Vision of the future (By Microsoft not raaaid)

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

I think you're exaggerating things a bit man, I gave my opinion as user of both systems, and I reckon Apple is overall better and more value for money, end of.

I seem to understand you don't have much experience with the Apple stuff, still you feel like making fun of others that do and tell you "dude, it's not just better, it's miles better".

I am daily exposed to apple products, believe me. There is not much way around it these days, this way or another. The problem is that you picked out certain criteria you liked, and only those criteria count and are the most important. I do not have to be an expert on apple products to differ between somebody with an open mind and one that knows everything already before the debate even begun. No offense.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

I am daily exposed to apple products, believe me. There is not much way around it these days, this way or another. The problem is that you picked out certain criteria you liked, and only those criteria count and are the most important. I do not have to be an expert on apple products to differ between somebody with an open mind and one that knows everything already before the debate even begun. No offense.

dude, prove me wrong then.

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

dude, prove me wrong then.

What is there to proof? I said Apple is more streamlines, PC is more adaptable. That simply is the case, so obvious as if you want me to proof that we have sunny and bad weather.

You like certain features like design, easy to use, great quality. Software geared for it is very good. All true. And I actually enjoy products like the Iphone when I get my hands on it.

I said there for pure performance you get more bang for the buck with a PC system, high end hardware and also special task hardware that you can interchange at will at home, perfect for a system that needs to do lots of stuff and with windows 7, as swiss correctly pointed out, also with a pretty nice OS. And you simply have a much broader choice in internal and peripha gear, as well as software options, payware and freeware. Not as streamlined as apple, but more adaptable. I have not seen one convincing arguement disproving that.

So each system has points going for it, the way I can see it both have advantages. But whatever advantage Apple has, it is eaten up by its cost and specialisation. I need a working computer, not a decoration. It's not about dissing, it is simply about ignoring the hype and see it as what it is and what you get for your money for what task.

[TomcatViP]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

... and with windows 7, as swiss correctly pointed out, also with a pretty nice OS.

That makes me wonder what the hell we have against CoD devs managing the bugs when it took 15 years to Microflop to release a bug free copy of it's original Win95 OS

As I remind it Win3 what the last bug free OS of MS until Win7

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

That makes me wonder what the hell we have against CoD devs managing the bugs when it took 15 years to Microflop to release a bug free copy of it's original Win95 OS

As I remind it Win3 what the last bug free OS of MS until Win7

that's another valid point man: it is fair to assume that devs have to put up with OSs from the same company which are never compatible, having to put extra efforts to deliver something which works on XP, Vista and 7.

[swiss]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

that's another valid point man: it is fair to assume that devs have to put up with OSs from the same company which are never compatible, having to put extra efforts to deliver something which works on XP, Vista and 7.

From 1999 to 2008 we worked on W2000 with an inhouse developed ERP, never had any problems. This software was developed for W95, the migration was a walk in park and it's even confirmed to work on XP too.
Another cool thing about MS is: I can play games like wing- or strikecommander on a W7 machine if I want to, I might need an additional progi(dosbox), yet I can.
I'm talking about 20(!) years old software.
Downward compatibility was never a real issue, at least not for mainstream progis.
The other way around is more tricky though. The question is: Why should you put any effort in making software compatible to an obsolete OS?
Can macs do do that?

Anyway, all those arguments against MS actually lack examples. I would like to hear what kind of windows-crap trouble you ran into.
Like:
1.program
2.OS
3.description of problem

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by swiss

From 1999 to 2008 we worked on W2000 with an inhouse developed ERP, never had any problems. This software was developed for W95, the migration was a walk in park and it's even confirmed to work on XP too.
Another cool thing about MS is: I can play games like wing- or strikecommander on a W7 machine if I want to, I might need an additional progi(dosbox), yet I can.
I'm talking about 20(!) years old software.
Downward compatibility was never a real issue, at least not for mainstream progis.
The other way around is more tricky though. The question is: Why should you put any effort in making software compatible to an obsolete OS?
Can macs do do that?

Anyway, all those arguments against MS actually lack examples. I would like to hear what kind of windows-crap trouble you ran into.
Like:
1.program
2.OS
3.description of problem

dude, I work in an office with 2500 employees, most of them work on PCs, and the service ticket list in the IT dept at the moment has an estimated 3 weeks wait. The problem is not the machines only, but the damage users cause to them. In offices where Macs have been introduced the request for assistance has dropped of a shocking 65%! If that isn't enough, then I dunno what you need as further evidence.