Paul Thurrott's "SuperSite" for Windows has always made for entertaining reading: Windows technologies are presented in the best possible light, with deficiencies glossed over or not mentioned at all. But the propaganda is often quick to reveal how inferior Mac OS X is by comparison. Having just placed my pre-order for Tiger, I was surprised to see a "review" on Paul's site of this unreleased product. How does it stack up against Microsoft's best?
Apparently Paul finds the Mac OS X Dock a bit too confusing:
Mac OS X 10.0 also included a few flops, which continue in the product to this day, including the reviled Dock, which is used to switch between running applications and, confusingly, non-running applications
My version of Windows XP has a taskbar at the bottom of the screen, which has a row of icons for some of the programs I might want to launch (others launch from desktop icons, or nested menus via the Start button), together with icons representing those applications that are already running. Sounds vaguely familiar. I'm not sure what the other "flops" are, because he doesn't seem to be able to list any.
...Mac OS X Panther has been updated by about 1400 bug and security fixes... Tiger is a minor revision, like all previous OS X updates... Contrary to Apple's hyperbolic claims of "200 new features," Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger includes, in my opinion, only two major new features, Spotlight and Dashboard, and both were clearly influenced by other existing products and services.
All those bug and security fixes sure sound bad—until you compare it to Windows, and realize that while Apple fixed potential exploits, Microsoft was fire-fighting a stream of active vulnerabilities. It's difficult to know whether an update is "major" or "minor". My purchase of Windows ME, which Microsoft hailed for it's innovative interface, turned out to be nothing more than eye-candy for Windows 98. Then came Windows XP which didn't look all that different, and didn't work (or crash) all that differently. With recent versions of Windows we've seen the persistence of the same instabilities, the same security flaws, the same lack of standards support, increased demands on hardware, increased expenditure on forced hardware and software upgrades for compatibility, and paid for the privilege of keeping Microsoft's pockets lined.
Paul names two "major features" of Tiger. Regarding Spotlight (instant search) "Microsoft is working on similar, if further-reaching, technology for Longhorn." OK, so what Apple has already done, Microsoft is planning to do better (when they've seen how Apple does it, to be sure). Regarding Dashboard (mini applications called widgets), he bemoans the use of "hot keys" to trigger their display as a "throwback". Hmm.. Ctrl-Alt-Del is needed to log into my PC at work. How do I access the help menu in Windows XP? Oh yes, the very obvious F1 function key...
Safari's support for RSS feeds is excellent.
Unlike Microsoft's plan not to fully support CSS in Internet Explorer 7, which inexplicably doesn't get a mention on Paul's site.
Apple's iChat AV is a great IM solution that has only gotten better in Tiger. I'd like to see it open up to more IM services—like Yahoo's and MSN—but , ah well, it will get there.
Paul's recent glowing review of MSN Messenger does not list cross-service compatibility as something for improvement. OK, got it! What is a deficiency in Mac OS X is a "feature" in Windows...
Windows XP Service Pack 2 (SP2) was arguably a bigger advance over the initial release of XP than Tiger is over Mac OS X 10.3.
Yes, that is arguable: can you call plugging security holes that shouldn't have been there in the first place an advance? SP2 was, in fact, a minor upgrade to a poorly-designed and crash-prone operating system.
If the past is any indication, Apple will release numerous fixes for Mac OS X 10.4 within days of the software's release. My sources on the beta tell me that testers were shocked Apple decided to finalize the software when they did. Apparently a lot of problems still exist in the final code.
And we all know how solid and refined Longhorn will be if it ever gets out the door, right? If it follows in the tradition of previous Microsoft releases (and there's no reason to suspect it won't) it will be a question of another week, another fix...
Tiger may lack some of the niceties that make Windows more appealing to new users...
Hah, hah, hah... I have to stop reading; my side hurts. Did I wake up in an alternative reality or something?
It turns out that Paul is one of the more unbiased journalists in this particular field. I wouldn't even begin to consider reading a review of a Microsoft software from folks at MacNN, or MacWorld, or anything else. They're heated and irritable when it comes to alternative platforms. From the way you write, though, it looks like you're interested in that kind of review -- one which only gives Apple credit, and doesn't give Microsoft any.
We all have our biases Mr/Ms Pickle; I have mine, Paul most certainly has his, and you surely have yours. I use both OS X and Windows regularly, and have no doubt that Microsoft is due credit for various innovations good and bad—just like Apple. How curious that you feel able to tell so much about the reading habits of a total stranger based soley on the mention of a single review.