pyrates Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 I thank you for admittance on your biasness. But I don't expect you to like it evantually more then mac os x. It's always to each his own. Or her too. The reason why Microsoft needs to include backwards compatability is because they have 90% of the market. Therefore they do move slower then Apple can. Apple can move faster and shave off compatability faster then Microsoft can, but that's because their market share is 5%. If Microsoft did backwards compatability the way Apple did, their users would howl and complain. Therefore they are forced to move slower. For example, software from 10 years ago designed to run on a mac doesn't run on todays mac's. But on the PC you can still run them. And the classic compatability mode was dropped when Apple switched over to using intel processors. And as for copying features and innovating, it has been improved. Can you save specific searches in mac os x so that you don't have to keep searching for them? You can in windows vista. Which was originally the spotlight feature in mac os x, which Microsoft innovated on. For the different versions, I believe that Microsoft will do a simple wizard that you'll do online so that you can figure out what version you need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollcage Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 i still think the price points for vista are ridiculous. an upgrade from xp to vista (not an actual complete license), is going to cost $129. that's like the same price as the full complete package of tiger. and $799 for ultimate!!? there's no way in hell i will ever pay that much for a copy of windows. there is absolutely no reason they need to charge that much. they have 95% of the market, how can they justify charging that much? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pyrates Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 i still think the price points for vista are ridiculous. an upgrade from xp to vista (not an actual complete license), is going to cost $129. that's like the same price as the full complete package of tiger. and $799 for ultimate!!? there's no way in hell i will ever pay that much for a copy of windows. there is absolutely no reason they need to charge that much. they have 95% of the market, how can they justify charging that much? There's one problem with your reasoning. You compare the price of a full version of vista against the price of what tiger would cost to buy. Now since you can't build your own mac, it always comes with the latest release of os x on it. Just like if you buy a pc from an oem. Therefore if you want to compare price points. The price of windows xp home basic which is equivalent to windows xp home edition right now, for the upgrade version, is $99. Same price that Mac OS X Tiger will be. So in that case, they're about equal. Now if you want say the media centre features and tablet features, you can get the home premium version. That is $159 for the upgrade. Now I don't know where you got your pricing from. $799 for the full copy, not for just upgrade, is a blatant lie. You can order it right off of amazon. Here's the link: http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Windows-Vi...&s=software So next time, do your research before hand. But most home users won't need that version anyways. They don't need to remotely manage it, apply group policies, etc. All they will ever need is Windows Vista Home Basic. That's it. And the cost of that is $99 for the upgrade since most people already will have bought their pc's from a pc manufacturer like dell. So don't go comparing versions of windows when it's a full version when in reality if you want to do a fair comparison, you'd compare it against the upgrade version. Since no mac doesn't come without mac os x on it, every version of mac os x that you can buy is technically an upgrade version. Unless you can show me that when buying a mac you have the option to not have it come with mac os x on it and that the mac would then be cheaper without it. Then I'm wrong. But until then, get your facts straight. You really do look foolish when you make outrageous claims like this. And if you want to compare price points, what about apple charging an extra $150 for having the mac book pro in black instead of white? The answer to that is it is what the market can bare. Here is where you can find out the differences in features that each edition of windows vista will have: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/getr...ns/default.mspx Oh and I know where your signature comes from. Is it from the first season of are you afraid of the dark? I sure did like that show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollcage Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 they lowered the price? last time i had seen the prices they were a lot higher. i'll get the home premium edition, but it's still $159 for the upgrade. you get the full, everything included version of osx for $129, even if you look at it from the standpoint of an upgrade. to get that with vista (i stand corrected on price) an upgrade costs $259. that's twice as much. sorry, but i really can't see why they need to charge that much. as for apple charging extra for the black macbook, other companies do the same thing, look at alienware for example: http://www.alienware.com/configurator_page...;subcode=SKU-AD they charge you $159 if you want to change the color of your system from blue to either red or green. