12 replies to this topic

[Smoke_Tetsu]

Microsoft is doing no better... first they had metro and the start screen which is arguably worse than the full screen app functions in Lion-Mavericks. Now they are going to unify Windows, Xbox One and Windows Mobile.

Quote

A couple of my contacts have confirmed that Microsoft Executive Vice President Terry Myerson recently mentioned the Threshold codename in an internal email about plans for his unified operating-system engineering group.
If all goes according to early plans, Threshold will include updates to all three OS platforms (Xbox One, Windows and Windows Phone) that will advance them in a way to share even more common elements.
(The codename Threshold, for those wondering, derives from the planet around which the first halo ring orbited in the original Halo game launched back in 2001. Threshold joins "Cortana," Microsoft's answer to Siri, as yet another codename with its origins in the Xbox franchise.)
From what I've heard, Threshold doesn't refer to a single Windows OS -- not even the expected, converged hybrid comprised of the Windows Phone OS and Windows RT. Instead, the codename refers to the wave of operating systems across Windows-based phones, devices and gaming consoles.

BTW When I use Windows 8 (in parallels) I used a few applications to make it more comfortable for me such as:

https://www.stardock...ucts/modernmix/ This allows you to optionally put metro apps into a window or full screen as you wish.

https://www.stardock...roducts/start8/ To have a Windows 7 or below style start menu

and

https://www.stardock...s/windowblinds/ to have any  kind of UI theme I want including Mac style ones...

I used to use a Mac style menubar app (and Dock) in Windows XP but it doesn't work so well in 8 so I've been sticking to the task bar and start menu instead. I could probably still use the dock apps for Windows but they'd be redundant with the task bar.

[Frigidman™]

Haha. Hahaha. HAHAHahahaha.

Personally I think the whole Windows 8 "commonly seen screen in all ads and tv shows" is the worst thing to happen to personal computing since ... uh ... *ponders* ...

[Frost]

For God's sake. They've already made looking at photos and documents in Windows a bloody nightmare. Must they do it to the whole thing now?

[DaveyJJ]

Yes. It is Steve Ballmer's way of saying, "Goodbye, I love you all" to the computing world.

[Jan]

Ah, I knew there was a reason why I only use OS X anyway ...

[Sneaky Snake]

Windows 8.1 really isn't to bad IF you have a touchscreen. It's not great, and not that intuitive, but you can see what they were going for. Without a touchscreen the OS makes no sense. The new start menu is terribad for kb/m users. Thankfully options such as ClassicShell (free - gets the job done) and Start8 (paid - a little nicer aesthetically the feature wise) are available to return to a Windows 7 style UI, and never see the Metro UI again.

[Smoke_Tetsu]

Well, I use it in parallels and with the right theme and third party software reenabling some old features it's not bad at all (as you mentioned). They just aren't doing any better than Apple is when it comes to the appropriateness of new features for desktop usage in fact I'd once again say they are doing worse. Also some of the design of some of the dialog windows such as copying files is a step backwards no matter what. Looks rather ugly no matter what theme is applied.

However, I heard in 8.2 they are bringing back some of those features without the need for third party software so there's that.

[Sneaky Snake]

Smoke_Tetsu, on 17 December 2013 - 09:54 AM, said:

Well, I use it in parallels and with the right theme and third party software reenabling some old features it's not bad at all (as you mentioned). They just aren't doing any better than Apple is when it comes to the appropriateness of new features for desktop usage in fact I'd once again say they are doing worse. Also some of the design of some of the dialog windows such as copying files is a step backwards no matter what. Looks rather ugly no matter what theme is applied.

However, I heard in 8.2 they are bringing back some of those features without the need for third party software so there's that.

I think Windows 8.1 was a huge step forward over 7 in almost every way other then the UI. Windows 8 has substantial performance increases over 7. It has more features and information for power users in the explorer and task manager. If you install Start8 its UI is identical to 7's, but with all under the hood improvements of 8.

Speaking to OS X. I know there's a lot of people on here who aren't a fan of where the OS is headed, but personally I love the OS X design direction. They seem to have the focus on making the data between my iPhone and Mac universal, with no need to sync or move files around.  That said, I really don't have any need for backwards compatibility with old applications, so when new versions of OS X break old apps it doesn't bother me, but I understand how that would be extremely frustrating for those who use older apps. OS X has been adding a lot of convenience features such as better notifications, iMessage implementation, better app store, etc. but also performance increases, especially the battery improvements that Mavericks brought. My old retina Macbook Pro lasted a full 1.5-2 hours longer in Mavericks then it did in Mountain Lion.

