SuperSite Blog

Pingback from  Twitter Trackbacks for                 How We Really Designed the Look and Feel of Windows 7 - SuperSite Blog         [winsupersite.com]        on Topsy.com

Besides the Superbar, what else is new to Windows 7 that is copied from OSX?

It's probably more accurate to say it is "inspired" by the dock in osx. To say it is a copy would mean that it actually "looks" like the dock. And it doesn't. And it's way better in my opinion.

Whenever I use the dock in OS X I feel like I am missing something because I want window previews and jump lists. Maybe Apple will add that to OSX *** Cat

No. The taskbar is fundamentally different from the Dock. It's YOU that hasn't been paying attention, Thurrott. The taskbar is designed as an APPLICATION launcher and switcher, with the start button and notification area thrown in as well. In this respect, it is unchanged from previous Windows versions. By comparison, the Dock has all sorts of stuff in it - folders, the Trash, minimised windows separate from launcher icons. It's a mess.

The Windows 7 feature allowing you to pin folders to the Explorer icon, but not have them directly on the taskbar, is one you often complain about, but is, in fact, entirely by design. It is inkeeping with the APPLICATION-CENTRIC, not EVERYTHING/NOTHING-CENTRIC like the dock, philosophy of the taskbar.

And anyone who thinks otherwise just isn't paying attention.

Let's face it, copying (or adopting and improving) has been going on in both directions for many years.

With a foot in both camps (having recently moved one of them into the Windows camp), I can say I appreciate each company adopting good things about what the other does.

At the moment, I prefer the Win 7 task bar to the Snow Leopard dock. And I prefer each of them to its respective predecessor.

I went back to the quicklaunch bar. I don't keep icons on the desktop and like having having these little tiny ones right where I want them.

It's pretty clear that when Microsoft releases something that is very like something previously done by Apple, it is NOT copying.  Whereas when Apple releases something that is very like something previously done by Microsoft, it IS copying.

And vice versa.

In the grand scheme of things does it really matter?

I can't run my Windows apps on OS X and I can't buy a Mac for less than a grand.

If we were talking hammers then a Mac would be the cool shiny fully automatic hammers that cost 3 - 4 times more than my trusty hammer that I use every day (as illustrated by HP's deal where you get 3 computers and a router for the cost of a Mac).  It would need specialized nails and while I could get an adaptor (think Parallels or some other virtualization software) it kind of defeats the purpose of having the cool shiny automatic hammer, doesn’t it?   And while the cool shiny hammer is really cool (and yes that does count for something), and I get bragging rights for just having it, at the end of the day it’s still just a hammer.

Pingback from  Windows 7 Blog » How We Really Designed the Look and Feel of Windows 7

wow Thurrott, your army is turning on you in here.

One thing that I find odd is that with the new taskbar UI in Windows 7, Microsoft is focusing on a solely graphical representation for launching and active applications over previous Windows versions which had hybrid styles (desktop icons did and still have program names, as did the running state, but the emphasis for users is now on the taskbar).  However, with the Windows Live applications, once you're in the program, the emphasis is on the content within that application, hence no toolbar icons, and minimal UI graphics.

So the only fancy graphics that an app should carry is with the launch icon?

Did anybody else pick that up?

What would that mean for the future of graphical application UI's and the integration of them within the operating system?

Paul,

Dude, I'm sure you know more about Windows that I do, it's one of the reasons why I like your site, but to use your own words: Anyone who believes that the Windows 7 taskbar is anything other than a copy of the Mac OS X Dock just isn't paying attention.

I posted a PDC session sometime ago on the history of the Taskbar. In the video, you can see that Windows had a "Superbar"-like taskbar previous to Windows 7

The Windows 7 Taskbar: blogs.msdn.com/.../happy-anniversary-windows-on-the-evolution-of-the-taskbar.aspx

Welcome to the Windows 7 Desktop: channel9.msdn.com/.../PC24

I know you hate the "Superbar," and that's probably influencing your view that it copied the Dock in OS X, but is not the case.

I think it's awful when high-level employees pull stuff out of thin air.

So, just to have a reference point, the quote generating all the attention is,

"The interesting thing is, [Windows 7] is basically the next version of Vista... 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."

Wow. Windows 7 is a Vista SP with a new look copied from OS X. Ouch.

Pingback from  Twitter Trackbacks for                 How We Really Designed the Look and Feel of Windows 7 - SuperSite Blog         [winsupersite.com]        on Topsy.com

"If we were talking hammers then a Mac would be the cool shiny fully automatic hammers that cost 3 - 4 times more than my trusty hammer that I use every day"

Nah.  It'd be that aluminum flashlight with the extra long battery life that Apple advertises as "the greenest", while being solar-powered.

This post was mentioned on Twitter by thurrott: How We Really Designed the Look and Feel of Windows 7: While the Mac community has been chortling over a suppos.. http://bit.ly/40ULp0

@qmt49:

"The taskbar is designed as an APPLICATION launcher and switcher, with the start button and notification area thrown in as well....By comparison, the Dock has all sorts of stuff in it - folders, the Trash, minimised windows separate from launcher icons. It's a mess."

