ever happen, since his egomaniacal tendancies prevent him from ever admitting there is anything wrong with any of their products. Mop up the pit-stains and get a whif of reality, Ballmer.

[Brad]

I thought he was doing pretty well up until this pointL

But Exposé is a weird solution, requiring you to hit various "hot keys" (read: A function keys) in order to trigger its display, kind of a throwback of sorts to the early days of DOS-based applications.

Maybe like the Dock hiding I'm alone here, but I thought most people used the hot corners to activate Exposé. Everyone I know in "real life" does and the gesture quickly becomes second nature.

The rest of the article I think is spot-on.

[ZogDog]

Meh, this guys earns no respect from me. Seems like he wants controversy and his writing style IS spot on for that. To say that Tiger is unto OS X as SP2 was to XP, is asinine. There are soooo many system enchantments, CoreImage, 64bit incorporation, Safari, Dashboard and so on. The system enhancements alone are proof this is not just an SP2 style update.

No, 10.3.9 for mac is what SP2 is for XP.

[ast3r3x]

Yeah it wasn't that bad, I didn't like the exposé comment, and with him making half of the article about the history of OS X, maybe he should rename the article to 'Evolution of OS X' or something.

Not coincidentally, Microsoft is working on similar, if further-reaching, technology for Longhorn. Apple's solution, however, is here right now and it appears to work quite well.

How is windows different that it is better?

Um, right. Since PCs and Macs have had tiny utility applications since the early 1980's, it's unclear why Dashboard widgets can't simply work on the normal Mac desktop (which is how Konfabulator works, incidentally). Having to move into and out of the Dashboard to perform these tasks seems a bit unnecessary. Why segregate them like that?

Apple explains on their site it's for quick access to commonly used information. I am excited about this just for the fact it gives me quick access to stickies!

Most of what he said is true though.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by ZogDog are soooo many system enchantments, CoreImage, 64bit incorporation, Safari, Dashboard and so on.

Core Image: Flashy eye candy only for recent machines with new video cards. I guess I (like most Mac OS X users) will need to buy new hardware to use Tiger if this is such an important feature.

64-bit incorporation: What of Panther? Direct from Apple: "Specially tuned for the G5 processor, Panther provides a seamless transition to 64-bit power with optimized libraries that let today’s applications take advantage of tomorrow’s power. [...] Mac OS X Panther includes 64-bit optimized system math, vector and image libraries that take maximum advantage of the 64-bit G5 processor."

Safari: Again, what about Panther? Jaguar? They have Safari. Oh, you mean the RSS features? It looks like Firefox and OmniWeb users already have that too.

Dashboard: Umm, Konfabulator anyone?

He does say that Spotlight is a huge new feature and he's right. That's going to be a boon for lots of people and will help the shift in abstracting the file tree away from the user. The rest of the stuff, though? Not so revolutionary. The Core bits are nice, but they're basically an extension of what started with Quartz Extreme and the average user will never even know the difference.

Also, you guys should know that I'm very much aware of Tiger's new features and changes (not all of those are *actually* new). So, don't write me off too quickly. You'd probably learn a few things by playing the devil's advocate.

[Quagmire]

Originally Posted by Paul the idiot Thurrot Contrary to Apple's hyperbolic claims of "200 new features," Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger includes, in my opinion, only two major new features, Spotlight and Dashboard, and both were clearly influenced by other existing products and services. In this section, we'll examine both of these major new features.

There are 200 new features in Tiger. Most of them are just under the hood and needs some digging by UNIX geeks and such.

Originally Posted by Paul the assclown Thurrot Though Tiger is a 32-bit operating system, it will support 64-bit address spaces on 64-bit capable Macs such as the PowerMac G5. This will enable high-performance, data-intensive applications on G5 systems with massive amounts of memory.

Actually Tiger is 64 bit with the comparability with 32 bit apps I believe.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by Undertaker There are 200 new features in Tiger. Most of them are just under the hood and needs some digging by UNIX geeks and such.

So, to most non-Unix geek folks, for all intents and purposes, this means those features are just marketing fluff.

Originally Posted by Undertaker Actually Tiger is 64 bit with the comparability with 32 bit apps I believe.

