SuperSite Blog

I'm surprised that you didn't mention Live Mesh as the answer to 'Back to My Mac' - plus it being free seems to be a sizable net benefit over .Mac

Pingback from  microsoft  » Blog Archive   » 18 Features Windows Should Have (but Doesn't) … Or Does It?

ISO burning would be handy, and it seems a strange thing for MS to omit. They already have drag-to-disc burning built in, so why not extend this capability to include ISO burning? It wouldn't negatively impact the people who don't need it.

1. Yawn? Exposé is a peerless solution for window and app management. Nothing else comes close.

2. Yet the design of said PowerToy is so poor that it's a pain to use. I tried it and failed. On my Mac, I use Spaces daily.

3. Noted.

4. Noted.

5. There are actually several design differences between VSC and Time Machine - enough that I wouldn't call it a copy with a pretty UI. But they both serve a similar enough purpose.

6. Noted.

7. Noted.

8. It's not the podcast capture itself that Windows needs, it's the infrastructure that makes it possible.

9. Noted.

10. Again, not the effect, but the rendering engine behind it (aka Quartz and the related libraries).

11. Who cares if the app is running or not? They just want to use it. Furthermore, I'd argue that the Dock is just a launcher whereas Exposé is the real window manager.

12. Noted.

13. Noted.

14. Not the feature, the technology. Again.

15. Maybe Microsoft should use a server without a million security vulnerabilities. Like, one where experts can actually see the code and effectively diagnose the problem.

16. That one's debatable, but I'll concede it.

17. Noted.

18. Wake me up in 2020 when I can buy an application in this format at Best Buy. Until it's the predominant way to manage apps on Windows, it's mainly irrelevant.

Nine of them are stupid, but the others are good points.

I am sorry but all of these are minor and I am sure that if Microsoft wanted to make windows with all these dumb features they would have. If apple is such a great innovator how come they don't fix all the bug reposts in their operating system for example print quotas for 10.4 server and now 10.5 servers don't work you can enable them but they just don't work. that two years they have been fixing this and their CUPS software and guess what it still does not work. There are several others but that is the best example of apple needing to get their act together.

Gawd I hate these lists!  Truly not even worthy of a response.  Of course I would have had a better list of 18 but then Paul would have just cone back with a better response, rinse and repeat.  Ugh...

Hey Paul,

I'm not sure which versions of Vista include it, but all versions that support the Tablet PC include a program called "Sticky Notes" -- probably similar to the Mac. Also, this program was part of Windows XP Tablet Edtion.

A mediocre list for sure! For that matter, you can get essentially the same thing as Expose through Switcher available from the website via. my name.

@Paul

This response seems unnecessarily shrill.  Does Mac OS X have any features that are better than those in Vista?

@DB - Good comment.  I agree.

Ahhh the weekly bi-polar swing to Ant-Apple.

Honestly Windows lovers dont get it, they just dont.

First I will agree most of the list is either lame, or just something "Joe User" would not use like a ISO burner.

That said its comes down to this simple fact.  When looking at the good/useful/cool things Time Machine, Expose, Spaces and Single file applications.....

Apple includes them, supports them, makes them USER FRIENDLY or flat out has them and no one else does.

Expose is simply a great tool.  If there is a Windows equivalent, Joe User would never know where it is or if he/she had to download it and install it....done/over/not going to happen.

Time Machine another great took with a super nice, simple USER FRIENDLY interface.  Volume Shadow copy is a joke when comparing its accessibility and user interface.  MS came out with VSC in 2003 for Windows Server 2003....not exactly on the client side there Paul.  Sure you could use it with XP provided the file you deleted was on a 2003 file server.  Even then the client was a separate install, hard to find, plain non-intuitive interface.  So MS moved that to Vista, finally and it pales in comparison to Time Machine.

Single file applications are cool, but in most cases they are just hidden application packages that look like one file, but when it comes to un-installing them just move to trash.

Apple and MS play leap frog.  They rip off stuff from each other all the time, as do others.  Its a fact and its not going to change.

MS is focused on big business first, # of features and geeks.  Apple is focused on Joe User and making using their products easier for Joe.  Vista has created a lot of "switchers" because it made this point clearer to Joe User.

I agree this is likely the lamest list ever, though I wish a few of those add-ons were added-on by default (or at least something you could add on later directly from Windows Update as a bonus or something). But #18 is worth talking about. That's the biggest frustration for me with Windows and the biggest plus to Macs. If Microsoft does move to this that's awesome. It may take forever though...and that wouldn't be soon enough. :)

1. Ever hear of Intellipoint?

2. 3. Ditto Paul

4. Office Communicator anyone?

5. Time Machine doesn't hold a candle to Shadow Copy with Previous Versions... seriously!

6 - 10... is this guy serious?

11. Spot on, Paul, it is the most obtrusive, unnecessary UI bug (some might call it a "feature"... I call the whole thing a "bug").

12. What Paul said AND you can capture certain regions of the screen (which I know you can do in OS X) but it then gives you the ability to edit them with things like pencil marks and highlighter marks.

13. I've used the multi touch track pad but don't see much use for it. On the other hand my Toshiba laptop has programmable hot spots that can be used for any number of options. I find this very useful and has been very helpful.

14. This is kind of like album views in Media Center (which came out first BTW). Besides that, what purpose does it serve when we already have thumbnail previews and Windows Desktop Preview?

15. Has this guy ever heard of PWS? On every version of XP Pro as well as Vista Business/Ultimate.

16 - 18. These belong in the same complaint as "they're not sexy enough"....

Do these guys do any research? I mean... my gosh!

"Maybe Microsoft should use a server without a million security vulnerabilities. Like, one where experts can actually see the code and effectively diagnose the problem."

Two points.  First, many Apple fans will rant on about the ease of use for Joe and Jane computer user, but then deride Windows for supposedly lacking a feature (which Vista has by the way) that only a incredibly small portion of the population would ever use or even know about.  I've never needed to use a web server on a desktop OS.

Secondly, you mean like Apache?  I have nothing against Apache, but your analogy is very poor.  Having many eyes on code has never meant that it is automatically more secure.  And secondly, using the data comparing the most recent versions of IIS and Apache (well, not the most recent IIS version in Win 2008), I see 2 of 7 security vulns unpatched for Apache, and 0 of 5 unpatched for IIS.

secunia.com/.../9633

secunia.com/.../1438

#7.  Um, this is a standard gadget that I'm actually using right this very minute.

So what you're saying is either (a) Apple did what Microsoft did in some shitty properties tab or some dodgy way, and did it a lot better. Which Microsoft will now copy. Or (b) you can get this stuff from elsewhere because Windows is deficient, lame and shitty out of the box? You forgot one: how do you undo the vomit inspired UI that is Vista? Upgrade to XP.

1. Major thing missing from Windows is a decent file search.  Microsoft wanted to do it. but couldn't build it into Vista and fix XP at the same time.

2. Time Machine -The big difference is that Apple users actually use it and back up.

3. ISO's - I burn ISOs all the time.

4. UI - The Windows UI has earned the term Mother-in-Law in our house.  It nags, nags, nags, is wrong, but never in doubt.

I think your are right about the standardised menu ribbon.  It is what you are used to.  I have met many switchers who can't get their head around it while the do your own thing menus on Windows drive me to distraction.

"Blog" or not, do you seriously spent your free time fishing for lists like this, no matter how inane, and then trashing them?

Jesus H Paul, step away from the computer, plug in your Wii and spend some time with your family.

*sigh*

I'll assume you're just trolling here for a lot of these.  

The Windows XP Desktop Switcher power toy was a hack with poor usability and limited functionality - there's a reason it's not supported, any app with slightly unconventional windows will leave them floating all around.

As for Microsoft's backup solutions, they are horribly misguided and poorly designed.  Let's start with what happens when your backup disk fills up (answer: no more backups until you erase the entire thing and start over) and go from there.  (Next stop, why does it take 3 features: "Complete PC" backup, "Backup files", and volume shadow copies (which for some reason are made but not usable unless you buy certain Vista versions), to even attempt to cover the functionality Apple provides in 2 clicks when you plug in a USB drive?  And after that... go ahead, try to tell Vista what folders to back up.  I dare ya.  And there's lots more after that.)

A turd's a turd, and a lot of those implementation you check off that list are turds.  You should have the honesty to admit that when appropriate even if you *really* want to be able to knock off every item on someone's list.  For chrissake, you can hardly call that Microsoft download link to a *beta* screen sharing utility remotely usable or intuitive or discoverable, and it's definitely *not* an operating system feature.

I believe I read about the latest eee PC, and that it has a multi touch track pad, and that the multi touch part worked out-of-the-box  after installing XP on the machine, but I could be mistaken...

::dama

Stockholm, Sweden

"do you seriously spent your free time fishing for lists like this, no matter how inane, and then trashing them?"

I thought the same thing too, until I clicked the magic link and found this drivel at PC World. If Paul had found it at "WaETHorN's LOLZ Blog" or someplace equally obscure, I'd say he was trolling. But PC World should have known better, and Paul was right to call them out.

Having said that, it's typical over-the-top smarmy Thurrott-speak, even if I do reluctantly agree with him on most of the points he makes here.

"1. Yawn? Exposé is a peerless solution for window and app management. Nothing else comes close."

I wouldn't call it peerless. It's just as useless as Flip 3D in Vista.

Seriously, if it was so awesome and useful, then why do none of the 2-3 dozen Mac users I know (myself included), in both the power and average user categories, ever actually use it?

