Apple's Leopard "copied Vista"

[TiKiMaN1]

Hahaha....just to get all the Mac lovers fired up check this out: http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=505 

Seems all the Mac fanboys cam flying out of the woodwork to post on her blog to.  Apple copying Microsoft....inconceivable.

"In fact, she claimed, Vista looked pretty darn up-to-date in comparison to Leopard.

She said that the Leopard Desktop was the spit of Vista’s Aero and Sidebar. It comes with a new finder which have the same capabilities as the integrated “Instant Search” in Vista. Leopard's Coverflow viewing capability looked almost identical to Vista’s Flip 3D.

Quick Look, which lets you see Live file previews, is just like the thumbnail preview capability available in Vista." TheInq

[sam-i-am]

Nice one - coverflow and spotlight have been around forever - they're not new in Leopard.  Apple beat MS to the punch on useful search.  But who needs it - quicksilver is king.

Aero is awesome.  It's like information overload every time I look at the screen.

I am not happy with the transparent menubar.  I think Leopard will ship with an option to turn it off.  Having a great OS is not about who can shove the most bells and whistles into their desktop metaphor.  That stuff is nice, and important to a degree, but I'm more interested in stability and workflow.

[Jonathan]

I'm more interested in stability and workflow.

I definitely agree with that statement.  So far Vista has worked very well for what I do.  I know lots of people have complaints about it, but i haven't had any.  I'm just always loving the incredibly fast boot time i get in Vista and the ease of navigating my system now that i'm used to the layout in Vista.

I think it's a great OS.  It'll be even greater once they get some service packs out for it, like all OS's i'm sure it could be more stable.

One thing i've noticed is people always give crap to Microsoft about having to patch their OS, which they do a lot of.  At the same time i've noticed that Apple patches their OS a lot too, they just release it under a different version number or even completely different name and just release tons of different OS versions.  Anyone else noticed that?

[sam-i-am]

Apple's version system is a bit different than Microsoft.  Service packs are a lot more minor, so several come out over time.  If you're running 10.4 then the equivalent of a service pack would be 10.4.1, 10.4.2, 10.4.3, etc.  These include security updates, new features, etc.  Just like service packs, but in smaller increments.

A new OS upgrades the first decimal.  A XP --> Vista type upgrade is the same as 10.4 --> 10.5.  Those come out every 3 or so years.  That's more frequent then Microsofts track record, and each edition of OS X (Basic, Home, Home Office, Small Office Not at Home, Personal, Personal plus someone else, kinda big business, biggest business, family, school of fish, king of the world, ultimate, and ultimate limited edition) are all the same price: $130 (or $199 for 5 licenses).  That's because there is actually only one version, and it just has all the features.

I don't think anyone gets mad at Microsoft for releasing patches.  People give Microsoft a hard time for taking so long to patch certain vulnerabilities, not completely testing their patches before releasing them, annoying WGA crap, and generally buggy behavior. 

[Jonathan]

Apple's version system is a bit different than Microsoft.  Service packs are a lot more minor, so several come out over time.  If you're running 10.4 then the equivalent of a service pack would be 10.4.1, 10.4.2, 10.4.3, etc.  These include security updates, new features, etc.  Just like service packs, but in smaller increments.

A new OS upgrades the first decimal.  A XP --> Vista type upgrade is the same as 10.4 --> 10.5.  Those come out every 3 or so years. 

Ok, that's how i thought it worked, i just wasn't positive.

[Jordan]

Personally, I'm not that surpized that Mac would copy Windows. I'm just surprized that Mac isnt using their awesome old operating system. Classic Mac was awesome!