Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Will you switch to Windows 7 from OS X? (boot camp/fusion/paralells/new pc)

  • Yes! Windows 7 is definitely shaping up to be better than OS X.

    Votes: 38 8.9%
  • No, and besides, Snow Leopard's coming out soon too.

    Votes: 303 71.0%
  • I'll wait 'till the final version of Windows 7 is released before I decide

    Votes: 86 20.1%

  • Total voters
    427

NoSmokingBandit

macrumors 68000
Apr 13, 2008
1,579
3
In my opinion windows can go **** itself and everyone stop being a smart ass, im not going to switch back and even if i do, im not going to pay for it. :mad:

See, children, this is what happens when you desperately come up with a bullcrap theory to prove how smart you are and are proven wrong.

That being said, theres no hard feeling from me, MacHappytjg. If you want to get all pissy you go right ahead, but when you are willing to debate this like a mature adult i will welcome you back, no problem. Until then, enjoy bashing windows on baseless claims ;)
 

Quillz

macrumors 65816
Jan 6, 2006
1,421
0
Los Angeles, CA
See, children, this is what happens when you desperately come up with a bullcrap theory to prove how smart you are and are proven wrong.

That being said, theres no hard feeling from me, MacHappytjg. If you want to get all pissy you go right ahead, but when you are willing to debate this like a mature adult i will welcome you back, no problem. Until then, enjoy bashing windows on baseless claims ;)
Not to mention he plans to be a pirate, too.

It's people like him that give Mac users an unfair stereotype of being immature snobs.
 

Quillz

macrumors 65816
Jan 6, 2006
1,421
0
Los Angeles, CA
According to that theory apple hasnt released a 'new' OS since march 2001.
Well, it's more than a theory, it's pretty much a fact. Apple has used the same Darwin kernel in Mac OS X since it's release. Every new release since Cheetah has been evolutionary, merely improving Darwin and its other components. Very rarely is each incremental OS update a truly "new" one.
 

Great Dave

macrumors regular
Oct 19, 2007
116
0
I certainly like the look of W7 - the features are pretty hot too.

The problem is the ****** looking hardware...

Actually, have you looked at some of the pcs lately. I hadn't until I was at Best Buy getting an install on my car. I had time to kill so wondered over to the computer department.

I actually felt kind of disappointed. Why? Because it seemed like my MacBook Pro, MacBook, etc. was altmodisch, out-of-date. Possibly, it was just me because I have owned powerbooks and iBooks and the style really hasn't changed since then.

But, man I remember pcs being big, bulky, cheap looking, etc. But, now...

Wow! They have so many different sleek designs, light weight. And the prices and features (what happened to the year of HD steve? Still waiting for Blu-ray!)are just better.

Now I haven't tried Windows 7, but all these positive reviews, make me think about it. That on top of the fact that it seems that Apple has become a phone/gadget company(also not to mention that Apple's corporate attitude has shifted through the years and they seem like any other greedy, monopolistic company out-there - makes me feel less loyal to them), really makes me think about it.
 

NoSmokingBandit

macrumors 68000
Apr 13, 2008
1,579
3
Imo, sony makes some of the sexiest computers:
Sony-VAIO-CR-Notebook.jpg


Yeah, it looks like the white macbook, but i think the white macbook is one of the best designs ever.
 

iMouse

macrumors 6502
Jul 23, 2002
255
19
Boardman, Ohio
Um...

Because for the longest time, Rootkits didn't exist and anti-virus could detect viruses. Plus, I have yet to see a virus (trojan, etc) that doesn't make its precense known.

By the time rootkits were around, I was at college with an industrial strength anti-virus program. I'm pretty sure I never got one.


Anti-virus is useless anymore on any Windows platform. Period. I don't care how "industrial strength" you think it may be, it sucks. Take it from a malware specialist who spends nearly 40 hours a week doing nothing but manually removing this crap from compromised Windows-based systems and restoring whatever services it has removed or disabled. Automated software isn't going to do for you what you expect. While some fairly good anti-malware based apps like MalwareBytes Anti-Malware are out there, they aren't perfect. Perfect is what you need in the face of today's digital threats.