So... Paul's point here (on most items) is that a similar feature can be downloaded from a third party?  I must point out that 90% of windows users never go online and search for third party widows management software, so the point it moot.  

The article is about the features Windows should have had in Vista.  Not what Windows should have made available from third parties.  

That has to be the weakest argument I've ever heard.  Until Paul puts a little more thought into the "average computer user" he will never get it.  He keeps talking about slightly faster processors, slightly larger hard drives, downloadable third party content, user replaceable hardware... but none of this stuff matters.  None of it.

@ jono1

"I wouldn't call it peerless.  It's just as useless as Flip 3D on Vista."

Hahahahahahaha.... LOL!  You've GOT to be kidding me!  Anyone who would say that has either never tried expose', or is in severe denial.  Expose' and Flip 3D are NIGHT AND DAY in terms of usability, practicality, and usefuleness.  

Expose' lets people multi-task in ways that simply can't be done on a windows machine (unless you've downloaded the expose' third party program).  This is a pretty undisputable fact.

"If Paul had found it at....someplace....obscure"

he found it on a .Mac website.

To make things even more hilarious!  If you actually go and read the article, you will see that the writer went out of his way to point out that many of theses 'missing features' are in-fact offered at third party additions to windows.  

Paul's point is meaningless!  That was not the writer's point... his point is that it should be included in the MAIN OS!  You shouldn't have to patch together third party solutions from tens of different companies/locations which may or may not work flawlessly with the rest of the OS to get thes same functionality as Mac OS X.  THAT IS THE POINT!  DO YOU GET IT, PAUL?

I can see how anyone Mac user would not like Expose.  

Open 10 different things on your screen and the best/simplest way to get to a windows under other windows is Expose.

Flipe 3D is a total joke in comparision.

"2. Time Machine -The big difference is that Apple users actually use it and back up."

Previous Versions runs automatically taking snapshots.  While the UI isn't as discoverable as it should be, people are actually using it even though they might not know it.

"3. ISO's - I burn ISOs all the time."

Firstly, you clearly are not an average user.  I rarely have to burn ISO's.  It seems that many are holding to contradictory double standards.  On the one hand, everyone is crowing about how Paul doesn't get the average user, and how the Mac is perfect for the average user, blah, blah, blah.  But then we talk about obscure features that none of the "average" users that I know would even know or care what the h??l I was talking about.  Say ISO to your grandmother and see her reaction.

Since it has been shown that the Mac user base is growing, and that is has been growing in the pure consumer market, those of you that were immune to the "average" user will now start having to deal with them.  The average user will download and install anything.  The cutesy Mac commercials about the Mac never having viruses will make those users feel that they are immune.  Then the malware writers will ramp up targeting the Mac platform and the sh*tstorm starts anew.

Also, it's very possible that MS intended to do this, but could not because of third party application writers that would probably sue them.  And since we know that the EU is such a fan of MS, I'm sure they would *love* for them to put this type of functionality in which would usurp Ahead Software (Nero).

"The article is about the features Windows should have had in Vista. "

Except, once again, you guys are contradicting yourselves.  The "average" computer user certainly doesn't care about POSIX compliance, built in webservers, screen sharing, virtual workspaces, automated screen shots, trackpad gestures or yes, even Expose.

And let's be honest, if MS HAD actually implemented a feature like Expose, what would be the reaction from the Mac people?  Everyone is deriding MS for not putting in a feature, but if they had, they would be deriding them for copying.

"The Windows UI has earned the term Mother-in-Law in our house.  It nags, nags, nags, is wrong,"

Kind of like applications in the dock that bounce constantly?  Like mentioned here:

arstechnica.com/.../13

www.peachpit.com/.../article.aspx

mac.softpedia.com/.../Dock-Detox.shtml

@PaulT

I'll skip the ones I agree with you 100% on...

1. For those that use Expose often in a multi-tasking, multi-app workflow, it's awesome and has no equivolent.  You've often said that you can't go back to XP from Vista because of the niceties you miss.  Expose is something I miss on Windows.  And, no, Flip3D ain't good enough.  If anything, that view is a step BACKWARDS from alt+tab.

2. Agreed on Spaces.  I love it, but you can get in on Windows easily, and it's a real power-user feature.  Very smoothly implemented in Leopard though, I must say.

5. Time machine combines version archiving with drive-failure protection.  That makes it an all-in-one tool for recovering from user error and hardware failure.  I may be wrong here, but doesn't volume shadow copy save the versions on the same drive?  Time Machine is like volume shadow copy + that rollback feature + full drive backup.  In one UI with a very easy to navigate file structure.

So again.  Same functionality, but arguably better executed.  Please correct me if I'm wrong on this one though.

6. ISOs.  Agreed.  If you're smart enough to know about ISOs, you should be able to deal with them on either platform.  Still, OSX relies on disc images for software installers to great effect.  I use encrypted .dmgs to store my personal finance stuff with Knox.  Without system support, these workflows don't tend to happen.  There's alot of benefit in disc image support.

18.  I think we agree on this, but it's still a fair criticism of windows today.  Nearly all OSX apps are installed as simple bundles that appear as a single file for the end user.  Until this feature has parity in implementation and third party support on windows, it'll be a fair point of differentiation.  No pointing to Windows 7 allowed!

(cont...)

9. Saved this for last.

"I guess I'd argue that Microsoft's Windows Marketplace pretty much covers this, especially the amazing (and under-reported) Digital Locker feature."

Let me tell you about my one experience with "Microsoft's" Windows Marketplace.  I'll spoil the ending and say that it's support is the worst I've had since, well, I used Windows.

So I bought Vista on "Microsoft's" Windows Marketplace as a "Full Version" intending to install it on my Mac Pro via Boot Camp.  They had a "Full Version" and an "Upgrade Version" with different prices for each.  You would assume and expect that the full version would not require Windows on the machine in order to be installed, given that it's a Full version and not an upgrade, right?  WRONG!!!!!

This digital download was not a disc ISO, or an executable that could create a disc... it was an installer that required windows to be on the machine already.  That also made clean installing an impossibility.

So I call "Microsofts" Windows Marketplace to find out what the deal is... and wouldn't you know it... it's not run by Microsoft at all but by an ecommerce company called Digital River.  They claimed to have no knowledge of responsibility for the content of the downloads and acted strictly as a store.  Hence my use of quotes thus far.  They pointed me to MS for support.  That call took 40 minutes.

Called Microsoft. It's clearly india. After 45 minutes and one elevation to a supervisor, they pointed me BACK TO DIGITAL RIVER!!!  MS said they don't run the store or support it, even though microsoft.com passes you to it in a way that feels like it's part of the site and it's clearly branded as such.

Called Digital River again. Got more finger pointing for 40 minutes.  This time, a supervisor told me, frustrated himself, that Microsoft had been doing this a lot with their downloads and that they were supposed to be supporting them, not Digital River.  He said to call MS back one more time and that they'd issue me a refund if it can't be resolved.

Call back MS/India.  Get a supervisor.  Explain the whole thing a fourth time.  He seems baffled by this whole "disc image" idea.  He points the finger again.  i give up and get my refund.  I calmly explain my disgust at the lack of responsibility in this process. 30 minutes.

Later that day I get a call from a manager of some kind from Microsoft following up on my experience.  I lay the whole thing out, explain that this was for use on a Mac pro, but could have easily been for an 2nd PC I was building.  He too is baffled by disc images.  He explains how internet software delivery is this new thing.  I explain that nearly all Mac software has been delivered as .dmg files over he net for the past five years.  He's humorously impressed by that.

I thank him for his effort, but do explain that this four hour finger-pointing session was yet another re-affirmation of my choice to go with Apple and have one company take ACTUAL RESPONSIBILITY for their store and products.  He's gracious.  

"Microsoft's" Windows Marketplace is a sham, a lie and a big outsourced heap of support trash.  It's got nothing on Apple.com.  NOTHING.

It's fun to listen to the morons say that something should be included in the OS only to watch them cry foul on the basis of monopolistic and anticompetitive practices once it is.

A lot of these items, by the way, are base on preference so your opinion, dear Apple shills, means as little as opinion of Windows users who like it the Windows way.

But I suppose if you didn't have a forum to express your Apple-can-do-no-wrong opinions and find similar people who would agree, you would have no one to talk to at all, so carry on...

@ibarskiy

"A lot of these items, by the way, are base on preference so your opinion, dear Apple shills, means as little as opinion of Windows users who like it the Windows way."

THE WRITER AT PCWORLD said they were features worthy of being in Vista.

PAUL indicated he thought they were worthy features and indicated that they could in added to Vista through third party downloads.

EVERY USER ON HERE who has used macs and PCs to a considrable extent can verify the usefulness of many of these features...

And yet, you seem to think they are all "apple-can-do-no-wrong" opinions, which "means as little as opinions of windows users who like it the windows way."  Sounds pretty ignorant.... my guess is that you've nver used a modern Mac computer for more than 10 minutes.  Its the only possibly explanation for your comments.

Oh... and screen sharing via iChat is the greatest family support solution ever.  It passes the "easy enough for my mother in law to use" test.

john, I'd argue that your experience with downloading Vista is due to the path of least resistance.  Since we all know that MS holds 90+% of the worlds computer marketshare, and that Apple and Linux fans are not necessarily the best friend to MS, offering the download of Windows that will only install on Windows really makes sense.  You are small percentage of a small percentage.  The bigger small percentage is the Boot Camp/Parallels people.  The second is that you are actually using a legitimate copy of Windows.  Most people on here and elsewhere talk about the lower cost of Mac's saying that they can run Windows, but fail to include the cost of a Windows license in their calculation, making me believe that most people that are actually adventurous enough to install Windows on a Mac are probably using a pirated version.  Additionally, MS doesn't officially support the Boot Camp/Parallels option, so this entire point is kind of moot.  However, I will say that I agree to an extent that they should be downloadable as an ISO so that they can be easily burned by those that have the knowhow.