How would it run on the G3 and G4 then? Tiger offers better 64-bit memory addressing, allowing 16 exabytes of VM, but the executable code is still 32-bit.

[Quagmire]

Originally Posted by Brad So, to most non-Unix geek folks, for all intents and purposes, this means those features are just marketing fluff.

Practically. Those new features will make Tiger faster. But, those are all under the hood. I never used Tiger yet, so maybe there are some small features I am missing, I just think most of them are under the hood. I could be wrong.

How would it run on the G3 and G4 then?How would it run on the G3 and G4 then? Tiger offers better 64-bit memory addressing, allowing 16 exabytes of VM, but the executable code is still 32-bit.

Oh ok! Thanks for correcting me on this one.

[rasmits]

Is it true that Tiger doesn't have any activation or copy protection, and you can install it on any number of Macs?

[MCQ]

Originally Posted by rasmits Is it true that Tiger doesn't have any activation or copy protection, and you can install it on any number of Macs?

Not sure on the first part. Legally, you agree to install it on a single Mac.

[jbloodwo]

Originally Posted by Brad So, to most non-Unix geek folks, for all intents and purposes, this means those features are just marketing fluff.

[CENTER]

[/CENTER]
Oh <insert any word here>!!!
Marketing hype, the bane of my life and cause of job security for support monkey’s the world over. Although not an Apple tech I have had to live with the hype and hysteria of the Evil Empire and several Linux distros. The Marketing peeps never like to “push the envelope” when it comes to how they want to sell the product. If one press relese for product x says 25 new features and over 100 enhancements. Product y ( a competitor) might through a press announcement that raze the bar several orders of magnitude. And the Support Monkey’s get all the calls asking where have all the features gone?
[CENTER]

[/CENTER]

Now if apple will only release a new iBook that supports Core Image. I am ready to switch to mac and I don’t really want to spend 1500-2000 on a powerbook. :P

[flail]

While you could argue that SP2 does rival Tiger in terms of features, there is no getting away from the fact that SP2 was poorly implemented and embarrassingly late!

Trust me, Microsoft does not improve their operating systems, they realease impractical unusable garbage that is as unstable as it is ugly.
Then they sometimes release updates (e.g. SP2) that appear to fix their myriad fuckups but really don't and are really a royal pain in the ass.

Tiger improves Mac OS X, adding useful features that enhance the experience. SP2 clumsily patched an already laughably poor OS with features that should have been there 4 years ago.

[jbloodwo]

Originally Posted by flail While you could argue that SP2 does rival Tiger in terms of features, there is no getting away from the fact that SP2 was poorly implemented and embarrassingly late!

Strange thing about XP SP2 is i think it finaly ships the functions that were promised in win ME.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by flail Trust me, Microsoft does not improve their operating systems, they realease impractical unusable garbage that is as unstable as it is ugly.

*yawn* Come back when you have a new troll about Microsoft. Here's a fact for you: Microsoft still commands 90% of the personal computer operating system market. If Windows was so horribly unusable and unstable like you claim, people wouldn't buy it. Look at Apple's dwindling market share. If Apple's stuff is truly so much better than Microsoft's, its sales wouldn't be stagnant and its share of the market wouldn't be dwindling.

[Kickaha]

Brad, that's an old argument that utterly ignores the lock-in and migration costs for moving away from Windows.

Better doesn't mean greater marketshare, particularly in the face of ignorance, conflicts of interest in IT depts (better systems = reduced budget and headcount), and migration costs for hardware and training.

MacOS X *IS* better, period. But that isn't going to make a whit of difference for sales until MS users get *tired* of the problems over there. And they are. I know a lot of consumers who are asking about, or have purchased Mac systems for the their homes. I don't know any Mac users who are going the other way though.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by Kickaha MacOS X *IS* better, period. But that isn't going to make a whit of difference for sales until MS users get *tired* of the problems over there.

Precisely. I haven't said that Windows is better either; I'm saying it's "plenty good enough" and isn't nearly as horrible as some people claim it is. If it was as bad as some folks like to make it out to be, users and businesses alike would have no choice but to switch to an alternate system.

When the costs of keeping a system outweigh the costs of migrating to a new one, people change and the market shifts. The numbers will show that this simply isn't happening; so, the situation can't be nearly as grim for Windows as some people would hope.

