Paul Thurrott's SuperSite for Windows
Home > Type > News > WWDC 2009: Time for a reality check

WWDC 2009: Time for a reality check

Jun. 8, 2009 Paul Thurrott | Paul Thurrott's Supersite for Windows

Apple is providing its WWDC 2009 keynote address today, providing some interesting info about its Mac and iPhone platforms. But this is Apple we're talking about. So it's time for a reality check.

75 million Mac OS X users. Apple claimed that the OS X user base magically jumped from 25 million to 75 million active users in two years. But it didn't. It jumped to 35 million users. The other 40 million are using iPhones and iPod touches. So if there are 1 billion active PC users (and that's an old figure), than OS X usage share right now is 3.5 percent. Everyone's onboard with the math, right? 3.5 percent. "No wonder everyone is trying to follow in our footsteps," Apple SVP Phil Schiller said. Right.

Macbooks magically become Macbook Pros. Apple rebranded the 13-inch Macbook as the Macbook Pro and added SD slots across the line-up. FINALLY. I've only been asking for this handy little feature for, what, 6 years? The batteries are non-replaceable. I'm pretty sure no one was asking for that feature. And they added Firewire 800. Seriously, how about two more USB ports? Oh, and $1699 to start for a lowball 15-inch unit? To Mac guys, this is big news.

Hypocrisy around Vista/7 and Leopard/Snow Leopard. This year, both Microsoft and Apple are working on revisions to existing OSes. In Microsoft's case, Windows 7 is a nice revision to Windows Vista. And Snow Leopard is a minor revision (service pack) to Mac OS X Leopard. Both Windows Vista and Leopard have had their share of problems, but Vista's are more high profile and thus, apparently, news to the wider world. But look how Apple's Darth Vader, Bertrand Serlet, describes these updates:

Windows 7: "Even more complexity is present in Windows 7. The same old tech as Vista. Just another version of Vista."

Snow Leopard: "We come from such a different place. We love Leopard, we're so proud of it, we decided to build upon Leopard. We want to build a better Leopard, hence Snow Leopard."

Um. They sound the same to me. Jerk.

For the record, Snow Leopard looks just fine to me. It should, after three years of development on a point release.

Exchange support in Snow Leopard. Apple makes fun of Microsoft to comic effect (see above) ... Unless, of course, they need Microsoft. Which they do, to add Exchange support to its products. Oh, wait. "With Exchange support built into Snow Leopard, there is no extra charge for Mac OS users while Windows users usually have to pay extra." There it is.

Safari 4 today for OS X, Windows. Yawn.

QuickTime X for OS X, Windows. Actually, this looks good. I especially like how the UI looks like no other OS X app. Nice consistency there from the HIG.

Mac OS X is not fully 64-bit. While Windows users get 64-bit versions of Windows, Mac OS X users will, in Snow Leopard, get an OS in which most of the system is 64-bit, but many "non-major system apps" are still 32-bit.

Snow Leopard pricing. Apple is finally charging the right price for the latest in a long list of minor upgrades: $29 to Leopard users. This is exactly right, and should serve as inspiration for Microsoft. Seriously.

iPhone 3.0. The iPhone is really popular, and let's face it, it's awesome. iPhone 3.0, which I've been using since February, is a very minor update, and mostly adds things that should have been there in the first place. Biggest disappointment: Apple is adding tethering, but AT&T refuses to allow it. Hey, AT&T. F#$% you. Yeah. Really.

Apple needs to tone down the boring stuff. Look guys, here's another iPhone app. We get it. Move along, please.

iPhone 3G S. Was curious what they were going to call the iPhone 3, since the iPhone 3G was the iPhone 2.0. Now we know. Built in 7.2MBps HSDPA for data. New camera (finally). But same form factor. (Which makes sense, given the add-on market, but lacks a certain pizzazz.) I mean, where could they go with this, really? Anyway: Pricing is $199 (16 GB), $299 (32 GB). Surely there's an upgrade program for existing users. [Cricket chirps.]

Voice Control. (3GS only.) Apple copies Microsoft Sync, no one notices. And by the way, the notion of talking to a smart phone should be obvious. Just saying.

Best live keynote coverage. Engadget, hands down.

