Quote of the Day

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Microsoft gave us quote of the day when a company rep said they intentionally tried making Windows 7 look and feel like a Mac. :eek:

One of the things that people say an awful lot about the Apple Mac is that the OS is fantastic, that it’s very graphical and easy to use. What we’ve tried to do with Windows 7 – whether it’s traditional format or in a touch format – is create a Mac look and feel in terms of graphics. We’ve significantly improved the graphical user interface, but it’s built on that very stable core Vista technology, which is far more stable than the current Mac platform, for instance.
Click to expand...
 
Stupid Microsoft, now we will never hear the end of this.
 
He should have just said "we put the sexy in windows 7" and left it at that. Then at the end said "i'm a PC and win 7 was my idea BITCH"
 
Not necessarily a bad thing. In general a mac does have a nice looking interface. It just has some quirks in how things are done compared to windows. Really the only disappointing thing about a MAC is the price, lack of games, incompatibility with the majority of programs, and lack of upgrade ability oh and their mice are missing buttons. Which is quite a bit, but there's nothing wrong with how the interface looks.
 
I like MacOS X but I refuse to conform to non-customizable hardware. I love how OS X works, I like how it feels and it looks fantastic, but Win 7 is definitely more my speed. All the talk about Mac app's is bull because I can get the same kind of stuff for free on my Windows OS. But the minute Apple opens up Mac OS to PC's, I WILL dual-boot with
Windows.
 
I actually don't see a problem with this. I like the new look and if it was influenced by Apple, as this guy admits, all I can say is Thank you Apple.

Other than that I'm still washing my hands whenever I shake hands with a Mac user...

...

Kidding!
 
Steve said:
One of the things that people say an awful lot about the Apple Mac is that the OS is fantastic, that it’s very graphical and easy to use. What we’ve tried to do with Windows 7 – whether it’s traditional format or in a touch format – is create a Mac look and feel in terms of graphics. We’ve significantly improved the graphical user interface, but it’s built on that very stable core Vista technology, which is far more stable than the current Mac platform, for instance.
Click to expand...
The entire quote was made with good intentions, however the [insert FUD group here] will only focus on the bolded statements.

The end result of the FUD machines will be the out of context statement "Win7 attempts to be like Mac, but is just as unstable as Vista was." This first part of the new FUD statement is out of context and is false. The second part of the new FUD statement is completely False on 2 levels. 1st, Vista was extremely stable after 3rd party driver situation was figured out, even more so after SP1. 2nd, Win7 is stable out of the gate BECAUSE it is basically an evolved Vista AT ITS CORE.
 
If I wanted a mac, I would buy a mac. Now I have to listen to every stupid mac user because of this comment. Thanks Microsoft.

Hey Ubuntu, hurry your ass up and become a viable alternative so I can sidestep this entire trainwreck.
 
I don't see anything wrong with the quote.

If Burger King stacks their burgers with the meat in the middle of the buns and people like it. Why should Wendys stack their burgers with the meat on top of the bun?

To be different?

If people like something a great deal, it makes sense for another company in the same market to come up with their own version using what has been successful for their competition.
 
Right WorldExclusive. What's funny, is the people who are about to complain to high heaven about 'MS copying' are the same ones that cry foul everytime a software patent is issued, or a bit torrent server is served by the law. Anyways, I'd rather have an OS that copies good ideas, than one that doesn't copy good ideas. For instance, Apple should copy Vista/7's security features and secure developement process. They do not, now is that bad because Mac OS X is less secure, or good because Apple didn't copy MS? Hmmm.
 
This was funny:

...it’s built on that very stable core Vista technology, which is far more stable than the current Mac platform, for instance.
Click to expand...

The follow up question, though, priceless:

So you’ve taken the style of the Mac platform and built it on the more solid foundations of Vista?
Click to expand...

I'm no Apple fan, but I'll never believe, read EVAR believe that "Vista technology" is more stable than *nix.
 