"PAUL indicated he thought they were worthy features"

Where?  Paul indicated that they could be installed, but he was pretty adamant that this was a bulls**t list, and not entirely worthy.

fivepoint, you also sound pretty ignorant.  You DO present the Mac way as the ONLY way, and that these ways are universally accepted.  They are not.

"and screen sharing via iChat is the greatest family support solution ever."

Being about as snarky as I can be (overdosed on lotsa pills today), but this should be unnecessary since Mac's are supposed to be so incredibly easy to use and work "FLAWLESSLY" every time, right? ;) <-- All forgiving wink, but not really in some ways.

DipshitAdmin,

John's comments hold true for installing Windows on any computer without an OS installed.  It has nothing to do with the fact that he was trying to install it on a MacPro.  The story would still hold true if he was installing it on a homemade ultra-gaming-machine.  

His issue is that the product seem to indicate that there was an 'upgrade path' which would require a previous install of Windows, and a 'fresh install' path which would seem  to not.  This was not the case.  If you would have read his entire post, you would have gotten it.

Dipsht,

You're better than this.  Don't hold water for MS on what's clearly a broken and misleading system.  How can you be anything but appalled by the lack of support for this service?  This story should make you red in the face.  

My point was clearly and obviously the fact that I had a legit problem and was given the PC industry standard run around.  This is why I left the PC world, because this kind of passing the buck on support is total and utter BS. And this was all from "Microsoft's" Windows Marketplace.

The fact that I was on a mac was irrelevant.  I wanted to do a clean install of a download that was being sold as a "full version".  Full Version inherently means that no current version of Windows is required.  Why the hell would I buy a Full version if I already had windows?  Why would they sell something labeled as such if it required it?  I'd clearly just buy an upgrade in that case.  What if I wanted the drive to be wiped during the install to do a clean new system?  No can do here.  And no help at all from effin MS.

This "Full Version" was a lie. If they don't want to sell a full version online, fine.  I don't know why, given how locked down Vista is with WGA, they couldn't have the installer burn a DVD.  Hell, send them out AOL style.

If I have to pay a small premium to run on an Apple and get back that 4 hours of bull, it's worth every penny.  

As for Mac support being unnecessary... I never said that, mr. snark ;)  Computers are complex and every system can be broken or have a bug.  Though I will say that my personal support calls are nearly zero now that my whole family is on macs, compared to hours a month when they were on Windows.  Seriously.  Hours on the phone with family down to minutes.  That's just the reality for me.

You can't help when comcast shuts off port 25 for no reason and I have to change the port for mom remotely.  But ichat makes that take 1 min, instead of 15 walking her through it.

As for this list being BS... that's silly.  Given the level of maturity in desktop OS's, these kinds of user feature implementations are where the differentiation now lies.  And they're also the kinds of things that people use every day.  I personally LOVE expose and spaces.  What lord of computing is keeping tabs on the list of features that are "worthy".  I'd love to meet that guy.

I just read the instructions on downloading and installing Vista from the Digital Locker.  While it is not overly obvious, and it could be stated much better than it is, reading the instructions makes it quite clear that a previous version of Windows must be installed on your computer, and it assumes that it is Windows XP.

A link directly from the product page:

www.windowsmarketplace.com/content.aspx

Under the instructions, the first thing it says is this:

"Find out if your Windows XP-based PC is ready for Windows Vista."

Certainly doesn't say anything about a Mac or Linux installations...

Here it also shows this, that as a long-time user of the Mac, this should ring some alarm bells:

"Go to the directory where you saved these files and double-click the file with the extension ".exe" to launch Windows Vista Setup."

As we know, these files would never be able to run on a non-Windows computer.

fivepoint, "If you would have read *the instructions*, you would have gotten it."

"As for this list being BS"

Never said that directly.  Paul made that assertion in so many words.  And given that most of them were BS, I can stand by that too.  And not because I don't think that something should have x or y feature.  Reread what I said.  If they don't include a feature, they are derided by people like fivepoint and drylight and their ilk.   If MS does include it, they may get sued or have the EU/DOJ breathing down their backs, all the while being derided by the likes of fivepoint and drylight.   If they include it, Redmond is "starting their photocopiers", and people like fivepoint and drylight will deride it.

"Computers are complex and every system can be broken or have a bug"

Jeez, yes I'm totally aware of that.  You might want to tell your friends like drylight about that, though.  They seem to think that everything is flawless.  Hey, I'm not saying this John, others are.  I know that computers are complex, I said it myself earlier.  But if you (not necessarily you directly, just a you in general) want to feed me the rhetoric, I will find it very hard to agree with you.  And that rhetoric starts with Jobs himself, down to cutesy commercials, to the ardent Mac fans that little the web.

Dipsht,

First of all, it's implicit that a download requires a computer and it's fine to assume that computer is Windows.  No problem.  But if you're selling a "Full Version", you better damn well generate a DVD that allows a clean installation.  That's the whole damn point.  I mean, jesus.  This isn't hard stuff here.  If I had windows on the system, I'd be buying an upgrade version at significantly less cost.

Full Version = meant for machines without Windows.  Period.

Regardless, why are you missing my point about the support nightmare?  Please don't go Waethorn on me.  Mac or Linux was irrelevant to this story.  I downloaded the files on my Shuttle PC at the time.  When I called, they didn't even talk to me about what I may or may not have done wrong.  They just wasted four hours of my time on 4 different calls pointing the finger to the other guy.  Meanwhile, this is a site that appears to be from Microsoft itself.  How DARE they point the finger for support to someone else.  My take away from this support experience was simple.  Microsoft and their platform can really go F themselves.  This would never EVER happen with the Apple store.  EVER.

John, I didn't talk about the support nightmare because I wasn't disagreeing with it.  My technical support mind likes to address the real crux of the issue, not poor customer service issues.

"Microsoft and their platform can really go F themselves."

OK, maybe you should just leave then.  I don't want to sound mean, but if you have such negative feelings about MS, I don't know why you are on the SuperSite for Windows?  Yea, I know that Paul covers Apple stuff, but seriously, if you really feel this way about MS, then why come here?

"This would never EVER happen with the Apple store.  EVER."

Had you not used EVER in capitals twice, I would have ignored this bait, but it is just too easy.

Rude Apple Store Manager:

consumerist.com/.../apple-store-manager-calls-autistic-guy-a-freak

Burning MacBook's that don't get fixed:

consumerist.com/.../dear-apple-my-macbook-keeps-trying-to-light-my-house-on-fire-please-replace-it

iMac (yes, that iMac) screens failing just after warranty, told to pony up $700 clams:

consumerist.com/.../oh-no-imac-screens-failing-328803.php

Steve Jobs himself (or his executive staff) has to rescue something from AppleCare hell because they didn't do their job:

consumerist.com/.../steve-jobs-rescues-your-macbook-from-pittsburgh

"The Apple at King of Prussia needs to be called out for its horrible service..."

consumerist.com/.../apple-gave-me-back-the-wrong-laptop

Plus numerous other comments backing it up.

And the BBB seems to agree:

www.dc.bbb.org/report.html

Once again, no company is perfect.  That's all I'm trying to say here.  When using absolutes such as EVER and FLAWLESSLY, that means that it should be true in every case.  It is not.

heh,

Fair reply, my friend.  I got a bit hot headed just recounting that awful experience and I guess I was taking your reply to mean that you were blaming the whole thing on user error.

I was being hyperbolic there.  Still, the finger pointing itself was what I was referring to, not the occasional support problem.  Apple would never point you to an outside company for support of their product the way MS did for the marketplace.  It's the finger-pointing to someone else that drives me up a wall.

I personally have had generally great support from Applecare.  My wife's macbook has been the most problematic mac ever for us (three times to service), but it's always been fast and courteous.  But clearly, some others have had issues.

As for coming here.  I generally stay in the Mac posts, and I read Paul's stuff to stay up on the Windows world.  But as you may have noticed, Paul writes about Apple in his blog ALMOST AS MUCH AS MICROSOFT.

"Mac or Linux was irrelevant to this story."

as is always the case.

"This would never EVER happen with the Apple store.  EVER."

"Had you not used EVER in capitals twice, I would have ignored this bait, but it is just too easy."

ditto for me too.  just like when I ended up stealing Mac customers away from them after trolling around the Jobs, Inc. store in the Eaton Centre when they essentially told customers that nothing was wrong with their non-functioning system.

"there's nothing wrong with your Mac.  just tie a rope around it and toss it over the side of your boat, then it'll function just fine."  - an Apple "genius"

hyperbole abounds with Mackies.  does it make a sour taste in your mouth when a PC user does it back at you?

Waethorn I am going to guess by your vitriol filled, childish, logic-less comments your 16 maybe 17 at the most and work at Best Buy selling PC's preloaded with Vista?  

Hopefully you get good discount, so you can purchase all 3 Zune accessories at a good discount.

why whenever its a story or comment about a mac there is 30+ posts but when its about windows its only 10 or less. Isnt this a site for windows?