Malware is playing a whole new ballgame with the power to not only change registry entries, but to hide as threads in Windows critical processes such as Winlogon, lsass, svchost (yes, the actual thread, not a .dll generated svchost process), and many others. They are self-protecting, self-healing, and many Vundo-based Trojans are now crippling the system by restricting Windows Group Policies so that things like 9/10 of the items on your Start menu don't appear or are inaccessible due to permissions denial. Some variants have gone as far as to hook the Winlogon Authentication Package so that when the Trojan is removed, the user can no longer log in to their account unless the Trojan's registry string was deleted in the LSA registry key before the previous logoff or reboot.

Then there's DNSChanger. Ah, a lovely one that redirects all web traffic to advertisers sites before dumping you to the actual website that you requested. ...most of the time. Ever try removing this beast? You'll find that it is indeed a rootkit. You'll also find that is resides in /System32/Drivers. So, what's the catch? You can't see it there. It has designed itself to hide from Windows APIs. Removal requires some pretty fancy rootkit detection software (some anti-virus apps can find and delete pieces of this now), and a bootable device such as a BartPE Disc, Ubuntu Live CD, and a lot of nerve as you go into your drivers directory deleting the rootkit piece manually.

Who wants to do this?!

At this point, nearly all end-users give up and either buy a new PC, Mac, or restore their old one using a restore partition or discs. For those that chose to restore, many forget to patch their 1, 2, 3 year-old factory image and become once again a member of our unfriendly botnet environment in a matter of a few hours.

I believe you're going to see the next round of malware apps attack at a level as low as the interrupt handler. You invoke an interrupt, the malware does its thing, then goes back into a stealth-like "wait" period. At this point, you might as well call it quits...
 

Stridder44

macrumors 68040
Mar 24, 2003
3,973
198
California
Actually, have you looked at some of the pcs lately. I hadn't until I was at Best Buy getting an install on my car. I had time to kill so wondered over to the computer department.

I actually felt kind of disappointed. Why? Because it seemed like my MacBook Pro, MacBook, etc. was altmodisch, out-of-date. Possibly, it was just me because I have owned powerbooks and iBooks and the style really hasn't changed since then.

But, man I remember pcs being big, bulky, cheap looking, etc. But, now...

Wow! They have so many different sleek designs, light weight. And the prices and features (what happened to the year of HD steve? Still waiting for Blu-ray!)are just better.

Now I haven't tried Windows 7, but all these positive reviews, make me think about it. That on top of the fact that it seems that Apple has become a phone/gadget company(also not to mention that Apple's corporate attitude has shifted through the years and they seem like any other greedy, monopolistic company out-there - makes me feel less loyal to them), really makes me think about it.

Unfortunately I feel the same as you do. And that sucks too, because I love OS X. If only Apple could write better drivers, and maybe bring back that insane thinking they used to have (like the G4 iMac design) and stop focusing so damn much on the iPhone (yes, it's very cool, but come on). I will continue buying Apple computers though, if nothing else for OS X.

Anti-virus is useless anymore on any Windows platform.

I agree for the most part, but anti-virus apps have really come a long way since the old days of Norton, which is still a POS. Free apps like Avira work exteremly well (way better than AVG and the like) and have virtually no impact. Looking at the Task Manager, I can see that Avira is takes up around 10MB of RAM. I've been running if for the past few weeks on my MBP (in Vista 64, which I use for gaming) and it has zero impact on FPS. Whether or not anyone needs an antivirus app is up for debate (one that shouldn't take place here) but if you want a solid, free, antivirus app that is super low impact (read: doesn't take up any resources) then Avira is your man.
 

NoSmokingBandit

macrumors 68000
Apr 13, 2008
1,579
3
Have you guys checked out ThreatFire? Is an anti-malware app that is behavior based instead of signature based. Combine something like with suRun and you will be as safe as anyone else.
 

zap2

macrumors 604
Mar 8, 2005
7,252
8
Washington D.C
I doubt it...although it will get a look if Apple refuses to come out with a netbook. I currently run XP on my EEE PC, but thats SSD is to small, CPU is slow, keyboard is small, battery is low(but hey its a 701 model!), I'd like to update but MS won't let OEMs update netbook specs to things like 2GB of RAM, 32+SSDs and still use XP. And Vista is a still a little "big" to use on them. I'm thinking about a Ubuntu Dell Mini

Hopefully Apple comes out with one, and I know where to buy!
 

fa8362

macrumors 68000
Jul 7, 2008
1,571
498
So now that many of you have had experience with the beta, do you think the final product will be enough to make you switch back to Windows? And if you've been a Mac user all your life, will you cross to the "dark" side?

