The ultimate shootout: Apple Mac OS X vs. Microsoft Windows Vista

[assasin]

if u Mac guys r trying to find fault with Vista by saying that it has huge sys reqs,i wud like to say that atleast Vista allows u to use a wide array of hardware in ur pc,which to some xtent Linux is now supporting but with Mac OS X,the reality is that mac users dont hav the freedom to use watever hardware they feel like with their pc ..err...sorry Macs

 

[QwertyManiac]

yeah sure i do understand usable state, i hope you understand and read my post carefully! i said i saw it running fine, means it was running fine.... no problems.. and in usable state..

what to remind.. i thought you had some common sense.. you are a old member , should show some sense in your language..

Haha am glad you still don't understand what usable means. I kick a stone, it moves. It doesn't turn into gold.

 

[eddie]

yeah sure i do understand usable state, i hope you understand and read my post carefully! i said i saw it running fine, means it was running fine.... no problems.. and in usable state..

Usable does not mean running notepad on your system. That is not known as running "fine"...that is just known as "running" and I really don't believe that you ever saw XP running on 64MB RAM. You can take a poll in Chit Chat section and ask them whether they could ever run XP in a "fine state" on 64 MB RAM. If you get more than 20% people saying "yes" then I would believe you.

In any case if we go by the same logic and accept that Windows Vista will be "usable" at 1GB just like how Windows XP was usable with 64MB then do we take it that for running every extra application we will need extra RAM? Does it mean that if I want to run Microsoft Office 2007 then I will need 256MB RAM more? Add 50MB more for iTunes, 30 MB more for Yahoo messenger, 30 MB more for MSN Messenger, 80 MB more for Firefox, 100 MB more for Norton Antivirus, 50 MB more for an anti-spyware of your choice, 60 MB more for a non-default Firewall, 30 MB more for a bandwidth monitoring software and 40 MB more for a download manager. This brings the total to 726MB. If I tried to open a Adobe Photoshop Instance then the requirement will jump straight to 1GB "extra RAM". You need all these applications to make your system "usable"...and it is clear that if you don't have at least 2.5 - 3GB RAM on your Vista system then you will experience lags while using all these applications simultaneously. When I am buying a $400 operating system...I don't buy it for using notepad or playing solitaire on it.

P.S. All the RAM requirements mentioned by me are approximate and some programs may use more while some may use less.

 

[assasin]

In any case if we go by the same logic and accept that Windows Vista will be "usable" at 1GB just like how Windows XP was usable with 64MB then do we take it that for running every extra application we will need extra RAM? Does it mean that if I want to run Microsoft Office 2007 then I will need 256MB RAM more? Add 50MB more for iTunes, 30 MB more for Yahoo messenger, 30 MB more for MSN Messenger, 80 MB more for Firefox, 100 MB more for Norton Antivirus, 50 MB more for an anti-spyware of your choice, 60 MB more for a non-default Firewall, 30 MB more for a bandwidth monitoring software and 40 MB more for a download manager. This brings the total to 726MB. If I tried to open a Adobe Photoshop Instance then the requirement will jump straight to 1GB "extra RAM".

Its the job of the OS to manage the available system mem to all the apps that req sys mem.even if u dont hav enough ram but a app needs it then the OS uses pagefile.
read thru any Operating System book and get the idea.

You need all these applications to make your system "usable"...and it is clear that if you don't have at least 2.5 - 3GB RAM on your Vista system then you will experience lags while using all these applications simultaneously.

WTF .i've been using Vista on 1GB for 4months and i didnt face any 'LAG' in multitasking and ma system was perfectly "USABLE".the only lag i faced was in games with high sys req such as R6 Vegas,but now with 2GB ram everything is fine.NO MORE SYSTEM LAGS while playing games.
and ur saying that one will req min 2.5-3GB of sys ram to run Vista.
Get a life dood.