*Major feature lacking in Vista is something like the Mac Migration Assistant.  When I got my new Mac two weeks ago I was able to transfer my Apps and 100 Gigs of data using nothing more than a Firewire cable to hook up the Macs.  AFAIK neither XP or Vista lets you do that.

www.apple.com/.../migration.html

Avro, I haven't used the feature myself, so I can't comment on how effective it is, but both XP and Vista have equivalent functionality to the Migration Assistant.

It's called "Easy Transfer" in Vista (suprisingly not Microsoft windows vista easy transfer!!) and I believe it was called "files and settings transfer" in XP

It will work over a network, USB link, external hard disk, or any way you want to .

It doesn't seem to transfer applications, and that is a pretty important difference.

User Accounts

Files and folders

E-mail messages, settings, and contacts

Photos, music, and videos

Windows settings

Program data files and settings

Internet settings

****But it seems not applications

When I use Migration Assistant on my Mac everything goes over to the new Mac or new Hard Drive.

Other things missing from Windows are Home Network set-up and the iLife suite.  I don't believe that Windows has equivalents of these. I know that it is possible to set up a full Home Network with Windows, it is just not easy.

Some people need to go get a hobby.

@Lindy

I'm going to guess by your grammatical errors that your IQ matches your age.

I don't work for a store that unsuccessfully sells Mac's.  I own my own computer store, which more-than-successfully sells exclusively Windows Vista preloaded PC's - all of which now are fully 64-bit too (unlike that steamed up Mac, staring you in the face, that's running a performance-less 32/64-bit hybrid mode).

Sorry, but Zune's aren't available in Canada either.  Sometime soon though.

"Other things missing from Windows are Home Network set-up"

New routers can be configured by Windows Vista, and the network setup guide supports many different types of network connections, such as wireless, wired, and even HPNA.  Windows XP had similar functionality, but Windows Vista also supports a new software-key mechanism where you can store the information for connecting a computer to wireless automatically just by using a USB thumbdrive.  Windows XP's options were also very similar.  There is new router support in Windows Vista that makes it easy also, but I can't remember the name of the technology.

Many new routers have one-touch push-button connection options anyway.

"....and the iLife suite"

Microsoft's answer to that is the Windows Live suite, which has no peer on OS X.  Frankly, I find that Microsoft's approach is reaching more customers, since it exposes their cloud-computing platform, which is a more modern approach to computing.  Windows Vista's Movie Maker HD is still better than iMovie '08 too, since you can't even navigate through a timeline in it, and I dunno what iDVD does to DVD's but the authored structure of a finished DVD is just awful!  Many programs I've used to analyze an iDVD-published DVD found excessive amounts of improper DVD layout structures.  Windows Live Photo Gallery's panoramic photo stitching borrows technology from the Live Labs Photosynth project (anyone catch the Photosynth tech highlight in CSI: NY last night?).  It also gives the user access to Flickr, Live Spaces, and Soapbox for photos and videos.  Of course, it offers the venerable Windows Live Messenger, which is the IM software of choice for the majority of users now too.  There's just more going on there.

@Lindy,

Waethorn isn't a kid, he just posts like one.  His hate of Apple is so over-the-top, it's funny, besides being childish.  Clearly, he feels his white-box PC business is under threat from the Apple store, since he's admitted to trolling there for clients.  Why else have such an infantile, black-and-white view of a legitimate innovator in technology?  Why else would you have so much hate for a product that you don't use?  Why else would you have the arrogance to claim that other people's reasons for like it are wrong?

I certainly don't love Microsoft, but I can admit when they do good stuff, like Media Center or Xbox.  I will also concede that their licensing model got GUI computing out to the masses in a way that Apple in the Jobs-exile year was unable to do.  If you love Windows, that's great.  I'm not gonna crap on your preference the way Waethorn does.  Just don't dump on mine.

But you'll never get anything that resembles intellectual honesty or nuance out of Waethorn regarding Apple.  To him, Apple = Expensive Devil.  Some people are blockheads.  That's just the way things are.

@avro - Hmm, that's a shame, but I guess that's just one of the downsides of windows not having single-file apps like the mac has.

As for setting up a home network, I know XP has this, the new network wizard, and it works well. Even has diagrams to explain to the truly clueless what the various options are.

I haven't see the mac equivalent, but I can't actually imagine how it could be any easier than the windows version.

It is a heck of a lot easier.  With Windows you need additional hardware, the set-up is pretty limited and difficult.  

On Mac OS X you are presented with dialogue box and tick what you want on the network.

DVD or CD Sharing

Screen Sharing

File Sharing

Printer Sharing

Web Sharing

Remote Login

Remote Management

Remote Apple Events

Xgrid Sharing

Internet Sharing

Bluetooth Sharing

Just tick the boxes and it all works.

@Dipsh

"Most people on here and elsewhere talk about the lower cost of Mac's saying that they can run Windows, but fail to include the cost of a Windows license in their calculation, making me believe that most people that are actually adventurous enough to install Windows on a Mac are probably using a pirated version.  Additionally, MS doesn't officially support the Boot Camp/Parallels option, so this entire point is kind of moot. "

Actually MacUsers have a good reputation for paying for their software.  The cost of a Windows installation.  It might be different across the pond but I can get XP or Vista Home Premium here for about the same price as a Wii game, so the cost is not outlandish.  One of the things that you will find with Macs is that we have hundreds of small software houses that thrive because we actually pay for our software.  It is often the case with a Mac Licence that we pay a few £'s more and get a 5 user licence for the whole house.  This is very popular and accounts for about a third of all Leopard sales.

www.guardian.co.uk/.../apple.software

www.microsoft-watch.com/.../leopard_is_all_in_the_family.html

Actually, avro, most of those (that are applicable) are set up by the wizard, and you don't need additional hardware apart from standard networking stuff.

I also maintain that the setup is incredibly easy - just different to the mac.

I regularly configure macs for people as well as windows machines, and for the most part, I wouldn't say either is easier, they're just different.

I was just going by the instructions on XP - which look daunting-  and its requirement for a USB dongle and 2 reports on Business Week.

"REMOVING HEADACHES FROM HOME NETWORKING

As Microsoft toils away on its next-generation operating system (dubbed Windows 7 and due in 2010 or so), it must, of course, go on supporting a wide variety of hardware. But it could move much closer to creating a Mac-ish Windows—even if it means splitting the software into different consumer and corporate versions, as was the case prior to Windows XP.

One goal Microsoft should adopt for the consumer version of Windows 7 is vastly simplified home networking. Home networks are proliferating, but my guess is that most people only use them to share an Internet connection. They'd probably like to share files and printers as well, but Windows often makes this ridiculously difficult, and, oddly enough, even more so in Vista than in XP.

Sharing iTunes libraries is one form of networking that is very simple on both Windows and Macs. The credit goes to an Apple technology called Bonjour, which iTunes uses to locate libraries on the network automatically. Macs use the same technology, which is supported by all major manufacturers, to find and connect to any printers on the network. Windows should use Bonjour to replace its complex and unreliable printer-sharing"

www.businessweek.com/.../b4073000919667.htm

The set-up wizard  looked a bit of a nightmare to me!  (and I like XP)

"Clearly, he feels his white-box PC business is under threat from the Apple store, since he's admitted to trolling there for clients."

nope, just that if Apple can't satisfy their own clientele, who the hell are you to presume that I can't turn them into my own?!

"Why else have such an infantile, black-and-white view of a legitimate innovator in technology?  Why else would you have so much hate for a product that you don't use?  Why else would you have the arrogance to claim that other people's reasons for like it are wrong?"

oh riiiiiight....you mean like this....:  www.apple.com/.../ads

pot meet kettle.

"Windows should use Bonjour to replace its complex and unreliable printer-sharing"

I recommend OneCare as a complete security solution, and printer sharing is one thing that it handles with ease.

John, not a knock against you, but:

"Why else would you have the arrogance to claim that other people's reasons for like it are wrong?"

Compare to fivepoint's rebuttal to another poster in this very thread:

"Hahahahahahaha.... LOL!  You've GOT to be kidding me!  Anyone who would say that has either never tried expose', or is in severe denial."

So I'm not calling you out John, but if you ever wonder why some of us on the *evil* side (their words, not mine) get so involved and have seemingly little tolerance for things like this, it is because of people like fivepoint and *THEIR* insistence that one is superior over the other.

Meaning, that if you are going to call out Waethorn, you have to call out the likes of fivepoint too.  Same problem, just different ideas.

"XP or Vista Home Premium here for about the same price as a Wii game"

Well, unless that is one expensive Wii game, no , we can not get them for those prices.  The only way you can purchase a Windows license for real cheap is if you use the OEM versions of Windows.  However, if you are not a system builder, you are breaking the license agreement, and therefore not entitled to use it.  The BSA would agree with me 100%.

And while I can see that many Mac users may actually buy software, I doubt that the majority of those installing Windows have enough respect for MS to actually legitimately purchase Windows.  There is about as much of chance of that as seeing "a cup of ice water in h*ll."

Ok, I"m not sure about the last part ;), but certainly what I have seen, most are not purchasing a license.

Dipsht,

I understand, believe me.  Nobody knows more about being insulted and assaulted by ignorant and judgmental jerks than long-time Mac users.  For most of the last 10 years, using a mac meant having some IT or machine-room dork snort and laugh and call your computer a toy.  That's not geeks on the internet (which is inherently the most vocal minority of any userbase).  That's people in your office, in your face, calling you out for what you use.  Many of us are still recovering from the "beleaguered" era where the media was expecting Apple to die or exit the computer market any day now.