Discuss this Article 193

mherm88
on Jun 8, 2009
@truffoo0: I spend at least 10 hours a day doing web development and test everything both locally and hosted on all major browsers and (even though it's young) Chrome has a significant speed advantage over all others. @robertsjoe: IE is typically used as the base of comparison of speed and function for all browsers to show home many times better the other browser is so why would you compare Safari to it? How about doing a real comparison like Safari to FF or Chrome? or are you scared? IE is an afterthought in the browser world, so why are you trying to use it on the forefront of your argument?
mikegalos@msn.com
on Jun 8, 2009
To those on here launching personal attacks against me rather than saying where my posts are wrong, I'd quote Ben Bradlee when the Washington Post was being savaged for telling the truth during Watergate... "They doubt our ancestry, but they don't say the story isn't accurate." Seems like that's good company for me. You might want to consider that using Haldeman and Erlichman and Mitchell and Hunt and Colson and Nixon and Liddy and Agnew as role models might not be something to brag about.
robertsjoe
on Jun 8, 2009
@miguelgalos: Comparing yourself to the Washington Post and the Watergate reports? Wow, you're living in a dream world.
robertsjoe
on Jun 8, 2009
@miguelgalos: The problem with pointing out your posts which are lies, incorrect or FUD is that when someone does, you ignore them. You move on to delivering more FUD. So it makes it difficult and pointless trying to point them out.
tayme
on Jun 8, 2009
@mikegalos - That made absolutely no sense. You seem pretty flustered today. I haven't seen anybody say that they consider those people their role models...there you go again, saying that somebody said something when it obviously didn't happen. Wasn't it you complaining about exactly that a while back? --tayme
robertsjoe
on Jun 8, 2009
Microsoft to announce Windows "7" pricing as soon as next week http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=2992 I guarantee that it will not be as nearly as competitive as Apple's desktop and server prices. Especially considering that both Snow Leopard and Windows 7 are just point upgrades.
anonymous
on Jun 8, 2009
Sorry I was away all day folks, had a day of driving around... I did catch some of Apple's WWDC....
Mum
on Jun 8, 2009
"As Paul mentioned, calling out MS for the improvements to Windows from Vista to 7, and then announcing the exact same thing in OS X is hilarious" It is, if you didn't get the message: Vista sucks, Windows 7 is more of the same. Leopard is beautiful, Snow Leopard is more of the same. "Seriously. What was announced today that you think actually was technically significant." Nothing. Apple sparsely announce anything technically significant, as "technically significant" sounds like an excuse to a product being unusable. Vista springs to mind. "To those on here launching personal attacks against me rather than saying where my posts are wrong, I'd quote Ben Bradlee [...]" What would you say to people who do point out where your posts are wrong, Mike? Nothing, as usual?
subzerohitman721
on Jun 8, 2009
@Daveinla stated "Granted Leopard introduced many new features, hence major update. Snow Leopard introduces few visible improvement for the user. hence the name Leopard still. Where the major work has been done is in the kernel here and for the developer." Sorry pal, but this doesn't pass the smell test. It maybe new features to OS-X users, but similar functionality has been in Windows for awhile now. For them to finally implementing features that were in Windows shouldn't be considered a major upgrade. When MIcrosoft does this, they are criticized for "copying Apple." Yet when Apple copies MIcrosoft, nobody calls them out for it. Well, I am calling it like it is. SnowLeopard is essentially copying functionality that has been apart of Windows. If anything, Apple should be criticized for being the "Johnny Come Very Late" to the party here. Microsoft has had a full working 100% 64 bit operating systems here for quite sometime now, going back to the XP era. Apple still hasn't got SnowLeopard 100% 64 bit. You're believeing this marketing hype when the facts do not suit the case. As gorath pointed out, Direct X does very similarly what Open CL does and has been in Windows as far back as 1995. Apple's just implementing a similar feature almost 14 years later? Wow. Yet we are supposedly lead to believe that OS-X is superior, when its just doing things that Windows has been doing for a decade and half now? That's really not worth saying thats justification for a major upgrade. As I pointed out Processor Power Management is code for taking advantage of multicore CPU's or threads. That feature was available in January 30, 2007 for Windows users. You guys won't see it until September 2009. Thats 2 years and 8 months later that Apple finally gets this done. And thats supposedly "new and revolutionary?" No. Its a copied feature. Nothing more, nothing less. Even Linux variants have code for similar features going back quite sometime. So you can believe the marketing or the cold hard facts. In my opinion, SnowLeopard is a cheap upgrade that people should get, but it doesn't make a compelling case against Windows 7. Thats why the audience groaned at the cheapshots against Windows 7 because they were't justified.