 

[Zeeshan Quireshi]

in my opinion XP is perfectly usable on 256MB of RAM , i my config itself is on 256 Mb DDR 333 RAM n 2.8 GHz Northwood n i can do all things except playing high-end games(GTA Vice CIty , which is the only game i ever play runs fine on 256MB n 845 Integrated GFX ) so it's perfectly usable for me .

WTF .i've been using Vista on 1GB for 4months and i didnt face any 'LAG' in multitasking and ma system was perfectly "USABLE".the only lag i faced was in games with high sys req such as R6 Vegas,but now with 2GB ram everything is fine.NO MORE SYSTEM LAGS while playing games.
and ur saying that one will req min 2.5-3GB of sys ram to run Vista.
Get a life dood.

Rightly Said , in my building too an Uncle Runs Vista on 1 GB of ram n his system is perfectly fine , not a single lag and he's a designer but his system never becomes slow even when working on photoshop , illustrator , etc , so i don't see any reason why VIsta isn't fine on 1 GB .

Well Arya as for Windows n Mac Software GUI Comparison i think you searched very hard for the ugliest application you could find to compare

Well here r some apps that i use and which i must say r both Good on the eyes and as functional .

Office Accounting 2007 Express

*farm1.static.flickr.com/121/286257178_675b52991c.jpg

Windows Media Player 11

*farm1.static.flickr.com/220/509488914_a9ea7ef822.jpg

Office Word 2007

*farm1.static.flickr.com/203/509488908_2f27d8d3a0.jpg

Expression Web

*farm1.static.flickr.com/88/240576365_2f1e49e0ae.jpg

 

[eddie]

Its the job of the OS to manage the available system mem to all the apps that req sys mem.even if u dont hav enough ram but a app needs it then the OS uses pagefile.

...and pagefile helps you when you are out of RAM? Do you realise that swapping or pagefile is one of the biggest bottle neck in your system performance? Giving an example of Pagefile in a discussion where RAM is being talked about is like talking about old Fiat in a discussion about Ferrari

WTF .i've been using Vista on 1GB for 4months and i didnt face any 'LAG' in multitasking and ma system was perfectly "USABLE".

We are not talking about using Notepad or Internet surfing. Time to wake up and smell the coffee?

Get a life dood.

LOL!!!
No offense but how old are you?

 

[assasin]

...and pagefile helps you when you are out of RAM? Do you realise that swapping or pagefile is one of the biggest bottle neck in your system performance? Giving an example of Pagefile in a discussion where RAM is being talked about is like talking about old Fiat in a discussion about Ferrari

even if u hav 4GB system ram in Vista Pagefile will be used.page file not only used when the system runs short of system memory,but its used the proccy and system schedulers.its also used to store the mem address occupied by the diff apps using sys memory.so know ur basics first then make a post.OK.
my 1st pc was a Compaq SR1130IL which was a P4 2.8GHz Northwood,MSI 845 chipset mobo and 256MB ram and i've games like POP SOT on it using 3D analyzer cuz the onboarrd gfx was crap.

We are not talking about using Notepad or Internet surfing. Time to wake up and smell the coffee? LOL!!!

its no use taking to u.man wat did i tell ya that Vista runs fine and is fully usable on 1GB of system ram.i used to rip dvd,install games,photoshop and surf the net all at the same time on 1GB of system ram.no one xcept u is here is talking bout using 'Notepad' or Internet sufing.only noobs do that sort of multitasking on their pcs.[/quote]

 

[aryayush]

10 years ago Mac used to come with PowerPC G3 CPU with 64 MB System RAM & 8/16 MB nVidia RIVA TNT2 M64 or ATI Rage graphics card. Try running MacOS X on that computer & then come here & tell how "usable" it runs.

Yes, I said it and it is hundred percent correct. Ten year old Macs came with 128 MB of RAM. Yes, you will have to upgrade the RAM to 512 MB (because Mac OS X runs slow while multi-tasking on 256 MB of RAM) but you can run Mac OS X very easily and properly on ten year old Macs running on G3 processors. A lot of people on the digg comment strings have even posted pictures of Mac OS X running on their ten year old Macs. And not just Tiger, even Leopard will run fine on those Macs when it is released. You cannot run Vista even on a five year old PC.