In fairness to fivepoint, that quote of yours is a response to this BS:

"I wouldn't call it peerless.  It's just as useless as Flip 3D on Vista." - jono1

Fivepoint is responding to a dig.  As some that relying on expose hundreds of times a day, I can attest to the value of the feature.  People that sh1t on features in OSX or Vista without using them are ignorant.  Take note of how many times I've unloaded about Vista or it's features. Almost never.  I just don't use it enough to call something "useless".  We are in a mature age with desktop OS's and it's the little innovations that make the most difference.  I find .mac sync of app preferences to be one of the greatest things ever.  Same with back to my mac.  Yet I know people that would call that "useless".

Fivepoint isn't saying that jono is an idiot for choosing Windows.

That's allot different than Waethorn saying that Macs suck and anyone that gets one is an idiot to pay so much for it.  Waethorn is a one-note hater with pithy, hypocritical punch lines like "pot meet kettle" in place of real argument.  Or pointing to their highly effective advertising as if it's a personal attack.  Yeah, advertising highlights competitor's weaknesses.  That's, um... the point.  Make your product look better than the competitor. And when you've got a competitor with 95% marketshare, it's worth attacking that competitor head-on.  That's not the same as Waethorn's blind, one-sided sludge.

ps - It's pretty sad if you need to order extra security software or services just to get PRINTER SHARING to work well.  Jeez, Vista hasn't improved that yet? That can't be right.

John, I still stand by what I said about fivepoint.  I believe, that just like Waethorn, he is just as much of a troll.  However, if you notice the difference, and I know you did, you actually explain why you feel that way, not just talk drivel and rhetoric.  And we all know that two wrongs don't make a right.

I will say that juno's original talk dissed both Vista and OS X for a feature that has some similarities.  However, fivepoint took it to another level calling in to question the intelligence of the poster, rather than the merits of the feature.  That's a big difference.

BTW, printer sharing is really not that hard even in XP.  Since I speak from the networked side of things, I can easily browse the network and find attached printers, and attach to them. The biggest issue for most is going to be making sure that the permissions and passwords are correct.  A printer needs to be locked down just like any computer resource.  However, a little pet peeve of mine is that I like to shun printing in general.  I may use my printer at home maybe 6 times a year.

@avro - that article overstates the complexity somewhat, I can assure you that it is in fact a pretty simple process.

Anyway, as for the expose thing, it is in my mind clearly superior to flip3D. you can see more of each window, which makes it easier (faster?) to select which one you want.

I've got switcher installed on my vista machines, and use it far more than the built in flip3D - however it has one major drawback over the proper OSX Expose - a program's child windows don't get presented properly.

But, Flip3D isn;t as bad as some would have you believe, I mean the window at the front of the stack is clearly visible, and being able to scroll through them with the mouse wheel is handy - but i do prefer Expose, or it's clones.

However, my favourite method of window management is to use virtual desktops (viewports in Linux, Spaces on a mac), and basically have one app per viewport.

When I started using Beryl(/Compiz-fusion) I thought the desktop cube and unfold effects were cute, but silly. However the more I used them the more useful I found them, especially on a small laptop screen!

"printer sharing is really not that hard even in XP."

It usually isn't if you know how, it's just that OneCare automatically asks you if you want to share printers, and other computers in your OneCare Circle automatically pick up those printers through your subscription and the OneCare installed on those computers will ask you if you want to connect to them.  The process is completely idiot-proof (even pappy John would know how to do it....maybe).

"That's allot different than Waethorn saying that Macs suck and anyone that gets one is an idiot to pay so much for it."

Never called a Mac user an idiot, sorry, but you seem to fit the bill pretty well by claiming that I somehow did.

"People that sh1t on features in OSX or Vista without using them are ignorant."

"Take note of how many times I've unloaded about Vista or it's features. Almost never.  I just don't use it enough to call something "useless"."

"you need to order extra security software or services just to get PRINTER SHARING to work well.  Jeez, Vista hasn't improved that yet?"

By your own definition, you sir, ARE IGNORANT!

"Or pointing to their highly effective advertising as if it's a personal attack.  Yeah, advertising highlights competitor's weaknesses.  That's, um... the point."

And yet Microsoft doesn't do that against Apple....There is no love for Microsoft in Poopertino....except maybe this one time....: www.youtube.com/watch

@Dipsh

A Mac owner adding Windows to his system would come under the terms "System Builder" under European Law.  In contrast to what you are try to put forward many tech journalists have mentioned that Mac Users are probably the biggest market for shop sales of legal Windows OS software.

There is a big difference between not liking certain aspects of Microsoft and pirating the software.  Just yesterday I bought a full version of Office 2008 for my Mac from Microsoft.  Price £17.31 (under $35)  You can buy expensive versions of Microsoft software, but you would be foolish to do so.  Note too that Mac BU at MS always is full of praise for its Mac customers and Mac purchases of Office for Mac contribute 20% of the overall profits for Office.  Looks like we pay for our MS software too!!!!   :-))

As for setting up the network.  I was posting about setting up a home network and having looked at the set-up process on XP it is more difficult than OS X.

permissions, password - sorry you are on the same network, why are these necessary and hard to setup???

@gorath The comments in the articles and podcasts said that one could setup a home network in Windows, but the setup was orientated towards an IT Pro rather than a home user.  Why not just present the user with a list of check boxes (OS X) rather than talk about extra hardware dongles, complicated instructions and wizards.  Personally I don't like wizards as they are time consuming and mask what you are doing.

We had some comparison tests done here by consumer researchers.  They took 5 tech journalists from Windows mags and had them set to work on getting a Windows computer on the Internet.  On the other side was a 9 year old boy with a new Mac.  The Mac got setup in 90 seconds, the Windows guys were still reading the instructions.

We also had a consumer show face off a new Mac User with OS X with an experienced Windows User with Vista.  They were given various tasks to do (WP, photo editing, video editing).  Again the new Mac User finished his tasks quicker than the Windows User.  Both had comparable machines, but the Windows User was hampered by functions being buried in submenus and she actually lost her video files.

www.switchingtomac.com/.../the-gadget-show-mac-vs-pc-who-is-the-winner

@Waethorn

I certainly wouldn't dispute that you could build a good computer at a lower cost than one could buy a Mac off the shelf.  If the chappie did not like Windows he could always load something like Ubuntu on to it.

While that maybe so there are a lot of builders around who don't have the foggiest notion about what they are building and you end up getting a load of junk.  Pay your money and take your chances.

When you are buying off the shelf, it is different.  The price differential between a Mac, a Dell and an HP is not great and a sale can make the difference as to which is better value.

You mention MS OneCare.  That is an extra charge subscription service (about the same price as Windows itself).  Very different from a no cost menu with check boxes which are included with the OS.  This would be like me adding all the features of .Mac and say these are standard with a Mac.  Not without a subscription.

Hehe, I remember the Gadget show show, and as entertaining as it was, it was rather biased. The female presenter's tv persona hardly comes across as the sharpest tool in the box, and you have to love the fact they had to use photoshop on the pc, due to a lack of built in equivalent to iphoto!

But the fact that they concluded that iphoto was "better" than photoshop is, frankly retarded!

Also, it was in reference to Photoshop that they mentioned the "functions being hidden in submenus" which would be the same regardless of what OS it's running on.

I think your comments on the presenter are a bit harsh - and she is rather cute.

en.wikipedia.org/.../Suzi_Perry

Yes on the point of hidden submenus in Photoshop (just finished a University course in digi photography using PE for the Mac) you are right, but this seems to be a certain trait of many Windows apps.

iPhoto is not better than photoshop but it is easier to use.

Mac Users complain constantly that The Gadget Show is biased against the Mac.

"many tech journalists"

Well, I don't trust what they say for the most part.  Give me real statistics that show that please.  In any case, I was going on what *I* have seen, and I made that clear.

In regards to the licensing, I was speaking of the US, but I believe that the terms of the license apply.  Read this document:

oem.microsoft.com/.../FY07_SB_License_English.pdf

The terms clearly state that the software must be installed on a hardware unit using the OPK (OEM Preinstallation Kit).  You must also attach a COA label to the computer.  Under a Boot Camp situation using an OEM license, you are not in compliance with the licensing terms.  End of story.

"permissions, password - sorry you are on the same network, why are these necessary"

Because the assumption is that you are on the Internet, and therefore are at least somewhat discoverable, even if you are behind a router or firewall.  And the average ISP is like the wild west.  In a controlled AD environment, I can easily access this, but I am the admin (It's good to be the King).  Outside of the domain, no way.  In addition, if this is a mobile computer, that makes you even more susceptible when you connect to hotspots, as without permissions or passwords you are providing free access for those that are inclined.  68% of the vulnerabilities reported for OS X can be exploited from remote, making passwords and permissions VERY important.

secunia.com/graph

"you need to order extra security software or services just to get PRINTER SHARING to work well.  Jeez, Vista hasn't improved that yet?"

How is that sh1ting on Vista?  How?  It's asking a question.  You're the one saying you need friggin one-care just to make printer-sharing easy.  That is ridiculous.  The last windows version I have any lengthy personal experience with is 2000 and networking wasn't easy on home network then, but I did get it to work.  I assumed it's improved.  Based on what you're saying, it sounds like the answer is no.  That's a shame.

"It usually isn't if you know how"

This is typical dork hack talk.  It is the job of the software designer to make things easy.  The answer to something easy like printer sharing being hard isn't "you just need to learn".  It's "the software is poorly designed".

