SPOTLIGHT
M Dot Strange
3D Animator

Digital Arts December 2009 - out now Get started in screen-printing
Everything you need to know about T-shirt design
50 years of Penguin covers
New art showcase
Amazing tutorials
Video training on free CD!

EDIGIT SIGN-UP

The twice-weekly newsletter with all the latest creative news, reviews, and features

Windows Vista: why Mac OS X will win

February 5, 2007

Microsoft is losing consumer operating system market share to Apple for many reasons, but most of those reasons can be oversimplified thus: Mac OS is simple, and Windows is complicated.

That's why it may be such a costly error for Microsoft to make the Vista upgrade such a confusing mess.

Until today, even experts couldn't tell you off the top of their heads the differences between each of the many Vista versions -- or even how many versions there are -- or what the basic requirements are for the Upgrade versions. Ordinary consumers are baffled to the point of paralysis.

I'm going to clear all this up in a minute. First, however, let's recall the fiasco that is the Windows Vista launch.

The Upgrade version mess

News organizations have been writing about Vista for years. In the past few months, the media addressed Upgrade versions (less expensive versions of the operating system available to users who already have a recent version of Windows), and the process Microsoft would impose for proving that you own a legitimate copy of Windows XP or 2000.

At first, some news outlets reported that Upgrade versions of Vista would require the user to enter an XP key -- the long combination of letters and numbers you need to install XP in the first place. Then, we were told you didn't need the key, but instead would be required to insert an XP disk during the Vista install. Earlier this week, some sites reported that the requirement was that XP had to be installed on your PC, and that a clean install -- installing Vista only on a reformatted disk -- would be impossible.

Don't feel bad if you still don't know which of the Upgrade proof policies above is the real one -- few outside Microsoft do. (In fact, none of them is correct.)

Microsoft created this confusion by failing to tell anyone what the proof requirement would be for using an Upgrade version of Vista.

Meanwhile, the Upgrade versions are poison:

- Windows power users know that if you want Windows to work well over the long haul, it helps to reformat and perform a clean install once in a while. The Upgrade version requires you to install both XP/2000 and Vista every time, doubling the already massive amount of time it takes to do a reformat/reinstall.

- The Upgrade versions require you to keep track of your original Windows XP/2000 disks. Most people have these in the form of "recovery CDs" from the PC vendor, which can include multiple disks full of junk applications.

- Using a copy of XP or 2000 as proof for the Upgrade version of Vista invalidates the XP key, according to Vista's End User License Agreement (EULA). The EULA states, in part: "Upon upgrade, this agreement takes the place of the agreement for the software you upgraded from. After you upgrade, you may no longer use the software you upgraded from." Some bloggers and newsgroup posters have speculated that you may not be able to use that "invalidated" XP license even for a dual-boot installation with Vista. Computerworld has contacted Microsoft for clarification on this and, at press time, has not received a response. In other words, this is yet another point of confusion about Vista. [Editor's note: Computerworld will provide an update when this information becomes available.]

- Many users have lost, or were never provided with, installation disks with their PC. Because they have XP or 2000 installed, they may decide to save money and buy an Upgrade version. If their disk later dies, or they need for whatever reason to reformat, they will then have to buy a second copy of Vista, this time, the full version. Ouch!

In a few years, future PCs may have hardware components not supported by XP or 2000. If a user buys the Upgrade version now, then later buys a PC and chooses to transfer the Vista license to it, the XP/2000 installation required by Upgrade versions of Vista may prove troublesome.

There is a widely published workaround that enables users to install Upgrade versions of Vista without XP. It involves, essentially, installing Vista twice. You can find the work-around in Computerworld's comprehensive Vista Upgrade Guide. Whether this work-around is considered by Microsoft as legitimate or a form of piracy -- like so much about Vista -- is still unknown.