DarkSages
on Jun 8, 2009
Great so SnowLeopard does not support PowerPC processors. That is just great not wonder they said that it saves disk space it no longer supports powerpc processor nor does it support 32bit. So now i can't fix computers with problems that are running leopard I guess I will just roll them back to 10.4 tiger. This really sucks... OK so they are making fun of Microsoft for "fixing vista" when Windows 7 runs better than vista on the same old hardware. Snow leopard their fix does not work on half of computers that were sold when leopard was first out. Let me guess many applications will break just like they did from 10.4 to 10.5. Also on the next version 10.7 will only work on 2009 hardware and on and will also brake half of 10.6 apps. So once again why are people so eager to trow money at this company?
g6672D
on Jun 8, 2009
->DarkSages If you require OS X for some reason, say, iLife, you need to buy a Mac, or they can try Hackintosh if they're feeling lucky. Same idea with the iPhone. If you get it, you can only use it with iTunes, and if you want apps, there's only one option: Apple. All of those make it harder to switch away, therefore, they can either lose what they have, attempt to find a workaround, or live with it. #1 is undesirable and #2 may not be possible.
niekbm
on Jun 8, 2009
I personally thought Harry McCracken from Technologizer did an excellent live blog during the keynote. That in combination with pictures from gdgt.com and macrumors.com was even better. Later I noticed Leo was streaming live with video from the keynote and Alex Lindsay, Geoff Smith and iJustine commenting. Apparently Andy Ihnatko was there too...
ModernDislocation
on Jun 9, 2009
Reality Checking Paul's Reality Check "75 million Mac OS X users" Phil Schiller never made this claim. He said specifically that there are 75 million OS X uses and that included Mac OS X as well as the iPhone and iPod touch. There was no attempt to pass that off as Mac growth. "Hypocrisy around Vista/7 and Leopard/Snow Leopard. " Paul takes quotes out of contexts and gets outraged. If you want to know what was actually said I suggest actually watching the video. "QuickTime X for OS X, Windows" Has this gem " I especially like how the UI looks like no other OS X app". This is an excellent point if you ignore the DVD player in Mac OS X. You know, the app that has similar functionality as the quicktime player and now has a similar UI. "Mac OS X is not fully 64-bit." And Apple didn't claim that it was. "iPhone 3G S ... Surely there's an upgrade program for existing users. " Paul who likes to deride people for not doing just a little research when making claims doesn't seem to feel the need to follow his own standard because an upgrade program was announced by AT&T. At one point this blog used to be kind of interesting. The Apple coverage was crummy but the windows stuff was good. But now the Apple coverage is just B.S and the Windows coverage is largely regurgitating M.S PR. The only thing Paul really seems to add are his hissy fits. I would fault him for that but reading through the comments he clearly knows his audience and given them the website they want. I guess it is good that all twenty of you who feel Mac Vs. PC is still relevant have a place to call home with your MC to keep the conversation going.
Lindy
on Jun 9, 2009
@subzero are you high? http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/pnppwr/powermgmt/ProcPowerMgmt.mspx vs http://www.apple.com/macosx/technology/#opencl This is your brain, this is your brain on drugs.
Lindy
on Jun 9, 2009
"75 million Mac OS X users" Phil Schiller never made this claim. He said specifically that there are 75 million OS X uses and that included Mac OS X as well as the iPhone and iPod touch. There was no attempt to pass that off as Mac growth." Paul did not watch the video before he made his comment. Phil CLEARLY SAID, something to the fact "not BECAUSE OF iTouch and iPod we NOW HAVE 75million users of OS X". Hack job journalism.
shark47
on Jun 9, 2009
From mherm88's link: http://www.neowin.net/news/main/09/06/09/marshymellow-apples-hypocrisy-i... "But, it wasn't enough to take a swipe at Vista. Serlet decided to key us all into what is perhaps Apple's new spin on Windows 7... that it has "even more complexity" than Vista. Why? Because it's based on the "same old tech as Vista." Basically, they've gone out of their way (and I think will continue to do so), to try and label Windows 7 as "Windows Vista 2.0"" Rabid Apple fans have been doing this for quite a while now. Now, Apple has joined the bandwagon too. After all, Apple has to pander to its fanatical fan base. "Vista sucks, Windows 7 is more of the same. Leopard is beautiful, Snow Leopard is more of the same." ...And with Steve Jobs calling himself an artist, all the pieces fall into place.