But again, I'm making no claims about how hard or easy Vista printer sharing is.  I'm simply asking why additional software from the base OS is needed to make something this trivial (a single checkbox in OSX) work well.

"And yet Microsoft doesn't do that against Apple"

Um... because Microsoft has 95% marketshare.  They'd be morons to attack the minority platform. Talk about bullying.  If Microsoft needs to steal share from Apple in order to grow, they've got a BIG problem.  Apple on the other hand, given the market saturation, must take Windows users and convert them to grow, and they are doing just that at a rate triple the industry's growth rate.  

Seriously, what is wrong with you?  This isn't hard stuff to comprehend.  The PC market is saturated and growing in the single digits per year.  For apple to grow, they need to move people from Windows to Mac.  So they make a campaign comparing Windows PC's with Macs and highlighting the things they believe work better.  

And you take offense at this? That is just stupid and childish. These ads are not a personal attack and only someone who incomprehensibly draws his personal worth from his computing platform would take them as such.  But then again, you with your cowardly, anonymous name have resorted to making fun of my real name as part of your infantile tactics.

You may recall that Microsoft did, however, put up a total lie "switcher" ad on their website back in 2002 that was written, not by an actual switcher from Mac to Windows, but someone in their PR firm.  Plus, they put up a getty image to represent this fake "switcher".  What a joke. Just google "fake windows switcher" if you missed that.

"Based on what you're saying, it sounds like the answer is no.  That's a shame."

again, you presume to know what you're talking about.  in fact, printer sharing in Vista is easy.  the comment was about XP though, since that was the subject matter at hand.

"But then again, you with your cowardly, anonymous name have resorted to making fun of my real name as part of your infantile tactics."

AGAIN you presume to know what you're talking about.  nobody but you claimed it was anonymous.  in fact it isn't.

"You may recall that Microsoft did, however, put up a total lie "switcher" ad on their website back in 2002 that was written, not by an actual switcher from Mac to Windows, but someone in their PR firm.  Plus, they put up a getty image to represent this fake "switcher".  What a joke."

you mean like how the representative "Mac" in the TV commercials, ie. Justin Long, runs his website on Apache webserver?  Oh but it's not running on a Mac though - it's on Linux!!!  LOL!

@Dipsht

Let's see: David Pogue, Walt Mossberg, Dave Raven, Leo Laporte

European Law is very consumer orientated.  You can have hamburgers -MaccyDees sell Beefburgers here.  

Under EU law I would be considered a system builder.  Got some parts from Apple (Mac Pro), installed some more hardware and software and Ubuntu and Windows OS = system builder

As for the Home Network.  OS X presents you with a menu with tick boxes.  XP gives you gobbly gook and a spaghetti like wizard.  I have seen it.  Not good.

I run encryption on my systems and don't use WiFi hotspots.

"again, you presume to know what you're talking about."

- um, actually, I did the precise OPPOSITE and said I don't know about Xp or Vista.  Learn how to read AND comprehend.

"you mean like how the representative "Mac" in the TV commercials, ie. Justin Long, runs his website on Apache webserver?  Oh but it's not running on a Mac though - it's on Linux!!!  LOL!"

Wow.  Nothing like that.  Justin Long is an actor and what he does personally is irrelevant.  He may love Windows.  Who cares?  He's playing a roll in a commercial, not personally endorsing the message.  I suppose you didn't know that OSX ships with Apache and is turned on with a single checkbox, but I won't presume to know much about web hosting.  Only that Apache doesn't rule out the use of OSX.  Regardless, it's an idiotic point.

And how is that even remotely similar to outright fraudulent advertising by Microsoft using a fake story about a switcher and a Getty image as if it's the author?  It's not.

hey, if Waethorn is your name, great.  Doesn't change your infantile tactics with mine.

Avro, by mentioning those tech journalists, you just proved my point.  Pogue and Mossberg are known shills (IMHO).  Show me where they say that OEM licenses can be used.  If they say it, than I certainly believe they are wrong.  As Paul would say, you gotta love Ed Bott.  Here he talks about the Vista upgrade license loophole that isn't (that Paul previously mentioned:  blogs.zdnet.com/Bott

Just because you physically can doesn't mean that you legally can.  The license specifically says that you need to use the OPK and put a COA sticker on your computer.  The license also states that if a provision of the license is against the law of a certain country, the rest of the license still stands.  I'd like for you to provide me with where the EU says you can violate software license terms.

In terms of printer sharing, you mean like this?

img380.imageshack.us/my.php

"I run encryption on my systems and don't use WiFi hotspots."

Hard disk encryption, or WiFi encryption?  If you are talking about WiFi encryption, and you are connected to the Internet, you are susceptible to remote based attacks.  Hard disk encryption is also valid.  However, since you are presumably using your computer, these things run in the user space, and also are susceptible to the same attacks.  Rather than make it easy, setting up simple permissions and a password give you that extra level of protection.  Telling people otherwise is just bad advice.

"Oh but it's not running on a Mac though - it's on Linux!!!"

Certainly doesn't prove anything besides that his hosting company uses the LAMP stack, which many hosting companies do.  It does provide an extremely slight chuckle, though.

Dpshit,

Wait... you mean that Justin Long doesn't server his website from his home computer??!??!  How could that be!  Clearly anyone that likes Macs must therefore be hosting their website from their home system or .mac or else they're a giant hypocrite, right?  Ah, Waethorn logic.  Grasping at straws one post at a time.

@dipsht

I thought printer sharing was pretty straight forward in windows.  i remember having more trouble getting machines to see each other for file sharing in 2000, but that was so long ago.  Why is Waethorn saying Onecare makes it easier?

Pingback from  Web Hosting &raquo; re: 18 Features Windows Should Have (but Doesn&#8217;t) &#8230; Or Does It?

John, I really don't know.  I do absolutely *zero* printer sharing at home.  In my AD environment, it's a totally different ball game, so I can't reasonably compare.

Either way, in 2008, the vaunted paperless office is even further away than it was in the 90's.

"I did the precise OPPOSITE and said I don't know about Xp or Vista."

....and yet you still comment on it.....and yet you claim that i don't have knowledge of Mac's (which I do), and yet you slam me for the same.

"Justin Long is an actor and what he does personally is irrelevant.  He may love Windows.  Who cares?  He's playing a roll in a commercial, not personally endorsing the message."

He is a spokesman and representative of the company - you can't deny that.  If you are, you've just lost all belief that you are an accredited advertiser....You even slam a Microsoft PR manager for doing the same....

"I suppose you didn't know that OSX ships with Apache"

Again, you're assuming here....and you know what they say about people that assume....

"I won't presume to know much about web hosting."

Obviously.

"Only that Apache doesn't rule out the use of OSX."

Actually, OS X installations of Apache identify themselves with a Darwin tag.  His server doesn't.  Hence, Linux.

"Wait... you mean that Justin Long doesn't server his website from his home computer??!??!  How could that be!  Clearly anyone that likes Macs must therefore be hosting their website from their home system or .mac or else they're a giant hypocrite, right?  Ah, Waethorn logic."

No, but likewise, it's not run on an OS X Server either.  I'd say that given the circumstances for which you slam Microsoft, this makes perfect logic, and is a perfect example of a flawed endorsement.

"Grasping at straws one post at a time."

You sure are.

"Why is Waethorn saying Onecare makes it easier?"

Because it proactively asks you if you want to share them, and then on the other systems, asks if you want to connect to them.  You don't even have to navigate to the printer properties to do that - the setup is automatic (except for clicking Yes/No).

Dipsht

Microsoft's interpretation of the law has a record of being a bit off-kilter.  The licence could say anything it wanted to, unfortunately that doesn't make it stand up in law.  If MS only wanted to have hardware companies have OEM software they would restrict their supplies rather than loading up Amazon and any computer warehouse in the world with them.

The tech journalists I referred to spoke of Mac Users being the main buyers of boxed copies of Windows.

Sighs..... MS is damned if it does and damned if it doesn't. They are like Barack Obama right now, in a no win situation here. Microsoft attempts to innovate and they are brought down by anti-trust. Apple innovates and they're hailed as genius, while violating the same laws and illegally bundling software.

I'll be glad when the DOJ oversight is over and then we'll see what Microsoft can do. I'm sure Microsoft could do over a million different things with Windows but they can't for fear of lawsuit and reprisal. Granted, some of the tactics were illegal and Microsoft paid it dues in court. MS has been doing a lot to change that and be the source for interoptability. But for Apple to turn around and do the same thing, since the majority of its apps are first party with no 3rd party competitor is just wrong. I truly do hope that a democrat wins the Presidency, because I think Apple will be answering to a DOJ/Judiciary committee about its bundling practices that violate U.S. law.

@subzero

"Apple innovates and they're hailed as genius, while violating the same laws and illegally bundling software."

You misunderstand the law and the history.  Bundling isn't illegal.  Leveraging a proven monopoly to crush competitors through bundling is illegal.  

Microsoft's biggest offense in my mind wasn't even IE, which they (to their credit) ultimately developed into a superior product than netscape.  Their offense was in twisting the arms of OEM's to do their bidding by threatening to revoke their Windows license.  They forced OEMs to pay a Windows license fee for every PC they shipped, even if it didn't include Windows... effectively destroying the market of OS alternatives.

They punished OEM's for including competitor software.  Go back and review the case against MS.  Everyone in the entire industry hated them from HP and Gateway on down the line.  They even threatened Apple to pull Office from the mac if Apple didn't switch to IE.  Never mind the stunts they pulled with Quicktime. That is evil stuff.