Please, no more jokes. I almost laughed myself to death.
 

nishishei

macrumors regular
Jun 5, 2005
203
0
I'm switching if OS X doesn't fix that goddamn Finder. The Win7 Explorer is night and day better than the Finder in just about everything you need to do to manage your files.

And why is it when I go to the previous page in the Finder, the Finder loses the folder's layout settings? It's so frustrating.
 

Machappytg

macrumors newbie
Jan 17, 2009
7
0
Looks like MacHappytjg took his ball and went home. :rolleyes:

as if there is a guy with the same name as me who looks like a really stupid guy :(. Reguardless im waiting for SnowLeopard im not too interested in windows 7. btw is there anyway how to change my name im new here...
 

integrat.ethis

macrumors regular
Oct 28, 2008
115
0
I'm switching if OS X doesn't fix that goddamn Finder. The Win7 Explorer is night and day better than the Finder in just about everything you need to do to manage your files.

And why is it when I go to the previous page in the Finder, the Finder loses the folder's layout settings? It's so frustrating.
I agree! I like most things about OS X more than Windows, but the Finder is horrible! I really liked the "group by type" option in Vista, and there's nothing of the sort in OS X. Hopefully Snow Leopard will set things straight.
 

BenEndeem

macrumors 6502
Jul 25, 2008
301
0
England
If the price points are just about the same for the MacBook line when I come to replace my laptop then I won't hesitate to buy a Windows based laptop. I don't like the prices and I don't like the (extremely frustrating) intermittent Wi-Fi problems. Windows 7 looks like the Vista that I imagined when I made the fateful decision upgrade from XP, as others have said it is coming on to be what Vista should have been.

However I doubt I'll switch back to Windows for my desktops. The Apple desktops are, as far as I can see, much more competitively priced that the laptops, plus there's OS X which will probably be my favourite OS throughout the foreseeable future, if only by a little.
 

HLdan

macrumors 603
Aug 22, 2007
6,383
0
I agree! I like most things about OS X more than Windows, but the Finder is horrible! I really liked the "group by type" option in Vista, and there's nothing of the sort in OS X. Hopefully Snow Leopard will set things straight.

I'm not really understanding what's so bad about the Finder and what's so great about Windows Explorer? Can someone explain rather than just say the Finder sux and Explorer is the best?

Also, the Finder does have a "Group by Type" option, unless you are talking about something else, it's in Show View Options.
 

NoSmokingBandit

macrumors 68000
Apr 13, 2008
1,579
3
I'm not really understanding what's so bad about the Finder and what's so great about Windows Explorer? Can someone explain rather than just say the Finder sux and Explorer is the best?

Also, the Finder does have a "Group by Type" option, unless you are talking about something else, it's in Show View Options.

Cut/Paste, multiple sidebars depending on what you like, an 'up' button as well as the back/forward ones, you can adjust icon size from the menu bar, folders have a little preview of what is inside them...
All of those things make it much more pleasant to use Explorer.
 

Quillz

macrumors 65816
Jan 6, 2006
1,421
0
Los Angeles, CA
I'm switching if OS X doesn't fix that goddamn Finder. The Win7 Explorer is night and day better than the Finder in just about everything you need to do to manage your files.

And why is it when I go to the previous page in the Finder, the Finder loses the folder's layout settings? It's so frustrating.
I agree. The Finder is terrible. I've moved full-time to ForkLift, which is what "the Finder should be." In fact, I think ForkLift is even better than Windows Explorer. It offers tabbed browsing, a dual-pane design and even builds in FTP. All of these should be in Windows Explorer. (There used to be FTP browsing, but it's been removed as of Vista.)
 

FX120

macrumors 65816
May 18, 2007
1,173
235
I agree. The Finder is terrible. I've moved full-time to ForkLift, which is what "the Finder should be." In fact, I think ForkLift is even better than Windows Explorer. It offers tabbed browsing, a dual-pane design and even builds in FTP. All of these should be in Windows Explorer. (There used to be FTP browsing, but it's been removed as of Vista.)