panache1023
on Jun 9, 2009
WOAH! Subzero...the DirectX of 1995, which wasnt yet called DirectX (I don't think), is NOT AT ALL what Waethorn said. DirectX back then was NOT capable of GPGPU, which is what OpenCL and DirectX 11 Compute (or whatever Waethorn pointed out) makes accessible, so that statement is in error. @Shark...the reason you are a douche is because of statements like...when I mentioned I have railed against RJ many times, you say, "Anything that makes you feel better"...but if you had actually paid ATTENTION to posts I've made, or went back to re-read some, it's all right there...*THAT* is what makes you a douche... Regarding MikeGalos's beard....what? You don't think it's sexy?! Regarding MikeGalos's claim that people should point out where he is wrong and lies...it happens all the time, but then he just ignores it, or spins it in such a way that he convinces himself he was right all along
panache1023
on Jun 9, 2009
@Shark, Again, you prove your douche-iness... "Rabid Apple fans have been doing this for quite a while now. Now, Apple has joined the bandwagon too. After all, Apple has to pander to its fanatical fan base" Meanwhile, ON THIS VERY BOARD, your God Paul Thurott has said the following "Here's what we do know. Windows 7 can and should be considered Vista Release 2 (R2). In fact, I think Microsoft should market the business versions of the OS under that very name." Meanwhile, who here besides RJ has said things like "Vista sucks, Windows 7 is more of the same. Leopard is beautiful, Snow Leopard is more of the same.", which is what you claim the "fanatical fan base" says? And it's THIS VERY HYPOCRISY that frustrates me to the point of calling people "douches"
gorath
on Jun 9, 2009
Lindy, he might be high, but he's just confused, and got the wrong name for the windows equivalent. Processor power management is used to lower the processor clock speed when it is not in use, etc. What he is referring to (I guess) is windows' thread scheduler/mnager - which as far as I know, has no fancy name. I mean, most other OSs don't have a fancy name for it, it's just something that's built into Kernels by default. I must say though, that although there has been thread management in windows since time began (not literally of course), the advancements that came with the scheduler in NT6 - vista and server 2008 - made a hell of a difference. Before that, I believe every thread was assigned equal priority unless it specifically requested otherwise. In vista and later, threads are assigned to processors dynamically depending on the workload, or somesuch. Whatever, the inner workings of it themselves are far to complicated, and way over my head, but the difference in responsiveness from XP to vista was night and day. So, I was mistaken, in that I hadn't realised that "grand central" had changed it's name / split up or whatever, but what I said still holds true. What "Grand central" does NOW, has also been in windows for a very long time, although it really came of age with vista. Subzero just seems confused about the name - probably because it has no fancy name - but I could be wrong. There's been a bit of controversy in Linux for some time regarding it's thread scheduler. Some were arguing that server benchmark results showed great performance in the scheduler, whereas others were maintaining that server benchmarks meant nothing for the desktop user, and that the scheduler should be overhauled to allow much higher immediate responsiveness.
panache1023
on Jun 9, 2009
MikeGalos, Regarding your ridiculous assertion that threads were created by MS and IBM in 1987....Maybe the two of the collaborated to incorporate threads into their new OS they were going to work on together...but read this.. "[93-04-21-13-32.11] [92-01-27-17-05.54] The notion of a thread, as a sequential flow of control, dates back to 1965, at least, with the Berkeley Timesharing System. Only they weren't called threads at that time, but processes [Dijkstra, 65]. Processes interacted through shared variables, semaphores, and similar means. Max Smith did a prototype threads implementation on Multics around 1970; it used multiple stacks in a single heavyweight process to support background compilations. Perhaps the most important progenitor of threads is the programming language PL/I, from about the 1965 time frame. The language as defined by IBM provided a `CALL XXX (A, B) TASK;' construct, which forked a thread for XXX. It is not clear whether any IBM compiler ever implemented this feature, but it was examined closely while Multics was being designed; it