Apple is totally entitled to add whatever features they want with no threat of action or reason for it.  Now, if it becomes known that Apple is bullying Music labels to abandon other services for iTunes and gains true monopoly power with iTunes... than leverages that... that's another story.  But the plain fact is that the content companies hold all the cards.  Look at how they've withheld DRM-free music from iTunes and given it to Amazon.

But first, you have to prove that iTunes is a monopoly, which can't be done.  Everything you can buy in itunes is available elsewhere.

@Waethorn

"He is a spokesman and representative of the company - you can't deny that.  If you are, you've just lost all belief that you are an accredited advertiser....You even slam a Microsoft PR manager for doing the same...."

I most certainly can deny that.  I'm a commercial director for spike.  We hire actors to appear for various commercials all the time.  It is paid, work-for-hire business and is absolutely different from being a personal advocate.

Justin long is playing a "mac".  He's an actor playing a character. He's not presenting himself as himself and giving a testimonial.  He's not saying "Hi, I'm justin long, and I love Apple and use all their stuff for everything I do."  That was the switcher campaign, which Microsoft attempted to copy with that fraudulent testimonial. Again, this isn't hard to understand if you have any degree of logic or intellectual honesty.

Think about the insanity of this argument.  You're asking us to believe that a fraudulent web ad campaign by Microsoft is ethically equivalent to an actor is Apple's ads having his personal website hosted on linux (probably by godaddy or whatever).  This is dork lunacy.

If you could have at least shown me that Justin Long uses a Windows machine, I'd call that irony.  But it's not hypocracy.  There are actors that play the opposite of what they personally believe.  It's acting.  It's the job.  Grow up.

Given this obvious and should-be-easy to grasp fact, the rest of your babbling about his website's server settings is irrelevant and a stupid waste of your time.

Dude, you banter like a child with these ridiculous dork gotchas. "Yeah... well... snort... Justin Long's web server ...snort... runs LINUX... HA!"  Give me a break.

Go back to playing with your BIOS updates for your next client and leave the media commentary to people that have a clue.

Avro, MS doesn't supply those retailers directly.  They are most likely purchasing them through a reseller.

And concerning the letter of the law concerning the license agreement, the EU has been very unfriendly to MS, and I'm sure they would shoot down whatever they could in the license that they didn't feel was right.  I have not seen that.

Anyway, your point is moot, because you are in so many words realizing you are wrong, but still willing to stick it to them to save some shillings.  The truth is that purchasing an OEM license and using it in the method you describe is wrong.  It may physically be allowed, but it is wrong.

John, technically, using the same reasoning you are applying here, the "Windows switcher" is also not a lie, since they are free to use actors and spokespeople and ad firms to create content.  In the same way that Justin Long could be playing the opposite of what they believe, so was this ad, or any ad for that matter.  Apple has certainly been known to stretch the truth in their ads, so it certainly is fair game.

Concerning iTunes, while you are correct that it is not a monopoly, but they do engage in what I would could call anticompetetive behavior similar to a monopoly.  The truth is if you purchased a ton of content through iTunes, and then wanted to buy a non-Apple device, your choices are limited.  You can either download some hack software that will certainly be against the "law", tediously burn them to CD's and then back again on another device, abandon your collection, or go and buy a new iPod to replace your broken one.

Now I know that some Apple supporters will chime in and say that most of the users would want a new iPod anyway, since they are "superior" to the competition and work "FLAWLESSLY" (their words, not mine).  But, you are not left with many good choices.

Since Apple was forced in to using DRM, they could have chose the MS route, and licensed the technology so that others could use the iTunes software to interface with other devices and use their proprietary formats on competing players.  Remember, we're talking about music here, not software.  A person could have just continued buying CD's.

And I don't think that anyone will deny that if MS had the 70% marketshare in a similar iTunes fashion, and were locking in users to devices from them with no easy way out, the outcry would be huge, and the DOJ and EU would have already clamped down on it a while ago.

Pingback from  Ipod  &raquo; Blog Archive   &raquo; re: 18 Features Windows Should Have (but Doesn&#8217;t) &#8230; Or Does It?

Dipsht,

"John, technically, using the same reasoning you are applying here, the "Windows switcher" is also not a lie, since they are free to use actors and spokespeople and ad firms to create content"

I respect you, DA, but lets have some honesty here.  That switcher ad was a lie.  It was being presented as a user generated story in the vein of Apple's switcher ads when in fact it was concocted by Microsoft's PR firm.  That's not acting.  That's lying.  There's a difference.

Justin is playing a personification of the Mac itself.  He's not there as a mac user.  And regardless, Waethorn isn't even claiming that Long is anything but a mac user.  Long may be a hard-core mac fanatic.  Waethorn is calling Apple hypocritical because LONG'S WEBSITE IS HOSTED ON APACHE.  WTF!  This is idiocy!  At least show me that Long is a die-hard windows or linux fan.  That still wouldn't be the same as Microsoft's lie, but it'd be ironic.

This whole argument is ridiculous.  Even if we were to entertain this stupidity as if it had some remote logic... not one Apple ad talks about the value of Macs as a web server platform. SO THERE.  Jesus.

Don't defend stupid thinking just to be a "team player", DA in a platform debate.  You know I'll admit when you catch me on something.  This is not it.

As for the iTunes issue... this is really a DRM and studio issue.  As for the "MS route".  Playsforsure failed, so I don't know why anyone would or should expect Apple to try a similar effort.  If MS couldn't make licensed DRM work, why could Apple?  The real truth is that Apple's iTunes + iPod business model is no different than gaming consoles, subscription services, cellular carriers or... the zune.  Sony had close to 70% share with the PS2. Did that make them a monopoly? Of course not.  

And iTunes DRM for music is easily and legally circumvented by burning CDs.  iTunes CD's even keep your track ID tags on import from it's burns, so it's really super easy.  You're making out to be a hassle when in fact burning CD's is a smart and necessary way of backing up your purchases.  And, again, it's very easy.

I mean, to criticize Apple for itunes when Microsoft just screwed it's MSN Music buyers is pretty bizarre.  At least Apple provides a cross-platform store. And Jobs has always been against DRM for music. None of the WM-DRM stores ever came to the mac.  That wreaks of windows-monopoly maintenance to me (because that was always the point of it).

Video DRM is another matter... but how is this different from Xbox Live, Hulu, Cable, Satelite or any other service offering the exact same content?  It's not.

So the iTunes as monopoly doesn't have a leg to stand on.  The market iTunes is playing in is the media content market, and there's a whole world of totally identical substitutes.  And that is the benchmark for Monopoly.

No disrespect.

This whole switcher ad thing is certainly blown out of proportion, but I will give you some leeway and say that it was a lie.  This happens often with advertising, and MS later apologized for it.

www.news.com/2100-1001-961994.html

John, don't you realize I was agreeing with you?  Justin Long is an actor (not a great one IMHO), and he's doing what he is paid to do.  SO THERE!

"I mean, to criticize Apple for itunes when Microsoft just screwed it's MSN Music buyers is pretty bizarre."

Why?  Did I defend MS in their treatment of MSN Music customers, or with their abandoning their own platform with the Zune?  No.  

I also didn't say Monopoly.  Rather I said anti-competitive and as an extension, anti-consumer.  Notice I also said that music is not software.  Software is fundamentally different, and of course has to be run on a particular platform.  However, music, well, has been around since way before the computer, and has been able to be freely listened to.  And it certainly has not been device specific, at least in terms of format (meaning a CD will play on any CD player, tape, 8 track, whatever).  I also mentioned that DRM was forced on Apple and other manufacturers, so they didn't have much choice.

Burning CD's?  Are you serious?  So let's say that own one of these 80 GB iPod's, and you have 10,000 songs to burn.  By my calculation, that is over 750 CD's.  Is that easy to burn?  What if you are the "average" consumer and just purchase music and want to switch to another player.  How long will this 750 CD's take to burn, and wouldn't that be a deterrent to switching to another player?  Might as well just have bought the CD in the first place and avoided the issue.  And while these are still DRM infested songs, at least if Apple did license the software, the user would be able to make that switch.  You mention bullying of OEM's as something to dislike.  Isn't this a bullying of the consumer, which I would say is worse?  And yes, I know, extreme example.  And yes, I also know that other DRM players will have the same issues, so don't take this as letting them slide.  We got off on this iTunes thing, so I'm addressing that.

"None of the WM-DRM stores ever came to the mac.  That wreaks of windows-monopoly maintenance "

Marketshare and the path of least resistance, my friend.  Just wasn't worth it.  And if I was in the marketing department, I would certainly say that the Mac market would be very tough to crack, since they are certainly very loyal.  It would be a waste of time, and would most likely garner ill regard.  Hey, MS offered the license, but I certainly wouldn't be one to take that bait.

Anyway, this does become more and more irrelevant with the Amazon MP3 store in play.  I really hope that they become hugely successful, and the RIAA can go back under the rock they came from.  In the meantime, I'll be using my phone as an MP3 player and listen to Sirius in the car and continue to burn MP3 CD's, even though I did at one time get a free iPod and could have gotten an iPod Integration Kit.

Anywho, I'm done with this topic.  I'll let you have the last word if you like, but I'm "Audi".

PS, I've been noticing a trend with these trackbacks, and these spam blogs seem to just troll blogs for keywords and automatically add them.