[Kickaha]

Saying that massive marketshare is proof of quality is just the reverse, and just as illogical, as asserting that quality should equal marketshare. You can't have it both ways.

Yeah, Windows is 'okay enough'... but so is a diet of gruel and brackish water, if you've never been exposed to anything else. Unfortunately, most users don't realize that there *is* any other way, particularly because they also buy into that fallacy that 'well it must be the best, since it has the biggest marketshare'.

Time to put that old chestnut to rest.

I'm sorry, but IMO Windows *DOES* blow chunks. Technologically, usability, elegance, security... take your pick, it fails utterly at each. Ignorant users, lock-in for data, and IT depts with agendas keep it in the top position. It is *not* because it is 'good'. It is, at best, 'barely adequate', but folks aren't willing to look at options due to the above fallacy. (And ego, and migration costs, and a dozen other things.)

[BenRoethig]

Paul Thurrott couldn't write an objective piece to save his soul. The first line in his articles should be "I hate Macs pure and simple".

[flail]

Originally Posted by Brad Precisely. I haven't said that Windows is better either; I'm saying it's "plenty good enough" and isn't nearly as horrible as some people claim it is.

I see what you're saying. I had a Windows machine for over 8 years and did fine.. I think Window's mediocrity is much more glaring when you're working with systems that are ill-maintained. In that case, which the majority of people face, I've found them not good at all.

the situation can't be nearly as grim for Windows as some people would hope.

I think you're right, Microsoft will be around for quite awhile.

[Buthidae]

Originally Posted by Kickaha Saying that massive marketshare is proof of quality is just the reverse, and just as illogical, as asserting that quality should equal marketshare. You can't have it both ways.

It's like saying McDonald's makes the best food in the world, because they sell the most of it.

Myself, I'm enjoying my lobster-tail OS, thank you very much

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by Brad Core Image: Flashy eye candy only for recent machines with new video cards. I guess I (like most Mac OS X users) will need to buy new hardware to use Tiger if this is such an important feature. . . The Core bits are nice, but they're basically an extension of what started with Quartz Extreme and the average user will never even know the difference. . .

Maybe I can get educated here. It was my impression that core services, such as core image, were intended for developer's convenience. By using core services their work is simplified. The operating system figures out the best way to perform an operation depending on the hardware that is running it. If the hardware has a great graphics card it is used. No need for the software developer to get involved with these details nor write extra code for it.

Okay, that has been my understanding up until now. What don't I understand about this?

[BarracksSi]

Originally Posted by Brad Dashboard: Umm, Konfabulator anyone?

Old argument, but Konfabulator is a dog. I had it, I tried it, I got tired of watching it eat up system resources and otherwise behave like junk.

Dashboard is what Konfabulator wishes it could have been.

[MCQ]

Originally Posted by Brad Look at Apple's dwindling market share. If Apple's stuff is truly so much better than Microsoft's, its sales wouldn't be stagnant and its share of the market wouldn't be dwindling.

Not that it makes much difference, but Apple did garner 2.4% worldwide marketshare for 2005 calendar Q1 according to IDC.

[omem]

People just have to see to believe it.
As its happening at my university. A friend of mine finally got tired of windows and bought himself a 12'' Powerbook and now 2 other guys I know (one of them actualy sells MS laptops, so he's not an ignorant in tech stuff) are planning on selling their laptops to buy a powerbook too, because they saw it working and how gorgeous and clean everything was with the PB. And one of them is selling a Sony Vaio 12'', so, he's not going from a cheap laptop to a powerbook.
Bottom line...Apple should distribute like 5 Powerbooks for free at each university and then all they had to do was to wait. People see it, they ask if they can try it a bit and they fallin love. Simple as that. Sometimes people don't switch because Apple computers are still full of myths.

[johnq]

My entire house is nearly converted to Macs. Me with 2, and 4 others with 1 each.

All 4 gradually saw the light. 2 got G4 towers (at the time) because that's what school was using (music mixing). 2 other got powerbooks. One uses a PC still but only for gaming and chat. And another is suffering through a crappy PC laptop and will get a PB this summer. I will have converted 5 people in the last few years.

Not to mention iPods...