I use Explorer for FTP all the time on Vista...
 

nishishei

macrumors regular
Jun 5, 2005
203
0
I agree. The Finder is terrible. I've moved full-time to ForkLift, which is what "the Finder should be." In fact, I think ForkLift is even better than Windows Explorer. It offers tabbed browsing, a dual-pane design and even builds in FTP. All of these should be in Windows Explorer. (There used to be FTP browsing, but it's been removed as of Vista.)

There is FTP in Vista's Explorer. You go to Tools (you might need to click Alt first to get the menubar) and then Map Network Drive.
 

nishishei

macrumors regular
Jun 5, 2005
203
0
I'm not really understanding what's so bad about the Finder and what's so great about Windows Explorer? Can someone explain rather than just say the Finder sux and Explorer is the best?

Also, the Finder does have a "Group by Type" option, unless you are talking about something else, it's in Show View Options.

Well the Win7 Explorer has something called libraries which allow you to sort documents through multiple folders. For example, if you have a picture library, you can put multiple picture folders (from anywhere on your computer) in it and either sort by physical folders or sort by say the month and year you took your pictures (this is profoundly different from "Last Modified" sorting within a folder).

The Windows Explorer is just simply more powerful in switching between folders. Say I have a folder at "c:\users\username\desktop\work folder", in the Explorer, I can easily go to the \users folder or the \username folder by just clicking on "users" or "username" in the path address. I don't have to go back one by one. I can also select another subfolder in the \users folder just by clicking the \users folder and picking say \username2 all within the top path address. Whereas, you can't do jack squat with the path (besides copy it) in the Mac Finder.
 

HLdan

macrumors 603
Aug 22, 2007
6,383
0
Well the Win7 Explorer has something called libraries which allow you to sort documents through multiple folders. For example, if you have a picture library, you can put multiple picture folders (from anywhere on your computer) in it and either sort by physical folders or sort by say the month and year you took your pictures (this is profoundly different from "Last Modified" sorting within a folder).

The Windows Explorer is just simply more powerful in switching between folders. Say I have a folder at "c:\users\username\desktop\work folder", in the Explorer, I can easily go to the \users folder or the \username folder by just clicking on "users" or "username" in the path address. I don't have to go back one by one. I can also select another subfolder in the \users folder just by clicking the \users folder and picking say \username2 all within the top path address. Whereas, you can't do jack squat with the path (besides copy it) in the Mac Finder.

The Finder does have a path bar that allows you to access subfolders inside the main folder. I'm not getting what you want to do outside of that. At any rate in Windows or OS X I never use the Finder or Explorer much more than storing files for quick access when needed. I don't have any need to do complicated tasks so the Finder is just fine and that's probably why I don't see the difference since I've used both basically the same way.
I agree, Apple needs to step up the Finder in Snow Leopard like they did from Tiger to Leopard but if you are looking for features that equal Explorer, forget it, Apple ain't gonna do it. Their idea is simplicity, not complex computing because most computer users don't get very extensive with the File browsers on their Mac or PC, only geeks here do that stuff.
 

QuarterSwede

macrumors G3
Oct 1, 2005
9,887
2,158
Colorado Springs, CO
The Finder does have a path bar that allows you to access subfolders inside the main folder. I'm not getting what you want to do outside of that. At any rate in Windows or OS X I never use the Finder or Explorer much more than storing files for quick access when needed. I don't have any need to do complicated tasks so the Finder is just fine and that's probably why I don't see the difference since I've used both basically the same way.
I agree, Apple needs to step up the Finder in Snow Leopard like they did from Tiger to Leopard but if you are looking for features that equal Explorer, forget it, Apple ain't gonna do it. Their idea is simplicity, not complex computing because most computer users don't get very extensive with the File browsers on their Mac or PC, only geeks here do that stuff.
Apple has a different philosophy when it comes to the file system. They'd rather have the apps access, sort, etc. files than have the user have to do all that work. Hence why iPhoto manages the library, iTunes does the same. They're basically frontends for your databases. Once I realized that (back when I got my Mac) it made my life a lot easier as I wasn't making folders and sorting everything myself. I just let the apps do all the dirty work.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.