Too many versions

When Bill Gates launched Windows 95 a dozen years ago, consumers understood what they were getting. It was a brand-new Windows, vastly superior to Windows 3.x, and came in exactly one version. PC users could just go to the store and buy it, take it home and install it, and they didn't need a doctorate to figure out how to do all this.

Fast forward to this week. Windows Vista launched with 10 -- count 'em, 10 -- versions. Instead of giving us a simple new upgrade path to the future, they instead gave us a homework assignment. Here are the versions:

1) Windows Vista Starter Edition
2) Windows Vista Home Basic
3) Windows Vista Home Basic Upgrade
4) Windows Vista Home Premium
5) Windows Vista Home Premium Upgrade
6) Windows Vista Business
7) Windows Vista Business Upgrade
8) Windows Vista Ultimate
9) Windows Vista Ultimate Upgrade
10) Windows Vista Enterprise Edition

Faced with this list, consumers are scratching their heads and asking: Which one should I buy? What's the difference? Why should I bother?

What you need to know

What is the proof requirement for Upgrade versions of Vista? XP or 2000 needs to be installed. Regarding whether or not a "clean" installation is possible, the answer is a resounding maybe -- it's not always up to you. Vista requires a clean install in some cases, depending on which Upgrade version of Vista you're installing, and which version of Windows you're upgrading from (Again, see our Upgrade Guide for specifics).

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Don't buy Vista yet. But if you really must, consider only two of the 10 versions: Nontechnical consumers should buy the full version of Windows Vista Home Premium, and power users should buy the full version of Windows Vista Ultimate.

(Windows Vista Starter Edition is for Third World countries. The Enterprise Edition is for big companies. The Business Edition doesn't have any of the cool multimedia stuff you want from Vista. Home Basic versions are crippled. The Upgrade versions are poison.)

Here's what you need to know about actually performing the installation of Windows Vista in Hands On: The Essential Vista Upgrade Guide.

It's obvious that Microsoft decided to extract maximum cash from consumers by micro-segmenting the market and trying to provide a different version for each. But they may end up with the opposite result. All this confusion over versions and upgrade policies will motivate unknown millions of consumers to simply stick with Windows XP or move to a Mac.

When you consider how important it is to Microsoft for Windows Vista to feel like a simple upgrade, and you consider how unnecessarily confusing and complex they have made the move to Vista, you can only respond with one word:

Wow!

Posted by: Mike Elgan

Submit to: Digg Digg delicious Del.icio.us reddit Reddit

What is this?

<<newer entry | older entry>>

Comments

Posted by John on February 5, 2007 :

I appreciate your article and you did bring up a few valid points. However; I would omit the 10 version of Vista thing, since you included the upgrades as standalone versions. I would think in this day and age, nay I would hope, that most users would understand that purchasing an upgrade is NEVER A GOOD IDEA. Remember Windows ME?? I do, those upgrades caused way more harm than good.

Posted by Jon T on February 5, 2007 :

If we didn't know it before, Microsoft is very, very nasty company.

Why don't more people jst choose Mac OS X, it's better, simpler, more secure and comes in only one version, the 'Ultimate' OS X Tiger, no crippling, no exclusions, no money-grabbing. Just plain brilliant computing.

Posted by Stu on February 5, 2007 :

I don't know a whole lot about Vista so I'm not sure if it's still required to wipe out your system on a regular basis to keep it operating at a high level. I've heard every 6 months is alright for XP. If they've fixed this up it may not be that much of a hastle to have the upgrade version. Also, I'd assume anyone who knows enough about computers to realize you have to keep wiping your system to keep it working can also find a downloadable copy of the XP or 2000 discs on the net in about 30 seconds incase they lose theirs.

Posted by Pedantic John on February 5, 2007 :

This guy lost me in the first sentence. "Mac OS is simple while Windows is complicated." Hello! Mac is based upon UNIX, probably the most complex and developed OS in existence! What the writer really meant to say is that the Mac *interface* is simple (which, BTW, I disagree, being a Windows user. I find the Mac interface to be tedious and inflexible, but let it pass). The underlying OS is not. I WILL admit that Microsoft has an image problem; right now they could produce the classic one-button OS that did everything include change water into wine, and it would still be reviewed as a lemon. Jobs has got the masses charmed,even though he is every bit as nasty as Ballmer (anyone remember the Fat Mac fiasco?)