Folders (or "stacks" now) on the Dock are clearly separated from applications by a divider. Trash is simply another folder, and it's positioned next to other folders. In Snow Leopard, windows can be minimized to their application icon by setting a preference. So the Dock is essentially applications and folders.

In contrast, the Windows Taskbar has the Start Menu (an entire system's worth of data types), an application launcher/switcher, and a hybrid system notification/background process list. That's hardly "application-centric."

Which you prefer is obviously up to you, but your logic here is faulty.

gfryesc1

"wow Thurrott, your army is turning on you in here."

I know it seems odd to you but what you're seeing is people actually thinking and having their own opinions rather than waiting for "glorious leader" to tell them what to think and say.

I don't believe the guy was specifically talking about the taskbar either, although I also don't believe that Windows 7 has much more graphical polish over Vista.  In fact, the system icons in the tray notification area are downright ugly, and don't fit within the context of the taskbar, which only otherwise contains very nice looking elements.  You can design very nice looking illustrated elements with minimal palettes so that scaling the object to a small size fits, you know.  The black and white micro icons just don't look good IMO.

The colour palette in 7 is slightly more vivid than Vista, but I would imagine that's also so that it matches those glorious HDR photos that they have for wallpapers.

I would still prefer that a window titlebar and the taskbar go black and opaque when a window is maximized.  Not sure about how you'd work out the logistics of changing it when a user uses Aero Peek though.

I dunno if it's just me or not, but my installation of Excel doesn't support the Aero Snap option for undoing  maximize.  That is, I can drag by the titlebar to the top of the screen to maximize, but I can't subsequently pull it away to restore it.  It doesn't happen in Word, Outlook, or Publisher.  I haven't tried it on another machine either.

"I can't run my Windows apps on OS X and I can't buy a Mac for less than a grand. "

If you're not willing to spend a grand, they don't want you.  It's an exclusive club.  Spend a lot, get a lot.

Waethorn: "In fact, the system icons in the tray notification area are downright ugly, and don't fit within the context of the taskbar, which only otherwise contains very nice looking elements"

Ugly, yes, but much easier to "read".  I always had a problem with the XP battery and network icons.

"I dunno if it's just me or not, but my installation of Excel doesn't support the Aero Snap option for undoing  maximize."

Neither does Word on my computer.  OneNote supports it, however.

Sorry, I meant sound and network icons.  The battery icon was fine.

Thanks for some honesty, Paul. Anyone that thinks the two companies don't "borrow" extensively from each other is delusional (i.e., "Microsoft Invented Everything" Mikey and WaeWrong). It's good for both companies and, in the end, great for the consumer. Long may they both run (MS and Apple, not Mikey and Wae. Just to clarify).

"Spend a lot, get a lot."

The first "lot" is a bigger "lot" when you get the same-sized second "lot" when you buy a PC.

That's a lot of lots

"Anyone that thinks the two companies don't "borrow" extensively from each other is delusional "

If that's your apology for recognizing that Apple "borrowed" it from Microsoft Windows 1.0, then so be it.

@de Silentio

Thanks, a lot.

Sorry, but the Taskbar is a copy of the Dock.

Yes, it has some changes, many of which are improvements over the OS X Dock, but it is still a copy.

Even jumplists are copy of the menu that you can get when clicking on an application in the Dock.  Jumplists certainly offer more options when the application is not currently open, taking that concept on step further, but they are basically the same thing.  I'm sure Apple could easily incorporate additional items into their Dock menus as well very easily by using the plists to get stuff like most recent documents, etc.  

The thumbnail windows are really the same idea as the minimized windows, just larger.  Even Apple has moved them to the app's icon in the expose view.

Really...look at what was added to the Taskbar and you will see things that have been in the Dock for years.

Large Icons

Progress Indicators

Running and non-running Applications

Live windows (running movies, etc.)

How you can claim its not a copy of the Dock is beyond me.  The similarities are just to striking.

Waethorn said:

"if that's your apology for recognizing that Apple "borrowed" it from Microsoft Windows 1.0, then so be it."

Well actually Next "borrowed" it from Windows 1.0, not Apple.  

I have the same problem with excel as well. As for the windows new "superbar" You could have used something similar in Vista, XP, or any other version of Windows basically, it has been here for a while it is just now at the front.

And yes the Windows Taskbar is Application Driven.

Before Win 7 and Quick launch it was used as a way to switch between apps quickly and easily, with Quick launch once could now launch an App from the task bar and then be able to sort it. In Win 7 they just combined the window's control of the Task bar with the application launching of quck launch which I find quite nice.

yoshipod

"Even jumplists are copy of the menu that you can get when clicking on an application in the Dock."

Wow. That's certainly rewriting history to an amazing degree.

Jumplists are an enhancement of the right-click context menus that have been around in that form for over a decade in Windows.

Even moreso, the "click a mouse button and get a pop-up context menu" should be really credited to Smalltalk-72 which not only predates OS X, and predates Macintosh but predates Apple's existance as a company by five years.