was decided that the TASK call as defined didn't map onto processes, since there was no protection between the threads of control. So Multics took a different direction, and the TASK feature was removed from PL/I by IBM in any case, along with the ABNORMAL attribute and lots of other weird stuff. Then came Unix, in the early 1970s. The Unix notion of a `process' became a sequential thread of control *plus* a virtual address space (incidentally, the Unix notion of a process derived directly from the Multics process design [Saltzer, 66]). So `processes', in the Unix sense, are quite heavyweight machines. Since they cannot share memory (each has its own address space), they interact through pipes, signals, etc). Shared memory (also a rather ponderous mechanism) was added much later. After some time, Unix users started to miss the old processes that could share memory. This led to the `invention' of threads: old-style processes that shared the address space of a single Unix process. They also were called `lightweight', by way of contrast with `heavyweight' Unix processes. This distinction dates back to the very late 70s or early 80s, i.e. to the first `microkernels' (Thoth (precursor of the V-kernel and QNX), Amoeba, Chorus, the RIG-Accent-Mach family, etc). On a side note, threads have been in continuous use in telecommunications applications for quite a long time. See also: [Cheriton, 79] Cheriton, D. R., `Multi-process structuring and the Thoth operating system', Ph.D. Thesis, University of Waterloo, 1979. [Daley & Dennis, 68] Daley, R. C., Dennis, J. B., `Virtual memory, processes, and sharing in Multics', Comm, ACM 11, 306-312, May 1968. [Dennis & van Horn, 66] Dennis, J. B., van Horn, E. C., `Programming semantics for multiprogrammed computations', MAC-TR-21, 1966. [Dijkstra, 65] Dijkstra, E. W., `Cooperating sequential processes', in `Programming Languages', Genuys, F. (ed.), Academic Press, 1965. [Saltzer, 66] Saltzer, J. H., `Traffic control in a multiplexed computer system', MAC-TR-30 (Sc.D. Thesis), July, 1966. " NOWHERE does it say anything about MS...and look at the dates! Please...give me a break...I'll find more info to debunk your nonsense. Now show me where MS and IBM created "lightweight" processes and called them threads? You mentioned the name of a book..how about excerpting from it? Give me a BREAK! MS did NOT invent the concept of threads.
gorath
on Jun 9, 2009
Panache, DirectX 1 was released in 1995 sometime, possibly with windows 95, although it's so long ago I can honestly not remember. However, you ARE right, back then, it couldn't do anything at all resembling GPGPU. However, around the time of DirectX7 IIRC, hardware transform and lighting was added to the spec. hardware transform meant that the actual GPU had to (in order to be DirectX 7 compliant) be able to handle the calculations for 3d mesh deformations, among other things, in order to reduce the workload of the main CPU. (I might be wrong about which specific version of DX this came in with) Now, this STILL isn't really GPGPU, although it could well be seen as the first tentative steps towards GPUs which could do broader things than just very fast image processing. Of course, the first DirectX version to truly support GPGPU is DX11 - which ships with windows 7 - but similar features began appearing in DX10.
shark47
on Jun 9, 2009
""...but if you had actually paid ATTENTION to posts I've made, or went back to re-read some, it's all right there...*THAT* is what makes you a douche..." And if you had actually read my past statements, you would have seen that I have criticized Microsoft and praised Apple's products like the iPod Touch on several occasions. Considering how busy you are obsessing over mikegalos, I won't hold that against you.
panache1023
on Jun 9, 2009
@Shark, I don't care what you call other people...but I don't see you calling MikeGalos a Windows fanatic! It's *YOUR* Hypocrisy, not mine. I have not once been hypocritical about ANYTHING! And to make this clear..I never said you don't say things against Apple products. Not to mention, and maybe you disagree...but I find it much much easier to ignore RJ's posts than MG's...RJ's posts are usually nonsensical drivel constantly repeated...MG's posts are condescending rude outright lies and hypocrisy spoken as fact. Much much easier to ignore an RJ post than MG post. Name calling occurs out of frustration. On topics other than your and MG's hypocrisy, I'm also quite reasonable....obviously you haven't noticed but when MG isn't being a 100% biased liar, he seems like an OK guy.....MOSTLY.
lotsamystuff
on Jun 9, 2009
"I wonder what my fart would play?" Something that stinks.
lotsamystuff
on Jun 9, 2009
"For them to finally implementing [sic] features that were in Windows shouldn't be considered a major upgrade." If the reverse were true, Windows 95 would never have been called a "major upgrade". Or, for that matter, most successive versions of Windows.