Posted by Lies on February 5, 2007 :

There are only 4 version of vista they are Home basic, Home Premium, Business, Ultimate. The author included the upgrades of OS. Bye

Posted by Lies on February 5, 2007 :

There are only 4 version of vista they are Home basic, Home Premium, Business, Ultimate. The author included the upgrades of OS. Bye

Posted by Lies on February 5, 2007 :

There are only 4 version of vista they are Home basic, Home Premium, Business, Ultimate. The author included the upgrades of OS. Bye

Posted by Lies on February 5, 2007 :

There are only 4 version of vista they are Home basic, Home Premium, Business, Ultimate. The author included the upgrades of OS. Bye

Posted by D on February 5, 2007 :

I have been a die hard user of windows, but I am tired of the confussion, looking at the many articles about wheter I should keep my Windows XP that I can not upgrade because of a key conflict to the new Vista is just a little much to bare, I am just wondering how good are the mac's now? I did not in the past maybe a fools move but I can not afford to have problems with my computers.

Posted by myopinion on February 5, 2007 :

I say stick with XP Sp2. If PC people dont know how to change internal parts of pc by themselves. It recommends 1Gb of ram, 128Mb video card, 1GHZ cpu. If you ask me I recommend using intel core 2 duo cpu with vista. Even it can work on P4 3.0ghz machines with 1Gb ram, 256Mb ati video card pretty good. Actually Mac is a better computer because its based on Unix FREEBSD. Bye

Posted by Mark Hayes on February 5, 2007 :

Actually there are eight versions of vista (not including the upgrades because including them as full versions would be, well, silly" there are:
Home Basic
Home Premium
Business
Ultimate

You've noticed I only listed four - that's because each version is available as either a 32 bit or 64 bit version. And that's going to confuse the hell out of just about anyone that isn't a geek or an IT person.

Posted by BlackHeart on February 5, 2007 :

Ok whether or not the Mac OS is easier to manuever through doesnt really matter. What does matter is that Windows alone has had more problems than the divorced married couples in the world. If its not one thing its another. Windows Vista just added to the kaos. It has software incompatibilities. I swear if it wasnt made by Microcrap its not going to work right without some inteligent people figuring out how work around it and yet still cause major problems. Im not even going to start on ME that speaks for itself. All the money and smarts Bill Gates has he should know better.

Posted by Bob on February 5, 2007 :

"Microsoft is losing consumer operating system market share to Apple for many reasons"

What's your source for this statement?

Posted by joecab on February 5, 2007 :

Why OS X will win ... what? The most market share? I use nothing but Apple but c'mon now. I'm sure OS X will gain market share and Windows will lose some (Linux is helping there, too) but that's it. You don't need the most market share to be taken seriously: just enough to be a good alternative, with hopefully the quality to back it up, and Apple's certainly got that.

Posted by John on February 5, 2007 :

"Using a copy of XP or 2000 as proof for the Upgrade version of Vista invalidates the XP key, according to Vista's End User License Agreement (EULA). " - This is hardly new, nor illogical; you are paying less for a copy to upgrade your current version.If you want to use that point as ammo against MS, at least mention just about every other piece of software on the planet has a similar EULA when it comes to upgrades.
However, that noted, I think the new upgrade requirements are much more hassle than they need to be. Undoubtedly they are trying to ensure people are not passing around the same XP disk to upgrade to Vista, but is it worth the trouble you are causing the end user?
Another minor quibble with your post; upgrades are not versions. I'm not sure what end users you know, but even the least knowledgeable I am in contact with know what an upgrade is...