@Zeeshan Quireshi,
First of all, the first and second screenshots are nothing special. Show them to any Mac user and they will refuse to use such ugly applications.
And Windows Media Player, Office and Vista are good looking applications (or in the case of Vista, operating system). Yes, everyone knows that. But that is only two applications. Throw the forthcoming version of Yahoo! Messenger and Yahoo! Widgets into the fray. That makes four. Add six applications randomly (though I am sure you won't find six more good looking applications for Windows). Ten. WOW! What a huge total!

I can prove to you that Windows has applications that look like crap and that Windows users are devoid of any taste. The reason is that Windows users think that Nero and Norton Antivirus have good interfaces. HA! HA! These are ugly applications. Look at the screenshots of Cha-Ching and Coda. Better still, use them. You'll come to know what user interface design is all about. (But with that thick blindfold shrouding your vision, I doubt you'll be able to appreciate something better.)

The worst designed applications for Mac OS X look and work better than their counterparts for Windows.

 

[gxsaurav]

Yes, you will have to upgrade the RAM to 512 MB (because Mac OS X runs slow while multi-tasking on 256 MB of RAM) but you can run Mac OS X very easily and properly on ten year old Macs running on G3 processors. A lot of people on the digg comment strings have even posted pictures of Mac OS X running on their ten year old Macs. And not just Tiger, even Leopard will run fine on those Macs when it is released. You cannot run Vista even on a five year old PC.

Hmm...Pentium 4 2.4 GHz with 400 MHz FSB came in 2003, which is 4 years old. Pentium 4 2 GHz northwood came in 2003 start well....Vista runs fine on it in without Aero. Add in a Geforce FX 5200 & vista runs fine with aero.

MacOS X Tiger was relesed in 2004 boy, today the application require more RAM to run it. Want me to show u screenshots of how good it is running on my PC to check the performance on 1 GB, multitasking is tough here in my case atleast.

if we use only the bundled applications of Windows Vista then 512 MB is enough. Not everyone uses Photoshop

Link us to those Digg articles plz.

& Yes, we can run Vista on 5 years old PCs easily without aero & 512 MB RAM. ask soura he installed it on his old Acer laptop which has Mirage/Sevage graphics (i guess)



@Zeeshan Quireshi,

And Windows Media Player, Office and Vista are good looking applications. Yes, everyone knows that. That is only two applications. Throw the forthcoming version of Yahoo! Messenger and Yahoo! Widgets into the fray. That makes four. Add six applications randomly (though I am sure you won't find six more good looking applications for Windows). Ten. WOW! What a huge total!

10..wow, in just 4 month of official relesae of Vista...nice.

I can prove to you that Windows has applications that look like crap and that Windows users are devoid of any taste.

Do so.

The reason is that Windows users think that Nero and Norton Antivirus have good interfaces.

Which member in this forum ever said these to have good interface? Are you asking your next door windows noob

The worst designed applications for Mac OS X look and work better than their counterparts for Windows.

& Nokia makes bread while Coka cola makes engine oil.

 

[Zeeshan Quireshi]

*alphaomega.software.free.fr/plaintexteditor/Documentation/screenshot.jpg
this has to be one of the ugliest mac apps ever , n no it isn't better than Wordpad shipped by default with Windows .

 

[led_shankar]

vi is the best looking software in the world.

@ZQ: dont youu think a better comparison would be with notepad?

 

[aryayush]

Link us to those Digg articles plz.

(1) I do not save the links of digg submissions I come across so that I can show them to someone later.
(2) You are not important enough to me anyway.
(3) Use Google (if you know how to). If you don't find it, I can quote Tobey Maguire here: "I missed the part where that is my problem."

MacOS X Tiger was relesed in 2004 boy, today the application require more RAM to run it. Want me to show u screenshots of how good it is running on my PC to check the performance on 1 GB, multitasking is tough here in my case atleast.