It's quite obvious that Windows 7 tries to look like Mac. The new taskbar, for example, is effectively the Mac dock; my friends and I even refer to it as the "Win 7 Dock" in general conversation.

I have no problem with MS adding Apple's good ideas to their OS or Apple doing the opposite. Apple and MS have been copying each other since MS responded to Apple's "Trash Can" with their equivalent "Recycle Bin." There's no reason each OS should be missing roughly half of its features because the other company came up with those ideas first.

Oh, and see what's happened since Apple became a viable competitor to Microsoft? Both companies have been innovating left and right, and as a result both products keep getting better and better for consumers. Software development is one market where competition is great!
 
I've owned a couple of Macs in the past, the last was a Core Duo Mac Mini. OSX is a great, easy to use and well thought-out OS, but that's all the kudos I will give Apple. Locking down software and hardware is major turn off in my book.
 
It's a frank statement that doesn't detract from Microsoft at all IMO.

I honestly don't know first hand how different a PC and mac machine is these days, but back when I was getting my first serious impressions of 'mac vs PCs', Macs weren't upgradeable, were more expensive, and had very few applications of games available.

Since then we've seen macs become more and more like PCs in the hardware department. Windows needed to update their UI so that PCs would be more like Macs in the software department. He basically said 'we took what Windows does best and combined it with what OSX does best, added some sugar and spice, removed the spit and dirt, and made Windows 7'. Actually, he should have just said it like that.

It's not a bad sales pitch if you ask me. I don't know anyone who has upgraded to windows 7 who doesn't really like it.
 
WorldExclusive said:
If Burger King stacks their burgers with the meat in the middle of the buns and people like it. Why should Wendys stack their burgers with the meat on top of the bun?

To be different?
Click to expand...

Wrong. To be awesome! Who wouldnt want a bun in between 2 patties? :D

That aside, lets not forget how customizable Windows is. I know people who cant live without Windows yet love the layout of Macs so much that they skin everything Macish.
 
I'm no Apple fan, but I'll never believe, read EVAR believe that "Vista technology" is more stable than *nix.
Click to expand...

Compared to the kernels, then probably. It's all the crap that gets added on top that causes instabilities.
 
http://windowsteamblog.com/blogs/wi...-designed-the-look-and-feel-of-windows-7.aspx

In brief; the comment came from an uninvolved, uninformed employee. I read a few months ago that MS said the design is reminiscent of Windows 1.0 which had icons at the bottom to represent running programs - doesn't really matter imo, computers can only have so many sensible possibilities for such things, it's inevitable that two OSes are going to look alike.
 
I like Win7...The looks dont really get me so much as alot of the nifty features, system stability, and overall speed of the system... I could care less where they got the idea for the looks so long as the stability stays where it is.
 
"Unfortunately this came from a former Microsoft employee who was not involved in any aspect of designing Windows 7."
 
Save to say he won't be involved in any aspect of any Microsoft product ever again... And for good reason. People need to excercise a little constraint. Saying something like that which would obviously be controversial, you better be sure you are right and your company is ready to admit it... otherwise its just stupid.

I Agree that the greatest compliment one can give is imitation, and if you can make a better product by copying any aspect of your competition, by all means, its only better for us consumers. But a company employee can't "out" Windows 7 look and feel unless the company decides to admit it.
 
From today's posting:
I know Simon Aldous, having worked in the same UK subsidiar as him for a few years. He's a good guy who, for me, is telling it like it is. He's paying testament to the common view that a Mac is cool and a great template to copy.

Then denying this to your customers just makes you look stupid because the very look and feel of Windows 7 is desperately trying to look like a Mac OS - just admit it.

Oh, and in the less significant UK region, sales of Macs rose 25% in the last quarter, with like for like PC sales down by about the same margin. I would try to copy that success.

Keep pretending guys, can't wait for the next Apple 'I'm a PC' ad :)
Click to expand...