Posted by Alexandra on February 5, 2007 :

Yes Mac OS X is based on Unix and that can be complicated if you are a Windows guy. Coming from Unix to Windows is probably just as "complicated". What the author thought was complicated was ordinary stuff users are expected to go through. The Mac OS X interface is easy and frankly most users only need that...and if you do Unix is extremely powerful.

Posted by Kevin on February 6, 2007 :

I would by Vista, then flush it down the toilet, you need a pretty powerful machine anyways to run everything it can do or else it just runs like crap. And to borrow a quote....The Vista logo is nice, with an aqua bubble, but underneath it....it's still windows.....Take this from a guy who once used Xp and switched to OSX, best thing ever, so much easier, SO STOP WHINNING WINDOWS FREAKS!!!! and just make the switch yourselves. As for it being based on UNIX, so what, the interface IS SIMPLE!!! thats what matters freak

Posted by reader on February 6, 2007 :

"Mac OS is simple while Windows is complicated." Hello! Mac is based upon UNIX, probably the most complex and developed OS in existence!

I guess, then, that you fail to understand the difference between the words complex and complicated.

Posted by Tim on February 6, 2007 :

' ...being a Windows user. I find the Mac interface to be tedious and inflexible, but let it pass).'

Rather a sweeping unqualified statemant to follow up with let it pass. I use XP and OS X all the time and find the very opposite of what you say to be true. OS X is far superior... in my opinion.

Posted by Tim on February 6, 2007 :

Posted by Kit-N on February 6, 2007 :

"Also, I'd assume anyone who knows enough about computers to realize you have to keep wiping your system to keep it working..."

WHAT?!?! You have to wipe your entire system every six months with XP? Or any Windows software for that matter?

That's NUTS! Why would you do that?

I've never had to reformat any of my Macs beginning with OS 7 on up to OSX.

My G5 I have now is almost always running. I rarely shut it down. I don't notice any speed or quality degradation. It still runs as fast as the day I brought it home.

Granted, I used to have to run Speed Disk (de-frag) every couple of months with OS7 thru 9, but with OSX, I don't even have to do that!

And Pedantic John thinks it's a complex OS?

Please guys, I use both platforms every day and Macs are hands down superior. I don't have to work at computer upkeep. I just work on my projects.

I'm thrilled that you like your OS, but until you actually use a Mac for more than just a "test-drive". Please don't be so quick

Posted by montex on February 6, 2007 :

10 versions are not so bad. Some of the European countries have more than that. The N series does not include Windows Media Player and the K versions exclude that and their Photo editing software. Always a pleasure to use MS products...

Posted by Neil on February 6, 2007 :

Windows die-hards are now coming to the conclusion that the Mac may be worth looking at after all.

Almost every person who has seen OS X running on my MacBook has stated to me that they:

Wish they could buy a Mac.
Know a Windows sufferer who is switching.
Are going to get a Mac as soon as they can.
Hate their crappy PC.
Got taken out by a virus recently.
Are kicking themselves that they recently bought a PC.

Micros**t have had a free ride for too long.
The people are waking up finally.
Even my Mac hating brother, who now wants an iMac.

Posted by Joseph Duchesne on February 6, 2007 :

so... when I upgrade my Mac I buy, for $170 or so, the best version that you can buy. I install on whatever Mac I want, regardless of what was previously there, and if it's in the supported hardware list it will run, and if the past two upgrades are any indicator, it will actually run faster than the previous version, in addition to new features. And all this without a serial number. Immagine that.

When I upgrade my Dell laptop... well, that's another long story but it involves Ubuntu, a lot of compiling, and no money. Linux rocks... once you get it installed... as long as you have another computer running another OS. :P

Windows Vista... I tried the demo the other day in a computer shop. It looked really nice. I hope everyone who unlike my friends and I want it, are happy with it.

Posted by rob on February 6, 2007 :

Some posters have alluded to the 64bit versions as well as the the upgrade versions. Including these in the total let's see.