(1) You are using it illegally on officially unsupported hardware.
(2) You do not know how to multi-task anyway, being used to Windows' interface (the biggest and most prominent example is that you prefer 'Alt + Tab' to Exposé and cannot work with several windows at once, which is what the Mac interface encourages).
(3) Anand uses a Mac Mini with 512 MB of RAM. AFAIK (and he has told me this), the operating system runs fine and he uses fifteen applications at once. Of course, if you insist on using Photoshop or FCP with 512 MB of RAM, you do not know anything about how computers work (which you do not anyway, so it hardly comes as a surprise).
(4) How can I be sure the biggest liar on this forum is not lying right now!


By the way, Vista without Aero is Windows XP.

10..wow, in just 4 month of official relesae of Vista...nice.

(1) If you had posted this statement on digg, you would have been buried as lame faster than you can spell your name (which, given your knowledge of English, must take you considerable amount of time anyway).
(2) Then again, maybe it is a spectacular achievement that Vista had ten whole well designed applications in four months of its release (the APIs were released a lot earlier, I guess). Oh, and where are the ten applications? I know only Office, Windows Live Messenger and Yahoo! Widgets (which does not look even half as good as Dashboard does). That's three applications. Even if you can mention twenty more names, that is still very lame for an operating system that is considered the standard as far as operating systems go.

As for Nero, I have met many people who think it has a good interface. Almost everyone I know uses Nero and most people give the reason that it has a good interface. If any of them saw Roxio Toast, they would change their minds as quickly as Windows XP used to crash (but Vista doesn't). You won't. You will think Toast has a crap interface because in "gx_saurav speak":
Good = Bad
Bad = Good.

*alphaomega.software.free.fr/plaintexteditor/Documentation/screenshot.jpg
this has to be one of the ugliest mac apps ever , n no it isn't better than Wordpad shipped by default with Windows .

Oh, and what it ugly about it! It is supposed to do one thing, let you type text without giving you any confusing choices and buttons. It does that. It is perfect and it looks better than both Notepad and Wordpad. (Why does Windows have two applications by default for basically the same purpose! )

You purposely gave the text a garish pink background to give it an ugly look. It is hardly the application's fault that you have such a ridiculously bad choice of colours.

 

[eddie]

even if u hav 4GB system ram in Vista Pagefile will be used.page file not only used when the system runs short of system memory,but its used the proccy and system schedulers.its also used to store the mem address occupied by the diff apps using sys memory.so know ur basics first then make a post.OK.

The whole description you just gave is not about Pagefile but about Virtual Memory. There is an enormous difference between the two and you really need to clear YOUR OWN basics before you pounce on other people. There are people in here who are actually coding...patching and replacing their CPU & System schedulers and you are not one of them. Be absolutely clear of what you say or else you risk looking like an absolute buffoon.

its no use taking to u.man wat did i tell ya that Vista runs fine and is fully usable on 1GB of system ram.i used to rip dvd,install games,photoshop and surf the net all at the same time on 1GB of system ram.no one xcept u is here is talking bout using 'Notepad' or Internet sufing.only noobs do that sort of multitasking on their pcs.

Yeah its no use talking to me...you are the intelligent one in here who doesn't know what he is talking about but feels he is an expert about everything. Go out and play cricket...or do they call it bat-ball at your age?

I use vista 512 ram.....playin POP:WW,POP:T2T...and many more....and i hv a onboard intel GMA....it works fine for me though...

You should really contact Microsoft immediately. They are acting really stupid by mentioning such high system requirements.

 

[kalpik]

even if u hav 4GB system ram in Vista Pagefile will be used.page file not only used when the system runs short of system memory,but its used the proccy and system schedulers.its also used to store the mem address occupied by the diff apps using sys memory.so know ur basics first then make a post.OK.

Umm.. I have 1 GB of ram. I have allocated 512 mb as swap.. And i've NOT seen my swap go above 200 MB even when im running VMware. 99.99% of the times, the used swap is 0 MB. Now you yourself have pointed out how bad the memory management of Vista is.. It uses swap even when its not required???