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackShadowWolf Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 they lowered the price? last time i had seen the prices they were a lot higher. i'll get the home premium edition, but it's still $159 for the upgrade. you get the full, everything included version of osx for $129, even if you look at it from the standpoint of an upgrade. to get that with vista (i stand corrected on price) an upgrade costs $259. that's twice as much. sorry, but i really can't see why they need to charge that much. as for apple charging extra for the black macbook, other companies do the same thing, look at alienware for example: http://www.alienware.com/configurator_page...;subcode=SKU-AD they charge you $159 if you want to change the color of your system from blue to either red or green. I checked it out and your right, not as expensive as Apple's $200 increase, but dont you get a little bigger harddrive with Apples though? I have to say Alienwares laptops look pretty cool looking, but I'll stick with my soon to come MacBook Pro . From personal experience the biggest gripe I have is the serial number/activation. When I used Windows heavily, I ended up having to buy Windows XP at least 3 times, that around 800-$1000, and I was only 16-17 . It was because I had to wipe Windows so often because things screwed it up, activation failed, even though it was on the same machine. I know now I could have just called and say I need a new key, but I didnt then. That was a lot of money gone to them . BTW Rollcage awesome avatar, love the 3D looking Metroid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollcage Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 I checked it out and your right, not as expensive as Apple's $200 increase, but dont you get a little bigger harddrive with Apples though? I have to say Alienwares laptops look pretty cool looking, but I'll stick with my soon to come MacBook Pro . From personal experience the biggest gripe I have is the serial number/activation. When I used Windows heavily, I ended up having to buy Windows XP at least 3 times, that around 800-$1000, and I was only 16-17 . It was because I had to wipe Windows so often because things screwed it up, activation failed, even though it was on the same machine. I know now I could have just called and say I need a new key, but I didnt then. That was a lot of money gone to them :censored2: . BTW Rollcage awesome avatar, love the 3D looking Metroid. well actually, apple only charges $150, so alienware charges more($159, not by much). and no, you don't get a bigger harddrive with the black macbook compared to the white one. if you configure them exactly the same, it's a $150 difference. i don't see it as a big deal to charge a bit extra, I'd certainly pay it. and agreed with the mbp (i wish you could get it in black too). i guess i'm so upset about the price because it's $159 for each computer i need to upgrade (i have three). that's gonna cost me $477. that's a lot. and for osx, you can get 5 licenses for $199. and i feel your pain over activation, i've had to buy another copy of xp because when i first upgraded to xp, i got the upgrade disc. well, my system crashed and i had to do a new install. it wouldn't do the install if i didn't put in a win98 disc. the only disc i had was an oem, and it wouldn't recognize it. and the oem disc wouldn't work cause i was using ntfs. my only option was to buy a complete xp disc. that's something that would never happen with osx. and thanks about the avatar! i got it off of http://avatarity.com i like yours too, that part of the game was awsome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackShadowWolf Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 Thats why I unfortunately went the pirate route and grabbed a corporate edition off bittorent because I couldnt stand having the windows activation nonsende. I never put security updates on as Im not stupid and use firefox. Some people say its pretty ridiculous that you have to pay extra money for the color, but we dont know how they assemble the notebooks, so it may cost more to use black. I would love a black mbp, but whatever. Its not the color, its what you can do with it. I checked that link out you gave and its pretty cool. I made mine using a snes emulator for windows and doing a screengrab while the game was playing. If you want the full pic, I can send it to you through aim as I saw your screenname , I'll PM you mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
br0adband Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 I never put security updates on as Im not stupid and use firefox. I know I'm just asking for trouble by saying this, but that statement quoted above is by far the dumbest thing I've ever read at this forum, even if it is about Windows and this is a Mac-based informational forum. It's just stupid beyond words to think just because you "use firefox" that you're safe in any way, shape, or form. And you even go so far as to admit you're using a pirated illegal version you didn't pay for. Real smart there, bub. bb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pyrates Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 I know I'm just asking for trouble by saying this, but that statement quoted above is by far the dumbest thing I've ever read at this forum, even if it is about Windows and this is a Mac-based informational forum. It's just stupid beyond words to think just because you "use firefox" that you're safe in any way, shape, or form. And you even go so far as to admit you're using a pirated illegal version you didn't pay for. Real smart there, bub. bb And plus firefox isn't immune to security holes too. That's why I use the noscript extension. Withit I select which websites can run javascript. And plus not all security updates are for IE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackShadowWolf Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 I know I'm just asking for trouble by saying this, but that statement quoted above is by far the dumbest thing I've ever read at this forum, even if it is about Windows and this is a Mac-based informational forum. It's just stupid beyond words to think just because you "use firefox" that you're safe in any way, shape, or form. And you even go so far as to admit you're using a pirated illegal version you didn't pay for. Real smart there, bub. bb Ok maybe that was an extreme statement that Im safe through firefox, I do admit Ive gotten spyware and other nasty things even when using it (by getting popups from my firewall). The main thing that causes that stuff for me is auto-loading java programs, If anyone knows how to stop it from automatically loading enlighten me. And yes I shouldnt have admitted that I have an illegal version, but I should have been more specific and said used to, as I got a fully legit copy through software licensing at the university which has a legit key, aka windows activation and wga said it was good. Damn just from this thread Ive learned I need to keep my mouth shut . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollcage Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 if you go under options and content, you have the option to disable java. that should help you out a bit... as for the pic, that's ok, but if i really want it i guess i could go the same route as you (it would give me another reason to beat the game again). i never thought of taking screenshots of my games and using them as avatars! that gives me so many ideas of cool avatars! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackShadowWolf Posted October 15, 2006 Share Posted October 15, 2006 if you go under options and content, you have the option to disable java. that should help you out a bit... as for the pic, that's ok, but if i really want it i guess i could go the same route as you (it would give me another reason to beat the game again). i never thought of taking screenshots of my games and using them as avatars! that gives me so many ideas of cool avatars! Wow I didnt realize it was that easy O_o. Thanks for the help rollcage, im sure that will save me from having headaches in the future . So anyway, back on topic about Windows Vista. I think i'll decide to hold my critisisms til when its released. I may dislike microsoft for their monoploy driven business plan and their priority for propietery technology, but I guess we have to face the face that eventually people will have to switch to Vista or get stuck behind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBK.Xscape Posted October 15, 2006 Share Posted October 15, 2006 people are complaning about paying a couple hundred dollars for Vista which is the whole operating system but people dont complain anout paying $1200 for software like Adobe CS2. its not rediculous to charge that becuase it is the everything the computer runs off of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lostgame Posted October 15, 2006 Share Posted October 15, 2006 I think the problem is that Microsoft spends too much time on backwards compatibilty, Duh. Software is the *only* thing that's keeping Microsoft going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oregano Posted October 15, 2006 Share Posted October 15, 2006 whens it coming out? may 07? or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe75 Posted October 16, 2006 Share Posted October 16, 2006 Duh. Software is the *only* thing that's keeping Microsoft going. An easy to use operating system that is preinstalled on every factory PC sold is what keeps M$ going After trying many Linux distros and Apple, I always go back to Windows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollcage Posted October 16, 2006 Share Posted October 16, 2006 whens it coming out?may 07? or something? it's supposed to be out either late december this year, or jan, feb. next year. M$ sounds like they are confident with this timeframe, but i won't believe them til i have it installed and activated... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oregano Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 well i see that so many people have it already that the only people who r gonna get it r people who buy new computers evryone who wanted it already has it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe75 Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 I have a feeling betas will not work or not have updates after release Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollcage Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 I have a feeling betas will not work or not have updates after release they will work until sometime in June of 07 (the 7th?). i don't know about updates though, enough of the code might have changed for some of them that the updates wouldn't be able to install. if you set your system clock back and keep it that way, you could use it indefinitely, but who wouldn't want to get the faster final version over the slower, more buggy beta? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe75 Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 It will be hacked and on the net by 6/07 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zealot Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 "It will be hacked and on the net by 6/07 "joe 75. well said . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oregano Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 I have a feeling betas will not work or not have updates after release o no definately not so i guess evryone who wants it and has it will have to buy it (how much do u think it will cost?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe75 Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 o no definately notso i guess evryone who wants it and has it will have to buy it (how much do u think it will cost?) Too much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asapreta Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 Vista played a Joke on my today: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts