Apple demonstrated the new version of its popular operating system, Mac OS X, at its World Wide Developers Conference, 8 June. Dubbed Snow Leopard, the new operating system is an iterative update. The operating system’s design is quite similar to that of current versions of the software. Ironically, Snow Leopard will only work with Intel-based Macs. Because of that, all legacy Macs containing Power PC chips will not be able to run Snow Leopard.
During the keynote presentation, as Apple was introducing its new operating system, Bertrand Serlet, Apple’s senior vice president of software, took the stage. He immediately fired a shot at Microsoft. Instead of ignoring Windows 7 and focusing the audience’s attention on Mac OS X, Serlet said; “Windows 7 is just another version of Vista.”
It’s a tough comment from a company that is far behind Microsoft in the operating system market. But it’s also an indicative comment. Apple is firmly focused on beating Microsoft in the operating system space. It wants the world to know that Snow Leopard is ready to take on Windows 7. And most importantly, it wants the world to know that it can compete on any level with Microsoft’s latest OS.
But is that really true? Apple’s Snow Leopard might be just fine for consumers, but to say it will be ideal for business is a different story. In that area, it’s Windows 7 that wins out.
New features
Mac OS X Snow Leopard does have a variety of new features. Finder has been reworked. It now finds and previews documents more quickly than it did in previous versions of the tool. And its search tool makes it easier to perform a customised search to find files.
Windows 7 has a similar feature. Although it wasn’t reworked as much, finding files in the OS is made simple with the operating system’s search and menu system that’s quite similar to Windows Vista. It makes finding files quite easy.
A major update to Mac OS X is the use of Exposé in the Dock. According to Apple, users will be able to add icons to the Dock and view all the active instances of that application currently running. It will show full previews just like it does in the current version of Exposé.
However, Windows 7 may just have the edge. Microsoft’s latest OS has a reworked task-bar, similar to the Dock, which lets users view all the open instances of an application. They can sift through them one by one and then pick the window they want to open in full size. It’s quite similar to Snow Leopard’s preview function, and it’s so good that I don’t see how Apple’s can be any better than Microsoft’s.
Apple has finally built Exchange support into its operating system. According to the company, support will be available in Mail, Calendar and Address Book. Users can also search for Exchange messages using Mac OS X’s Spotlight search.
Microsoft has supported Exchange in its operating systems since the beginning. That doesn’t necessarily mean that Windows’ implementation of Exchange support will be better, but considering Microsoft has been at it much longer, you can bet it’ll work quite well in Windows 7. Apple’s decision to add Exchange support has taken a while to get here, but it doesn’t necessarily provide unique value to businesses.
Page: 1 2
Biden vetoes Republican-backed measure amidst dispute over 'joint employer' status for contract workers, affecting tech…
Lawyers in US social media addiction action say strict controls on Douyin in China show…
More than 10,000 London black cab drivers sue Uber claiming company acted illegally to obtain…
Liverpool's Alder Hey children's hospital turns away electric car from car park due to 'fire…
German foreign minister warns Russia will face consequences for “absolutely intolerable” cyberattack on ruling party,…
Google is reportedly laying off at least 200 staff from its “Core” organisation, including key…
View Comments
I think this article has missed the point entirely. I'm not sure what Exchange support they think that Windows XP has. Webmail from the browser? You only get full Exchange support from Office - that's not a no-cost option.
As for 64bit - with Windows you have to choose 32bit or 64bit and buy the appropriate OS package. OS X has been seamless for a while with a single release for both and this version improves on that with even more of the code optimised for 64bit. Application writers have more incentive to write 64bit for OS X because more Macs are able to utilise the code.
The Windows XP mode in Windows 7 represents a major headache for corporate environments. They now have two Windows OSs to configure, patch, secure and protect from malware.
Having said all that, this isn't Apple's play for the corporate market and I don't expect that they will make much ground in that area. Many large IT firms are so locked into Microsoft, they will not consider anything else. My firm WILL move to Windows 7, but the Wintel guys are dreading the transition.
The only PC that will run OS X, XP and (I assume) W7 out of the box are the computers built by Apple.
Why have two when you can have three?
It's really amazing how clueless 'technical writers' can be. Just a few examples from your story:
1. You claim that Windows supports Exchange. That is incorrect. Windows does not, nor has it ever supported Exchange. It relies on applications to do that. So, by your own logic, OS X is far ahead of Windows since Snow Leopard WILL support Exchange in the OS.
2. You claim that Windows computers have better application support. That is backwards. A Mac can run Windows software and/or OS with a variety of virtual machine solutions. Windows computers can not (legally) run Mac OS X apps. So Macs run 100% of available software while Windows computers run something less than 100%.
3. You claim that Mac OS X is far behind Windows in the OS market. If your measurement is purely in terms of the number of licenses, no one would argue. But that wasn't Apple's point. It was that Windows has been playing catch-up to Mac OS for decades in features, performance, and usability. I've been hearing that the next Windows version would be 'just as good as a Mac' for over 2 decades. Clearly, Microsoft realizes they're playing catch-up.
4. Since your article is about business, there should have been some mention of issues that really concern business. Expose in the dock is not a serious issue. Security, reliability, and usability is. While both platforms can be affected by trojans and there may some day be a Mac OS X virus, as of today, there are no viruses affecting Mac OS X vs hundreds of thousands affecting Windows. Business loses tens of billions of dollars per year due to Windows security problems. Then there's the reliability and support problem. Endless surveys show over and over that Macs work more reliably right out of the box, achieve greater customer satisfaction, and lower support costs. Finally, there's productivity. While there are no recent studies, all the studies done over time show the Mac to have substantially higher productivity - and this is supported by anecdotal reports from switchers.
5. I love the "Microsoft has had 64 bit apps for years" line. The problem is that, even today, most consumers are still using 32 bit Windows - because of compatibility problems. Those problems don't exist with Macs. (Not to mention that the core of OS X has been 64 bit for years. Try installing 8 GB of RAM in a 2006 Mac or 2006 Windows XP machine and see which one recognizes it.
Maybe eWeek should find someone to write its technical articles who actually knows something about Macs and who is capable of rational argument - rather than simply repeating a Microsoft press release.
You may be right, altho' this isn't much analysis. You get paid for being a petunia, you know, simply blowing in the wind?
What's unmentioned at all is the shift to mobile platforms and the cloud platforms. It's NOT software and these two OSes anymore. It's about what Google is doing with online apps and what Apple is doing with mobile apps.
Get with it.
You may be right, altho' this isn't much analysis. You get paid for being a petunia, you know, simply blowing in the wind?
What's unmentioned at all is the shift to mobile platforms and the cloud platforms. It's NOT software and these two OSes anymore. It's about what Google is doing with online apps and what Apple is doing with mobile apps.
Get with it.
Your entire article is a plea for Windows from an obvious zealot. Windows 64 can't run 32 bit apps while Apple has been universally 64/32 compatible for a decade. It ONLY Windows that can't handle both seamlessly and why Microsoft had to mimic Apple as always and use an emulator to try and beg some business users to use Vista 7 update. The lies are repleat throughout this article like "It also means companies won't have to worry about application compatibility as they will with Snow Leopard." This of course is a lie designed to dupe the stupid.
Every comparison of an Apple feature is determined by whether Microsoft has been able to mimic an old Apple feature so it can "look" like it's in the game.
Fundamental structural improvements where Microsoft hasn't any prayer of ever competing are left out because Windows hasn't a prayer of even looking like it's in the game.
The more one ACTUALLY KNOWS the less likely you would tolerate Windows in any environment. This leave the brain dead Windows zealots nothing but delusional misrepresentations and outright lies to justify their ignorant support.
The problem is that the theory posited was already answered by the writer BEFORE any analysis was carried out. For example the 64 bitness was skimmed over without actually considering that Snow Leopard will run 32 bits as well. With Microsoft you have to have Windows XP running in emulation to reach the same effect.
Really, if you want to do an assassination attempt on Snow Leopard, especially in a technical magazine then you really aught to do your research. It is easy to skim the surface and come to the conclusion you had before going in. It is much harder to actually find out how things work and then report - sitting watching an online demo is not reporting.