 

[assasin]

(1) You are using it illegally on officially unsupported hardware.
(2) You do not know how to multi-task anyway, being used to Windows' interface (the biggest and most prominent example is that you prefer 'Alt + Tab' to Exposé and cannot work with several windows at once, which is what the Mac interface encourages).

(1) So wat?r u worried that the xclusive ness of Mac OS X has been lost??

(2)most ppl around the globe use pcs and not Macs.so wat do ya wanna suggest that only u Mac users know how to multi-task and not use the pc users??
u gotta be kiddin man and stop dreaming.if wat u say had been the original scenario then most of us wud hav been using Macs instead of pcs.
but most of u know wat the real deal is...dont we guys??

 

[eddie]

Umm.. I have 1 GB of ram. I have allocated 512 mb as swap.. And i've NOT seen my swap go above 200 MB even when im running VMware. 99.99% of the times, the used swap is 0 MB. Now you yourself have pointed out how bad the memory management of Vista is.. It uses swap even when its not required???

The thing is that he doesn't know what he is talking about CPU schedulers and Pagefile! LMAO

 

[kalpik]

Heh.. i know.. was just having some fun..

Its funny when people think that they have the "ultimate" knowledge about a thing and the rest of us are fools..

More here: *www.thinkdigit.com/forum/showpost.php?p=486928&postcount=68

 

[aryayush]

(1) So wat?r u worried that the xclusive ness of Mac OS X has been lost??

WOW! A bigger idiot than gx_saurav!! That is quite an achievement.
I was saying that if you run a piece of software on unsupported hardware (that the software is designed not to run on), you can hardly blame the software if it is not performing up to scratch.
"OMG! Vista is not running on my toaster, what a crap operating system!"

I used to run Vista and Ubuntu on virtual machines on top of Mac OS X (with 512 megabytes of RAM alloted to each OS) on my MacBook Pro. I also used Photoshop in the meanwhile and regular Internet browsing. I never shut down my Mac so it used to stay in this state for days and it used to run smoothly for the most part. Yes, there was a bit of a jerkiness here and there in some of the animations (specially of Front Row which is currently beta software) but it performed absolutely fine.

 

[assasin]

The whole description you just gave is not about Pagefile but about Virtual Memory. There is an enormous difference between the two and you really need to clear YOUR OWN basics before you pounce on other people. There are people in here who are actually coding...patching and replacing their CPU & System schedulers and you are not one of them. Be absolutely clear of what you say or else you risk looking like an absolute buffoon.Yeah its no use talking to me...you are the intelligent one in here who doesn't know what he is talking about but feels he is an expert about everything. Go out and play cricket...or do they call it bat-ball at your age?

WTF
do ya even know wat ur taking bout??dou know the diff between pagefile and virtual memory??first know it and then come out and post,else count stars in the sky.

This is a method of extending the available physical memory on a computer. In a virtual memory system, the operating system creates a pagefile, or swapfile, and divides memory into units called pages. Recently referenced pages are located in physical memory, or RAM. If a page of memory is not referenced for a while, it is written to the pagefile. This is called "swapping" or "paging out" memory. If that piece of memory is then later referenced by a program, the operating system reads the memory page back from the pagefile into physical memory, also called "swapping" or "paging in" memory. The total amount of memory that is available to programs is the amount of physical memory in the computer in addition to the size of the pagefile.

Source:*www.computermemoryupgrade.net/faqs-on-memory.html

now u guys r being stubborn and not accepting the fact that Vista runs fine on 1GB ram.

@kalpik ,which OS r u using??

 

[kalpik]

assasin, im using Ubuntu Feisty. As we speak, im running firefox, azureus, pidgin and a full fledged PCLinuxOS under virtualbox. As can be seen from the screenshot, i STILL have ~300MB free ram left and used swap is just 33 MB.

*img382.imageshack.us/img382/5836/screenshotgc3.th.png

Just realised that if i close Virtualbox, my used RAM is just 300 MB