Dipsht,

Don't mistake my long reply for offense.  I know you get the difference between dishonest marketing and Waethorn's non-issue web-host BS. This is a good back and forth. Far more interesting than "pot meet ket" style garbage that comes from Waethorn.  My "SO THERE" was directed more at him.  

"Rather I said anti-competitive and as an extension, anti-consumer."

Is it anti-consumer that Xbox 360 games can only play on the 360?  Apple's not out to DRM content.  They don't care.  They have been the sole tech giant to stand up to the RIAA and fight for lower prices for consumers, better terms and ultimately no DRM.  The RIAA is the real illegal cartel, and Apple has been on the side of consumers against their gouging hysteria.  

Microsoft, on the other hand, was happily allowing any level of DRM restrictions they wanted and rolling over to give them a cut of the hardware sales to boot.  But that's the difference between Apple and Microsoft.  Apple is a consumer company.  Microsoft is a company that sells to businesses.  Microsoft's instinct is to please businesses like the RIAA.  Apple has always had a direct relationship with consumers.

"So let's say that own one of these 80 GB iPod's, and you have 10,000 songs to burn."

Let's say we stick to actual reality instead of theory and fantasy.  4 billion songs divided by 130 million ipods is an average of 30 songs per ipod.  Let's triple that to 90, assuming the userbase is one third of the total sales.  That's 5 or 6 CDs. And you'd be doing that as you buy them over time.  This is, after all, what Paul recommended doing and why he claimed that MSN screwing it's customers was no big deal.

"And as I so often advised people to do at the time, I always burned those purchased tracks to CD and then ripped them back in an unprotected MP3 format" - Paul on 4-24

"Marketshare and the path of least resistance, my friend.  Just wasn't worth it"

That's plain wrong.  Music downloads is a purely consumer market and Apple has 10 to 20% of the US consumer market.  Mac users also buy more music and software that PC users.  This is facts that any reasonable market research would have revealed instantly.  But windows media was always about propping up the Windows monopoly.  It was more of the same "moat" strategy, which is to build a wider and deeper moat around the castle that is the windows monopoly cash cow.   Except that it failed because it sucked. Sync problems.  Poor integration.  Bad players.  Failure.  Now Microsoft has copied Apple's business model with the Zune, which hasn't taken a point from iPod marketshare, but instead has feasted on the corpse of former partners like iRiver and Creative. That's what you get when you build your business on Windows moat technology.

I know you didn't defend the Zune.  I'm not bashing it either.  It's a nice player.  Too bad it's just being allowed to whither on the vine without and real improvements or support.  Competition is good.  MS just can't stay focused enough to execute.

Peace brother.  I think we see more eye-to-eye than... meets the eye?

"Even if we were to entertain this stupidity as if it had some remote logic... not one Apple ad talks about the value of Macs as a web server platform. SO THERE.  Jesus."

Calling me "childish" and the using terms like "SO THERE" with religious aftertones just shows that you can't argue against my statement.  Arguing with you consists of this:

"OH NOES!  Someone is criticizing Mac."  

<insert faulty response>

"OH NOES!  My pro-Mac comment was torn apart."

*backpeddle* *backpeddle*

etc.

Waethorn spewed, "Never called a Mac user an idiot, sorry".

Dude, you're a troll and a liar. You've used the term several times, and once referred to me as a "queen ***". Don't try to take the high road. It doesn't suit you. Go back to the gutter from where you crawled.

"Dude, you're a troll and a liar. You've used the term several times"

go ahead and try to prove it.  you are the master of the chat history here after all.  i would've expected proof with a blatant comment like that.

Waethorn spews: "I'm going to guess by your grammatical errors that your IQ matches your age. I don't work for a store that unsuccessfully sells Mac's. "

*chortle*

A criticism of a grammatical error followed by...A GRAMMATICAL ERROR.

Waethorn, you're an endless source of amusement.

"go ahead and try to prove it."

OK...Scroll down to the last comment on page one, Wae:

www.windowsitsecurity.com/.../google-cuts-staff-in-doubleclick-merger.html

I'll be expecting my apology any day.

"I'll be expecting my apology any day."

I wasn't calling Mac users idiots - just you.

Keep trying though.

Wae, I know I shouldn't wrestle a muddy pig like you, but you did say you never called "a Mac user an idiot". And  you did (as I just showed). You used the singular, not me. You've also hurled other invectives over time, and now you try to take the high road? It doesn't work, sorry.

"It doesn't work, sorry."

that's right - your argument doesn't.  i accept your apology.

LOL.

Great work lotsamystuff.  You've demonstrated Waethorn's amazing block-headedness and hypocrisy for even the most casual onlooker to enjoy.  And yet he still claims "victory" in an argument he plainly and objectively lost.

Waethorn, you're the worst.  What a stubborn, childish buffoon.  Repeating "your argument doesn't hold up" isn't actually arguing.  It's sticking your fingers in your childish virtual ears and screaming "I CAN'T HEAR YOUR, I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!".  You and my 3 year son could have some great debates with each other.

You would claim 2 + 2 = 5, then when demonstrated the contrary with a calculator, simply insult the other person or change topic or spew some inane garbage like "pot meet kettle".  Seriously.  You deny actual text that's right here on the page in black and white.  It's stunning.  And ridiculous.  But that's the mind of stubborn, know-it-all, platform zealot.

Any discussion with you always heads down the same road to the gutter, regardless of who's arguing with you because you can't debate with dispassionate logic and are unable or willing to stay on topic or acknowledge when you've been proven wrong (see above "idiot" quotes).

Re:  losta

By digging into the chat history (as I told you to) you just proved my original point that you are a troll, and an idiot.

Re:  pap

By backing up losta, you just proved that the Mackie peanut gallery doesn't have anything better to do here.

I call 'em like I see 'em.  And he won that one. No contest.

"I call 'em like I see 'em.  And he won that one. No contest."

thanks.  that proves several points i've made already about Mackie's too.

Here's a few more to add to that list for the Mac.

Apple's support beats the best in the PC world by almost 20 points for customer service.  They also took top position in most categories except the budget ones.

weblogs.baltimoresun.com/.../macs_beat_all_in_consumer_repo.html

"Overall, this year’s CR report card looks as more favorably upon the Mac than ever. That’s the sort of positive reinforcement that could encourage more potential Windows users to switch in the months ahead, maintaining the Mac’s market share growth momentum."

Pingback from  Should I Give Paul Thurrott This Much Attention? &laquo; The Legend Of Vincent Tremblay

"That’s the sort of positive reinforcement that could encourage more potential Windows users to switch in the months ahead, maintaining the Mac’s market share growth momentum."

what growth momentum?  Mac share DROPPED in the last couple months!!!

HAHA!  keep seeing rainbows in those storm clouds though.

@John

The Sherman Antitrust Act states... "Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal". The Act also provides: "Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony."

I'm afraid you got the United States vs Microsoft anti-trust suit wrong. You can re-read the legal case if you wish. The core issue of the anti-trust suit was the illegal bundling of Internet Explorer to the Microsoft Windows browser. The secondary issue was what you stated, MS was twisting the arms of OEM's to do their bidding by threatening to revoke their Windows license. The original findings of fact was never overturned in court. The settlement was brokered by DOJ and Microsoft so that MS could avoid being broken up. The original Findings of Fact would have most likely unbundled I.E. from Windows and broken the company into 2 separate entities.

However, the bundling issue for Apple isn't just iPod and iTunes together. Its also locking out other competing devices from accessing the iTunes Store. Also, other music stores are locked out from accessing the iPod. This makes Apple the sole source of all media for the device. Yet I can pick up any generic media playing device and access multiple stores. Now that Apple is the number one digital music store in the United States and accounts for 70 percent of the world's online digital music sales.

Also, iTunes is bundled with Quicktime, which as you know is an Apple product. Therefore you have two Apple software's, an Apple Store, and an Apple device all bundled together without any true competitor. Even Microsoft's Zune player is at a severe disadvantage along with every other player on the market. It doesn't matter that other stores and devices are out there. They cannot directly compete fairly to the iPod and iTunes service. Nor can customers take their iPod to a competitor. This violates the spirit of the free market enterprise of U.S. commerce law.

There are several lawsuits pending in U.S. courts based upon this interpritation of the Sherman Act. None of which has been resolved yet by a court or Apple. I n my opinion and many others, I do believe based upon the original Findings of Fact in the United States vs. Microsoft case, that Apple is in violation of the Sherman Act and the Clayton Act.

Now if there was a DOJ that would handle the case properly, Apple would be in serious legal trouble. Now if Apple were to open both the iPod and the iTunes store up to competition and devices, they could avoid a costly legal case.

Pingback from  Apple &raquo; re: 18 Features Windows Should Have (but Doesn&#8217;t) &#8230; Or Does It?

Pingback from  Explorer &raquo; re: 18 Features Windows Should Have (but Doesn&#8217;t) &#8230; Or Does It?

Pingback from  Microsoft  &raquo; Blog Archive   &raquo; re: 18 Features Windows Should Have (but Doesn&#8217;t) &#8230; Or Does It?

Pingback from  The 18: Features Windows Can or Already Has &laquo; Boxtech Blog

Pingback from  The 18: Features Windows Can or Already Has &laquo; Boxtech Blog

Pingback from  The 18: Features Windows Can or Already Has - Part 2 &laquo; Boxtech Blog

Pingback from  storey story

Pingback from  pcworld

Pingback from  installed windows xp pro with a coa key code that doesn t work now how do i find one that will work

Pingback from  installed windows xp pro with a coa key code that doesn t work now what

Pingback from  pcworld com