Which Os is better among the Windows Vista.

Nice.

It sure sounds like it. Of course, I'm dead-broke (literally) at the moment. But when I'm ready for a new computer, it'll be nice to have a wider choice.

I notice various commentators finally echoing my thoughts that the Mac is "superior" primarily because it's a closed system. But the Mac doesn't "leave Windows in the dust", simply because Windows offers a wider variety and range of software.

I wonder if Apple will ever create an OS that will run Windows applications directly and transparently. I don't think it's impossible, but it would require a huge programming effort.

I remember Apple promoting their single-button mouse because it reduced the number of decisions the user had to make, conveniently overlooking the fact that designers would (and did) find all sorts of things for a mouse to do. The result is that, with a single-button mouse, you now have to remember which key to press to access these features.

I also remember John Dvorak griping that the Windows industry had not yet decided what the "official" use of the second button would be. It finally decided on displaying properties & functions, an excellent choice.

The OS I use decided on a 3 button mouse over a quarter of a century ago. We have five 'fingers' - two needed to move the mouse so three spare. Surely it makes sense to use those?

It probably runs nicely on a 200 THz processor with 128 TB of memory.

Get Linux and you can have THREE mouse buttons, all very handy.

I don't see that as an advantage over what they have already done.

You have a basic misunderstanding of how the OS works. Software is written and compiled to run on a particular OS/processor combo. You can't run a Windows app on a UNIX box "natively" any more than you can drive a boat on an asphalt highway... on a very fundamental level it just doesn't work.

I don't know how this "parallels" software works BUT I am guessing (and I'm pretty sure about this) that it's a virtual dos machine environment similar to VMWare or WINE where there is an application which emulates a windows OS computer and which is displayed on the Mac OS X computer. It may APPEAR that you are switching between the two OS's, but in reality you are running OS X UNIX on the processor full-time and DISPLAYING (full-screen or otherwise) a PROGRAM which is running the Windows app (perhaps within the familiar Windows desktop). the only other way it could be done is the way IBM and the big boys have been doing it for decades: partition the system (memory, cpu cores, i/o bus, etc.) so that different OS's run CONCURRENTLY on different processor cores within the same physical machine. OS X is simply not designed or implemented to do this. Kudos to the writers of Parallels for their most excellent-sounding product, I will check it out.

Having jumped back into the Mac world recently with my iMac purchase, I will say that much as I dislike Microsoft, they have a better interface for administering some things like network connections and firewalls, but that is only my opinion. My background is in UNIX system administration, so I am thrilled that the OS x backend is UNIX but... the GUI tools to administer the vast power of the OS is geared towards trendy Jim whose skills lie in perhaps advertising or image manipulation and who has no ability or desire to completely control his machine... he wants a warm fuzzy "automagic" interface which eliminates any technicial ability requirements. Just about all of the Apple documentation deals with the fuzzy simple interface and does not address the underlying OS which is UNIX. Although I've been in the IT field for several decades, I had one helluva time configuring my wireless adaptor to talk to my wireless print server in ad hoc mode... it took me literally two hours. That having been said, my techno-illiterate wife could sit down and follow the instructions to get the machine talking via ehternet to our DSL modem (insecure as THAT is given OS X's default setting for their less-than-perfect firewall is "OFF" out of the box) and hence onto the internet... Apple is bang-on meeting the needs/wants of their intended market.

Dave S.

Yeah, I don't understand Apple's stubbornness with that single-button mouse. Sure it looks cool (oops, answered my own question) but using the control key to access the shortcut menus is just plain stupid and inefficient. Why should I have to use two hands to do the same thing I could easily and simply do with one with a Logitech mouse?

Yes, remember the three-button optical mouse (with the special metal optical pickup mouse pad) that Sun shipped with their IPC/IPX/Sparcstation machines in what, 1987? It was a bitch to keep that pad clean enough to work smoothly but ahhh, the third button... I also always liked their CUT/COPY/PASTE keyboard buttons... why not add buttons to eliminate multiple actions for functions that people perform ALL THE TIME? I'd get rid of the "scroll lock" and "pause/break" buttons on the PC KB in favor of COPY and PASTE.

Dave S.

Not only is it new, it's also slower, it requires huge amount of resources to run "optimally" and contains more than its' share of bugs. Oh, and the lack of backward-compatibility, did I mention that?

Oh, but I do understand it. I said "directly and transparently", not natively.

The Apple OS could, in principle, support all the Windows API calls, address spaces, etc. Windows software would think it was running in a Windows environment.

I'm

similar

OS

running

That seems plausible.

Yes, it would be possible but holy s*it why would you want to? There would be a huge huge huge cost to develop hooks for all of the MS API's and for what? You can already run an emulator and (with a minimal performance hit) run all the windows apps...

I think a more simple way to go about it would be to write a simple wrapper for your windows app which scripts the launching of the app within the emulator app when you click it with your mouse. Couple of lines and you're done....

Make that "all companies".

I wonder if the computer industry will end up like the auto industry: a few big players. I will gladly pay for the option to purchase reasonably priced spare parts for 20 years in exchange for giving up ultimate customizability of my car. Any day of the week.

would

hit)

The reason you would want to is to allow the truly simultaneous operation of Mac and Windows programs. Of course, anything that gave the _illusion_ of same would be just as good, of cours.

wrapper

you're

Okay.

few

priced

customizability

It seems that all industries tend to devolve toward a few big players, simply because of bad management or shakeouts during economic downturns.

There are good reasons for damning Microsoft (and Apple, for that matter), but if it weren't for Windows, there would be no single "universal" (???) platform for software and it would be economically more difficult for software companies to develop niche products. The paradox (at least with respect to operating systems) is that fewer operating systems means a wider variety of software products.

The Windows emulator was very s l o w....... even on this MacBook Pro, which has a 2.16 GHz processor. For what I wanted, it was inadequate.

Windows via Parallels and XP is not slow.

If you don't like it, you can turn it off. It annoys me every time I use my old Pismo, because I do the "two-finger thump" and nothing happens.

Two finger motions also emulate a wheel mouse -- draw fingers down, scroll up; draw fingers sideways, scroll sideways. Nice.

Isaac

UNIX (BSD, actually) is a "closed system"? That will be news to a lot of folks.

Windows proponents often say that, but when put to it, they are usually unable to name any particular areas of software other than games or very expensive, special purpose apps for offices or engineers where Macs are deficient. That a PC has a larger availability of games is a given. In fact, if you start with the premise that a PC is a game machine that also does spread sheets, a lot of the architectural aspects of PCs make a lot more sense. And those expensive special-purpose apps are of no particular interest to the typical home user.

Can you do better? In what areas are Macs unable to perform because of the unavailability of software? (Not "I can't run this specific Windows app or something exactly like it", but "no Mac software to perform the function satisfactorily exists").

Isaac

Logiteck (and others) make plenty of inexpensive mice, with plenty of extra buttons and scroll wheels that work just fine on Apple computers. Must have been a long while since you looked at a Mac if you think they still all come with a one button mouse.