shark47
on Jun 9, 2009
"I don't care what you call other people...but I don't see you calling MikeGalos a Windows fanatic! It's *YOUR* Hypocrisy, not mine. I have not once been hypocritical about ANYTHING!" Likewise, I don't see you calling lindy out when he goes into his anti-MS phase. Mikegalos is being used as an excuse to troll here. Even before he says something, there's a hundred people ready to pounce on him. I don't always agree with his views on MS, Yahoo, or the Democratic party, but even his most harmless statement is taken out of context and used as an excuse here. I am a hypocrite. Fair enough. But then, so is everybody else here. tayme gets bashed equally by both sides and doc seems reasonable. Apart from that, everyone has a bias. Some are more biased than the others, but that's expected.
Lindy
on Jun 9, 2009
@gorath, sub is just clueless. He needs to stick to the sky is falling in the OS X security world. At least there he gets it right 20% of the time. To get down the grit of it all Open CLI and DX11 are first time that a programer can use the GPU to do things the CPU can when writing applications. Example would be something you do toda in Photoshop CS4 that rails all the CPU cores in Windows or OS X. If Adobe wrote a patch or a whole never version then in OS X that new version would use all of the CPU cores and the GPU cores to do the same thing via Open CLI, and DX 11 in Windows.
Lindy
on Jun 9, 2009
I wonder, will MS give Vista users a deal now in light of the $29 upgrade price of SL? $49 for a family pack? If so that would be a "Big Announcment". Even if they do it now it would look like they are doing because of what Apple did.
panache1023
on Jun 9, 2009
@Shark Well said! I do like the Doc...I actually like Tayme too, but not when he goes on his "It's entertaining" rants.. LOL! You know....regarding Lindy...Im not always a fan....doesn't really bother me though...something less abrasive about they way he/she posts.... Or maybe I just can't stand that horrible picture of MikeGalos...maybe that's what drives me so crazy! HAHAHAHA :)
gorath
on Jun 9, 2009
Lindy, you're not quite 100% correct there, on you rcomment about photoshop. CS4 on windows at least, does already leverage the (Nvidia) GPU for certain processes, I believe they do this via CUDA. Although, yes you are correct, DX11 and OpenCL are the first such interfaces built into their relative OS. I don't disagree at all about that. I was just pointing out that it's been a long time coming, and some first tentative steps were made towards this several years ago. Of possible interest on the subject is Universal Audio's DSP cards for professional audio processing. Whilst these cards could only actually run UA's own signal processing software, they are in fact, run entirely on what is basically a repurposed graphics card. As for the OSX upgrade pricing, Apple have done their users proud on that one, and I can only hope that Microsoft offers a similar price for 7 upgraders (although I doubt that they will). @Panache. No, you're Wrong. MikeGalos is not as you said a "Windows Fanatic" He is simply a microsoft Fanatic ;)
panache1023
on Jun 9, 2009
@Gorath, You're right. I should have said MS fanatic, not Windows Fanatic...but he is a Windows fanatic too! LOL!
chuckb84
on Jun 9, 2009
Wow, this thread could set a record, either for length or name calling. Well, probably not, but perhaps close. However, you've gotten off point, and that point is the drivel that Paul calls "commentary". For example, he calls out Apple for supposede hypocrisy "Hypocrisy around Vista/7 and Leopard/Snow Leopard." and then gives us this gem, "For the record, Snow Leopard looks just fine to me. It should, after three years of development on a point release." In his own words, "In both cases, Windows 7, and XP, the system was essentially a highly tweaked version of its predecessor. And in both cases, the underlying core of the OS (the kernel plus support code) is largely unchanged from that of its predecessor. So from a technical standpoint, Windows 7 is a minor upgrade." "Windows 7 is a minor upgrade." Furthermore, it didn't take 3 years, it took 8, or 9 or 10, depending on how you count, to get from the previous clearly distinct Microsoft OS, XP, to a usable version of Longhorn/Vista/Windows 7. Oh wait, it isn't even released yet, and won't be until after Snow Leopard ships. Which of the two will be "better"? That's entirely a matter of opinion. I find the RC of Windows 7 "okay", and clearly much improved over XP, but again, after most of a decade, I would sure hope for that! I don't know why Paul is so rabid and hypocritical on the subject of Apple, and I've previously noted the bizarre congnitive dissonance. He notes the Mac "usage share" of 3.5%---as if Apple is irrelevant----and is then just frothing at the mouth over what was said by this "irrelevant" company. Methinks he doth protest too much. And he doesn't even seem to know it....