Starter - (only available in 2nd/3rd world countries, leave it out)

Home Basic (Full, Upgrade) +2
Home Premium (Full, Upgrade, Full 64bit, 64bit upgrade) +4
Business (Full, Upgrade, full 64bit, 64bit upgrade) +4
Ultimate (Full, Upgrade, full 64bit, 64bit upgrade) +4
Enterprise (not available to consumers so leave it out.)

But also on the shelves there will be copies of windows XP, Pro, Pro upgrade, home and home upgrade. +4

So that means as many as 18 versions of windows on store shelves. Consumer hell. If a computer newbie buys a version and they don't have the hardware or software requirements for it. They lose their PC and money.

Happy shopping!

Posted by Ben on February 6, 2007 :

The point about OS X coming in one version is the strongest. I'm a Mac person, so I'll avoid any OS discussion. But I just don't get the idea of buying a limited version of any OS. The various versions of Vista are confusing. I'd just buy the best version, as I did with XP for my MacBook Pro. I bet that MS is betting most people will do this. It is awfully expensive, too.

Posted by roach on February 6, 2007 :

Scam is when a company tells your user G# processors are better than them intel processor. And having Apple lemmings fill the forums with this stupid claim. Then telling the same lemmings uhmm...forget what we told you because were switching to intel. Also, that evil Window OS...we're making a program, so you can run it! So...buy! buy! our Intel powered machine that can run Window!

Posted by Sai Zelion on February 6, 2007 :

My God this is sooooo simple folks! First of all, drop all of the emotional ties to Microsoft and Apple and just simply break it down for what it is:

OSX is a superior product, plain and simple.

Let's stop with the emotional ties and compare feature to feature etc...

{1} Just as everyone who has experienced OSX has stated, "no upgrading hardware is necessary!
{2} no wiping out hard drives, in order to use new versions

{3} immensely more secure & stable

{4} cleaner, more simplified interface

{5} None multi-version releases of the operating system.

{6} Apple is a very self efficient experience, buy 1 mac, and you switch to versions of the operating system SEAMLESSLY. A Mac, is one community tied to one OSX and 1 hard ware style. In the PC realm, you have to upgrade all sorts of things in your system in order to upgrade Windows. Which means, you save so much money because you don't have to upgrade your system hardware throughout the years unless you want to for you

Posted by flotsky on February 6, 2007 :

Okay, you've explained why Vista is a mess and complicated. Now actually explain why OSX will win? There is no proof, no justification there it will, and lets face it, it won't, in terms of any measure involving sales, market share, usage, however you want to split the cake, Vista will outachieve OSX massively, regardless of quality.

Posted by flotsky on February 6, 2007 :

Posted by cube3 on February 6, 2007 :

There are 3 versions of OS X - Client, Server 10 and Server unlimited. That said they are infinitely superior to Vista right now, which should not have been launched until it was ready.

Posted by cube3 on February 6, 2007 :

There are 3 versions of OS X - Client, Server 10 and Server unlimited. That said they are infinitely superior to Vista right now, which should not have been launched until it was ready.

Posted by cube3 on February 6, 2007 :

There are 3 versions of OS X - Client, Server 10 and Server unlimited. That said they are infinitely superior to Vista right now, which should not have been launched until it was ready.

Posted by cube3 on February 6, 2007 :

There are 3 versions of OS X - Client, Server 10 and Server unlimited. That said they are infinitely superior to Vista right now, which should not have been launched until it was ready.

Posted by cube3 on February 6, 2007 :

There are 3 versions of OS X - Client, Server 10 and Server unlimited. That said they are infinitely superior to Vista right now, which should not have been launched until it was ready.

Posted by TheLini on February 6, 2007 :

I think what the author is trying to get at is that you actually can buy 10 versions of Vista to install on any pc that has xp already on it.

With mac os x you can only get 1 version whether you are upgrading or doing a whole clean install. Its the same box for either.