[iRolley]

Sneaky Snake, on 17 December 2013 - 11:52 AM, said:

...Windows 8 has substantial performance increases over 7...

Something I wish Apple would pay more attention to. Windows performance is "overall" way better than OSX in day to day tasks.

I use a Core i5 MacBook Pro at work, and I run Windows 8 in a VM (using VMWare). While the integration is incredible, once any OS starts swapping, responsiveness crumbles. However, in most cases, Win8 is much more snappy than OSX. Opening application in OSX still feels like a misery : for unknown reasons for time to time opening an application will take several seconds.

[Hansi]

iRolley, on 17 December 2013 - 02:54 PM, said:

Something I wish Apple would pay more attention to. Windows performance is "overall" way better than OSX in day to day tasks.

I use a Core i5 MacBook Pro at work, and I run Windows 8 in a VM (using VMWare). While the integration is incredible, once any OS starts swapping, responsiveness crumbles. However, in most cases, Win8 is much more snappy than OSX. Opening application in OSX still feels like a misery : for unknown reasons for time to time opening an application will take several seconds.

I'm sure this depends on the hardware in question. Everything in both OSX and Windows 7 is instant on my machine with a SSD and 16GB RAM.

[Frigidman™]

iRolley, on 17 December 2013 - 02:54 PM, said:

Something I wish Apple would pay more attention to. Windows performance is "overall" way better than OSX in day to day tasks.

I use a Core i5 MacBook Pro at work, and I run Windows 8 in a VM (using VMWare). While the integration is incredible, once any OS starts swapping, responsiveness crumbles. However, in most cases, Win8 is much more snappy than OSX. Opening application in OSX still feels like a misery : for unknown reasons for time to time opening an application will take several seconds.

I do all my work on my Mac, instead of my Win 7 machine... because the mac feels far more snappy in everything that isn't a game. Of course, I am still using the good ole 10.6.8 OSX, so that may be why it feels so solid and snaptastic

[Smoke_Tetsu]

I don't have problems with sluggish app loading on my main rig running Mavericks here. My 2009 iMac which I have my parents use also doesn't have any problems either with the same OS. They both have over 10GB of system RAM though.

I do have crumbly responsiveness on my G4 Mac Mini using the last PPC compatible OS X revision (10.5.8). Also, at the time I ignored it but I keep it off most of the time now because it's a goddam wind tunnel even when I'm not doing much with it.

In other words I don't think this is a case of anything < 10.6 being crap.

[Sneaky Snake]

iRolley, on 17 December 2013 - 02:54 PM, said:

Something I wish Apple would pay more attention to. Windows performance is "overall" way better than OSX in day to day tasks.

I use a Core i5 MacBook Pro at work, and I run Windows 8 in a VM (using VMWare). While the integration is incredible, once any OS starts swapping, responsiveness crumbles. However, in most cases, Win8 is much more snappy than OSX. Opening application in OSX still feels like a misery : for unknown reasons for time to time opening an application will take several seconds.

I think your Mac side of things has some pretty bad corruption going on, or maybe you have a billion menu bar apps open at once trying to do something. Windows 8 is miles faster then Windows 7 for virtually every task, but in my experience on my laptop, Mavericks absolutely crushes Win8 in performance (other then gaming obviously). You can tell how much more efficient OS X is compared to Windows by seeing how much battery life you get on a full charge. In Mavericks I could get 5 hours on my old retina MBP. When booted in Windows 8.1 I'd get about 3 hours. This is also evidenced by the new Macbook Airs. In OS X Mavericks they get a solid 10+ hours of battery life, sometimes up to 15. The absolute best battery life windows ultrabooks get about 8 hours on max charge.

Obviously it's expected that OS X would be a lot more efficient then Windows, since there's maybe only a few dozen tops hardware configerations that can run Mavericks, where as Windows has to support virtually inifinite hardware configerations. A higher level of optimization in OS X is inevitable.

The only slow experience I have in OS X is when I go to File>Open in an application. It will occasionaly hang for a solid 10+ seconds while it tries to load my file information. It should be instant, as it is just opening a finder window displaying my pictures or documents folder (and it's running on an SSD). Several of my family members have experienced the same thing. We all have [had] retina MBP's, so not sure if it's unique to that machine.