jefflessard
on Jun 9, 2009
Paul, you look upset, dosen't serve tour cause to write when you're mad...
TEAMSWITCHER
on Jun 9, 2009
Paul is a bad source for Apple Information. He writes to the Windows faithful, and his tone is intentionally spiteful to keep the Fan-Boys happy. It's an old Jedi mind-trick! "This isn't the OS you are looking for. Move along." It only works on the weak-minded.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Jun 9, 2009
panache Threads <> Processes Even your cite says that. Sorry. You're just flat out wrong on this.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Jun 9, 2009
Lindy Here's a deal for you. Compare the following: Leopard-> Snow Leopard - $29 Vista SP1 -> Vista SP2 - $0 Unlike Apple, Microsoft doesn't charge for Service Packs that don't add features.
panache1023
on Jun 9, 2009
obviously you didn't read it mikegalos. Anyone with any computer background knows that threads and processes are not the same thing. You still haven't shown me ANYTHING that says Microsoft helped invent (you use the word "create") threads. You are the one that is wrong.
panache1023
on Jun 9, 2009
MikeGalos, Here's a comparison for you Mac OS X 10.5 -> Mac OS X 10.6 - $29 Windows NT 6.0 -> Windows NT 6.1 - ??? how much? Until MS says $29 or less, it's time to take your beard and shut up.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Jun 9, 2009
panache Actually, I gave you a cite with Gordon Letwin's book (He was the architect for OS|2 and one of the earliest Microsoft employees). You could also look at the OS|2 SDK documentation from the time which goes into long explanation of what these new "threads" are. The problem is that anyone who learned about computers recently doesn't understand that threads are relatively new. You're apparently in that group. I (having been at IBM and Microsoft during the relevant time) am not.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Jun 9, 2009
panache When you find a product named Windows NT 6.0 or Windows NT 6.1, let us know. Otherwise spreading ignorance is really not a rare skill here so you won't be missed.
panache1023
on Jun 9, 2009
MikeGalos, You NEVER gave me a site, you said, "look up..." I guess MS also invented Mutexes as well? Semaphores? Critical Sections? And your whole POINT of that nonsense was that MS had a mutli-processor thread scheduler that wasn't "broken"...as if a UNIX based OS has a broken thread scheduler...please! Are you now saying there is no such thing as Windows NT 6.0? Windows NT 6.1? Oh right, it goes by the public name "Vista" and "Windows 7"... Are you now denying that Windows Vista is NT 6.0? Are you denying that Windows 7 is NT 6.1? Again, this is a perfect case where your hypocrisy is evident, but you spin a small issue to deny your own hypocrisy. You are so see through.
DarkSages
on Jun 9, 2009
I hate to repeat myself but At least Microsoft Windows 7 supports the same hardware as Vista and in some cases xp. Thats alot of hardware. Apple 10.6 does not support half of the computers that were sold when 10.5 was released. Huh how many computer types? let's say 20 and that high becuase most of them have the same hardware.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Jun 9, 2009
"I guess MS also invented Mutexes as well? Semaphores? Critical Sections?" Nope. Those already existed for processes. That's why I didn't make those claims. "And your whole POINT of that nonsense was that MS had a mutli-processor thread scheduler that wasn't "broken"...as if a UNIX based OS has a broken thread scheduler...please!" Well, seeing how the Unix process scheduler predates threads, yeah. On the other hand, most Unixoid implementations have a thread scheduler added in or have replaced the process scheduler with one that supports threads.

Please or Register to post comments.

Related Articles

IT/Dev Connections

Las Vegas
September 30th - October 4th

Paul ThurottYou'll have the opportunity to experience:
• 120 Technical
Sessions
• Networking with Peers
• Expert Speakers


Come See Paul Thurrott & Mary Jo Foley in Person!

Register Now

Office 365 InfoCenter

Get the latest insight and info from Paul

Read Now!

What I Use
Apr. 18, 2013
Article

What I Use: On the Road 20

Every so often, I publish an updated version of my “What I Use” document, which details the technology products and services I actually use day-to-day. Since I’m currently on my third business trip in five weeks, this is perhaps an ideal time to discuss the technology products I rely on when I travel and a few related points....More
Mar. 6, 2013
Article

What I Use: March 2013 33

Lots of changes since November, including a new PC-based home server running Windows 8, several new smart phones, new PCs and tablets, new cloud backup, Office 365 Home Premium and a nice doubling of my Internet speeds courtesy of Verizon FIOS....More
WinSuperSite.com
Related Penton Sites
Copyright © 2013 Penton Media, Inc