Mac os X = 1 box

Windows Vista = 10 boxes.

He is totally right to count the upgrade versions as he is talkimg about uprgrading a system as well as clean installs.

Posted by TheLini on February 6, 2007 :

He is only talking about vista, which is a client OS not a server OS.

I dont even want to start counting vista along side current windows server versions...

Posted by Christopher on February 6, 2007 :

--"There are 3 versions of OS X - Client, Server 10 and Server unlimited."

We are talking about the software for workstation/home machine. Not Server software. there's only ONE OS X Client software for all Mac. But if you want to make you Mac a File Server, you can get the Server software.

If you want to include server software, mabe you can tell me how many choices you can get on Window Server licenses. On the Mac the most is TWO.

Window 3.x/95/NT/ME/2000/XP/XP Pro and now Vista is same as what we know as (Mac OS 9 before this) OS X Client. The ONE

Posted by Kit-N on February 6, 2007 :

"Vista will out achieve OSX massively, regardless of quality."

And they call Mac users 'Lemmings'.

Don't be afraid to improve your life. Try a Mac. You won't go back.

Posted by Kit-N on February 6, 2007 :

"Vista will out achieve OSX massively, regardless of quality."

And they call Mac users 'Lemmings'.

Don't be afraid to improve your life. Try a Mac. You won't go back.

Posted by Joe D on February 6, 2007 :

"Vista will out achieve OSX massively, regardless of quality."
????
Are you kidding me? Is this what you really want out of an OS? Microsoft wants more customers like you!

OSX is far superior on so many levels.

Posted by designed on February 6, 2007 :

Do not forget the 32-bit vs. 64-bit issue. Also, in Europe, we have the Home Basic N and Business N -versions without Windows Media Player and IE 7.

And, because i.e. we here in Finland are bi-lingual (Finnish and Swedish) but some of us prefer the non-translation-crippled English version, there are apparently something like close to 70 different versions of Vista being sold currently.

So, how about we visit that local Apple retailer?

Posted by flotsky on February 6, 2007 :

I'm not kidding, I'm just right. Okay, I like drum'n'bass. I hate American Idol/Pop Idol. I know if someone on Hospital Records releases a single, it will be far better than any single that could possibly be released by a winner of American Idol. However I also know that there is no chance it will outsell it, no matter how much more superior it is a product. I know that OSX is better than Vista on most if not all counts, I'm not a fool. However I would be if I believed it could "win" in any shape or form, other than morally.

Posted by Gonzo on February 6, 2007 :

I just want to address the folks who are saying that most computer users know that they have to Nuke and Pave their systems occasionally... While it's true that they may have been told this by more experienced users, they 1: Don't understand why, and 2: Quite resonably don't think they should have to... I mean, for all the money we pay for these things, why can't they just work? Why do we have to cowtow our digital tool like it's a 4 year-old? Oh. Wait. That's why I switched. Now I just use PCs when I charge others $100 to re-format for them.

Posted by Joe D on February 6, 2007 :

Out achieve is different than out sell. Which, in that case, I agree.

Sure, there are many more diehard users of windows products, those are the same people that will never give OSX a chance, they would rather just trash the system. I'm a tech and work on OS9/OSX and windows systems, so it's not like I don't understand how both work inside and out. I'm just stating that if given the option, I'm all about OSX. For those windows supporters, just check it out and give it a fair chance, you'll never go back.

Posted by Joe D on February 6, 2007 :

Posted by Chris N on February 6, 2007 :

as fr as MAC OSX being superior to Vista lets take a detailed look at claims being made

OSX is more secure and reliable this is a matter of opinion any OS from *nix to Windows is only secure as the person running it. (17 yers runnign some form of windows and never been infected by a virus)

Need to wipe and rebuild windows machines form scratch every 6 months - this is fasle the msot common reson to have to rebuild machines is beacuse people install every piece of free or share ware out on the Internet I suscessfully keep machine running with top perfomrance and stable for years

To many Version of Vista - Ill give you this one some of this is driven by the Europen Scrunion alot of it is driven by marketing not developers

OSX will win - well honestly this isnt going to happen until there is software written to run on the MAC. Open source isn't going to cut it Users dont want to have to download and compile it they jsut want to install it. This one has always been the downfal

Posted by Peter C on February 7, 2007 :

I have been a long time user of 2000 then XP. I refuse to load Vista. In fact I'm so tired of screwing with the OS that I'm buying a Mac. I'll keep the Dell PC for some windows/CAD..that is work related stuff, but all my other home computing is going to be on a Mac and Mac software. Bye Bye Microsoft.

Posted by Peter C on February 7, 2007 :

Posted by Dirk on February 7, 2007 :

At work, we run Windows, and I've been involved in in-house development and user-support for a 6000+ group of computer users.
This unfortunate experience alone would be already more than enough for me to _only_ run on Mac OSX at home.

However, when I did my computer science degree - long time ago, long long time ago - we programmed on Windows as well as on Macs (and on Unix, Mainframe, AS400, anything with a processor, and from downright Assembler till Lisp and Smalltalk).
The university in case needed to have, for every 100 students to work some 3-400 PCs (at least half of them continuously being in reformatting, repair, re-everything), and for the same work 103 Macs (3 used by the professors, the rest continuously used by the students).
This caused me to switch (and back then OSX wasn't there yet, at all), and I haven't regretted it one single day.

Although I can tweak the inside-out of any PC, at the end of the day I just want a machine that does what I want it to do, and l

Posted by Dirk on February 7, 2007 :

(continued)
...and that's what a Mac does, it simply works.
I've been going with Mac for some 8 years now after some 12 years of PC, and I haven't regretted for a single day moving to Mac.

In this period, I haven't come across any single file or application that I could not open or run on my Mac - eventually through a Windows emulator; and I've always been at ease exchanging files with PCs.
Not quite so the other way round (in fact, when something doesn't work at work (Windows) I take it home (Mac) to get it to work...

I feel truly sorry for the Windows afficionados, my 2c worth: stick with XP as long as you can, and use that time to get acquainted with the Mac. As already said by other posters on this site: you won't come back.

Posted by Dirk on February 7, 2007 :

(last note)
One last note: I don't consider myself a Mac addict or so, I just want a machine that works.
If Apple were to deliver crappy machines/software or charge ludicrous prices for their OS, I'ld be looking for another option, without any second thoughts.
However, until now, they haven't, so I'll be sticking with my Mac.
(I guess that by now my wife would simply kill me if I would say that I'ld want to go back to a PC: she's a photographer, not a computer addict, so she for sure wants something that simply _works_)

Posted by David Flood on February 7, 2007 :

<i>1) Windows Vista Starter Edition
2) Windows Vista Home Basic
3) Windows Vista Home Basic Upgrade
4) Windows Vista Home Premium
5) Windows Vista Home Premium Upgrade
6) Windows Vista Business
7) Windows Vista Business Upgrade
8) Windows Vista Ultimate
9) Windows Vista Ultimate Upgrade
10) Windows Vista Enterprise Edition</I>

This is still not the total, as non-Windows Media-equipped versions are also sold in the EU, as per antitrust settlement.

Posted by mulepose on February 7, 2007 :

A lot of Windows users make a lot of fuss about the fact that Mac users love there Mac and think that they are fanatic, brainwashed people without a sense of reality.

They seem to mess up the expressions "in love" and "love". When you're "in love"- and I'm sure anyone that has been will recognize this description: you don't see anything clear, you close your eyes for any bad thing that there might be and you think that everything is just fine, though it's not. When you love somebody, you know the person well - also the bad things there might be - but have come to love him/her for all the good stuff.

Mac users are not "in love" with their Macs - they "love" them! They are (most of them) experienced users who (many of them) also have used PC's in various forms, but have made the switch.

And why do they love their Macs? Because on a Mac you use your precious time to work - not to patch up the system with Registry cleaning programs, anti-virus programs, anti-spyware programs and

Posted by mulepose on February 7, 2007 :

(continued)

- but it takes a lot of time and costs a lot of money - leaving you with less time to work. With your Mac you just work - everything just works!

Is it really so hard to understand that we are some people who appreciates this? I don't hate Windows - but I love my Mac and will never go back!

Posted by mulepose on February 7, 2007 :

Oops - this is how my comment should continue:

so forth. If you are an experienced PC user, you CAN keep your Win XP fresh and free of virusses and spyware programs - but it takes a lot of time and costs a lot of money - leaving you with less time to work. With your Mac you just work - everything just works!

Is it really so hard to understand that we are some people who appreciates this? I don't hate Windows - but I love my Mac and will never go back!

Posted by PBDoetMee on February 7, 2007 :

Wow indead. I am sooo glad I'm an OS X user!

Posted by Themis G. on February 8, 2007 :

" 'OSX is more secure and reliable' - this is a matter of opinion any OS from *nix to Windows is only secure as the person running it.

>>> You Win fans just won't get it - On Macs you CAN'T get infected by a virus, NO MATTER how hard you try!!!

"(17 yers runnign some form of windows and never been infected by a virus)"

>>> Oh common! I've been a Win user for most of my computing life. Once you connect to Internet, Win lets hell break loose! So unless you don't get online, or you don't install 3rd party programs that contain spyware, etc. or phone home/ create vulnerabilities, then ok. You're right!

Posted by Themis G. on February 8, 2007 :

"Need to wipe and rebuild windows machines form scratch every 6 months - this is fasle the msot common reson to have to rebuild machines is beacuse people install every piece of free or share ware out on the Internet I suscessfully keep machine running with top perfomrance and stable for years"

>>> If you use your PC for more than just Office (ex. Graphic Design and Web Design) you need a dussin of programs to be installed (because Win is bare-naked and crippled when fresh installed). Those on their own crap out the Win registry throughout their usage and when installing additional stuff to them plus upgrading them through the internet. After 6 months performance drops down to 70% (at best) and at the end of the year 50%. On Macs, you won't EVER need ANY kind of hard-disk wipes or maintenance...

Posted by Themis G. on February 8, 2007 :

"OSX will win - well honestly this isnt going to happen until there is software written to run on the MAC. Open source isn't going to cut it Users dont want to have to download and compile it they jsut want to install it. This one has always been the downfal"

>>> Ehm, buddy, I think you are confusing there Mac OS X with Linux. Out of all the OS in the world, OS X has the easiest installation procedure - Drag a single file (Yes, a single! All folders and files are packed into a single file!) and drop it where you want it to reside! That's it! And about your 'no-software-written-for-Mac' issue. I won't go ahead giving you examples. I'll just ask you if you knew that your beloved company, Micro, writes her entire Office suite JUST for OS X? I guess don't...

Read your homework Chris and THEN write. Your knowledge is limited, false and outdated (like most Win fans...)

Posted by lonetree on February 9, 2007 :

Its too horrible, with so many editions of vista even excluding the upgrade version.

Its such a confusion to even the techy ones, needless to say about those pure end users. My users keep asking me about vista recently and some even requested to upgrade their PCs to vista. My answer to them is, NOT NOW!

To answer them even further, I said, I really didn't know which is really good for you. Getting the lowest edition may not have the feature they want, getting the higher edition means more $$$$$. Sigh.

Was thinking to myself last few weeks, why not linux? Since the new vista and office 2007 UI is a change. Might as well introduce them to Linux, afterall, its a relearn.

Posted by adamb on February 14, 2007 :

i would choose mac os x over vista because that is what i like, i like mac more than windows... i have used windows for a while and it makes me mad when things start freezing up...

also i dont think a lot of people will be able to upgrade to vista without upgrading their computer first, the reqs are high