"I know a guy, and, you're just jealous and worse, LAAME!!" These discussions are completely pointless. As another pointed out, it's only so long before all these OS's look the same. Pick yer Linux flavor, OSX, Windows (any flavor)... it's all the same pile of crap with different colored buttons. That's it. Arguing "you stole this from us, waah waah!" is just pointless. The same crap flew around when Vista came out, before everyone hated it.

Each of them does some things better than their counterparts, that's the truth. They're all just as good/bad as each other. Hearing the Linux crowd on /. go "Windows hate hate hate!" is just the same as hearing the Mac guys go "Not Mac? hate hate hate!" It's to the point of religious fervor... over an OPERATING SYSTEM??

Seriously, my old PIII runs Ubuntu which has a RAID 5 containing all my ripped media. A media server (which I manage via a web browser on my Windows machine, a 4200+ X2) serves that content up over my network. I stream to and view it from my PS3, wired to the home theater. The home theater is managed by a Logitech eHarmony remote control, running its own little embedded OS. Look! There's 4 OS's right there, and they all work together!! Should we not be shaking hands? High-fiving? Rejoicing in our interoperability? Seriously, I just installed the software and it all worked!! Incredible.

Ultimately, pick one of them and go surf the damn web, because that's all you do anyways (well, most people). Marketing and whatnot has created some bizarre status symbol out of whichever OS you use. Really? It just lets you chat, read your email, and surf the web. The vast majority of users out there never go any deeper than that. Twitter is proof positive of that fact.

(In other news, ever notice the first syllable of 'Twitter' is 'Twit'? Appropriate?)

Agh, sorry for the rant, but I'm just getting so tired of this "debate". (There is none, or no point to one, if you ask me.) Maybe I work with too many graphics designers.
 
One of the things that people say an awful lot about the Apple Mac is that the OS is fantastic, that it’s very graphical and easy to use. What we’ve tried to do with Windows 7 – whether it’s traditional format or in a touch format – is create a Mac look and feel in terms of graphics. We’ve significantly improved the graphical user interface, but it’s built on that very stable core Vista technology, which is far more stable than the current Mac platform, for instance.
Click to expand...

After reading what the guy actually said, it doesn´t sound that bad... I actually think what he meant to say is that they tried to make win7 more graphical and easy to use, like how people feel about Mac OS, not that they actually copyied the competing OS... I just think he probably used the wrong words to express himself.
 
Notice how many automobiles are looking the same and also offer the same features? It's because aerodynamics drive the shape of cars, and there's a concensus among human beings on need to have/nice to have features. Thereofre, autmobile manufacturers, if they strive for these improvements, aren't necessarily ripping each other off.

It stands to reason that, when it comes to overall functionality and aesthetics to the "average" computer user, regardless of individual tastes, there's only going to ONE BEST, though there might might be MANY "GOOD". (Look at the peak of a bell curve to understand this.)

Consequently, the PC started on one low end of the bell curve, the Apple, the other. As they improved, it was only natural that they would converge to a point where both would look and work like each other, regardless of imitation (which is also acknowledged to exist in an "imperfect" world.)
 
At least the rep tried to save face by ending that quote with:
"We’ve significantly improved the graphical user interface, but it’s built on that very stable core Vista technology, which is far more stable than the current Mac platform, for instance."

Basically saying that he feels that 7 has the look-and-feel of Mac OS but is more stable. Apparently the public is buying into it given the brisk sales of 7 (vs. the pathetic sales of Vista).
 
I've said Windows 7 looked like OSX since it was in early Beta that said all this talk about who stole what look is all a moot point.

The fact is all of them stole the whole IDEA of a GUI from....wait for it....

XEROX!

Steve Jobs just had enough foresight to steal it first, that's all.

Still Windows 7 doesn't work like OSX. OSX is more like an appliance than a computer.
You can do just about anything on a MAC that you can do on a PC but when it comes to things like say lan shares, well that just doesn't quite fit the whole "appliance" mold so well. Mac's are just different...

:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top