I guess if all you ever see is one system you think the first time you saw it was the first time it existed.

yoshipod

"Well actually Next "borrowed" it from Windows 1.0, not Apple."

"the Taskbar is a copy of the Dock"

So you're saying that the taskbar (Windows 7) is a copy of a copy (Mac OS X) of a copy (NeXT) of part of the UI of Windows 1.

Therefore you're saying that Microsoft Windows has features that were copied from Microsoft Windows.

And that's news?

no galos, 'dear leader' in this case is Microsoft.  Paul has so ingrained the Microsoft is god phenomenon that now it's biting him...  kinda like frankenstein's monster that turns back on its creator.  

and yes I know where your opinion comes from, in the form of signed checks from Microsoft itself.  I know what kind of kool aid you guys drink because I know several employees.  I'm surere Simon Aldous got a heaping refill of it today.

I'm sure

Mike you are certainly correct.  

I meant that in the context of integrating contextual menus into the Dock/Taskbar beyond the simple open/close functionality. Developers could put additional functionality into their dock menus such as being able to control itunes play/pause/next track etc. from the dock.   I don't recall seeing that before Windows 7.  Just booted up Vista, opened Media player and saw nothing beyond open/close/minimize.

Since this was about a comparison about the Dock and Taskbar, I assumed that was implied.  My bad for not being specific enough.

gfryesc1

So in your view a wide range of opinions including out and out disagreement is proof of centrally controlled uniformity of thought and practically proof that all of them are being paid off (both to agree and disagree)

Wow. Orwell would be proud.

But, hey, you've met some Microsoft employees. I'm sure everyone reading is impressed.

"and yes I know where your opinion comes from, in the form of signed checks from Microsoft itself."

No, Microsoft fired him, remember? As "guruguru" put it on Paul's other site, they removed some "excess fat and middle managers which don't do anything but go home with fat checks after reading outlook emails and going to meetings each day."

It's great, though, because it leaves Mikey with more time to tell us how wonderful the company that ripped his paycheck out of his hands is. Stockholm Syndrome, anyone?

"If that's your apology for recognizing that Apple "borrowed" it from Microsoft Windows 1.0, then so be it."

The only apology needed is from Microsoft for foisting Windows 1.0 on an unsuspecting world. I actually used that software (well, as much as anyone could "use" that POS), and it was an abomination. Tandy DeskMate was even better.

At any rate, Apple has a patent on the Dock, so your silly argument is moot.

www.maclife.com/.../leggo_my_dock_oh_apple_patents_dock

yoshipod

The ability to add context menus to all items has been around in Windows for a very long time. For example, notification items (the stuff on the right side of the taskbar by the clock) have typically used context menus as their primary UI.

What wasn't commonly done prior to Windows 7 was adding non-windowing, contextual tasks to the icon of a running program which is hardly a major change since those icons had system context menus (windowing) and non-running programs had other context menus.

mike, there isn't a wide range of opinions here.  the Microsoft camp here says 'no thurrott you're nuts, Microsoft is incapable of copying anyone'.  and the apple camp is 'see, told you so'.  I was just saying it was nice to see you softies rail against paul for once.  just an observation.

I would say Orwell would be proud...  of Microsoft [and IBM before them] and of you personally.  You're a cog in that machine that runs 95% of the world's computer and the fact that you bring up Orwell to attack me is some serious circular logic.  The ministry of truth would be happy to have you.

Mike.

I certainly agree with what you are saying, and maybe it was the next logical extension of the contextual menu.  Apple seemed to think so back when OS X first shipped.

But once Microsoft added that functionality to appear directly by clicking on the large icon that sits in a bar on the bottom of the screen, it makes it look like a copy of the Dock.

I must not be paying attention as Paul claims, because based on my original post,the Task Bar looks like a copy of the Dock.

"Well actually Next "borrowed" it from Windows 1.0, not Apple."

And as you all know, OS X was derived from NeXTStep, which Apple acquired when they bought back Jobs.  Apology accepted.  Case closed.  Thanks for playing.  Collect your parting gifts at the door.

"I actually used that software (well, as much as anyone could "use" that POS), and it was an abomination. Tandy DeskMate was even better."

Sorry, but I've used EVERY version of Tandy Deskmate ever released, and I can say you are SO. DEAD. WRONG.  Thanks for your non-insight into something you know nothing about though.

Waethorn,

Didn't MS pretty much rip off the macintosh UI when Apple handed them the source code?  Was a huge lawsuit that went MS's way due to some technicality or something?

Case closed, thanks for playing, collect your parting gifts at the door.

So obnoxious.

Who copied who...

Compositing desktops?

Who had it first?  Mac OSX?  or Windows?

Multi-touch consumer devices?  Apple?  MS?

Wasethorn?  Mike?

Lotsa,

Your opinion is SO. DEAD. WRONG.

Waethorn said so.

panache

"Didn't MS pretty much rip off the macintosh UI when Apple handed them the source code? "

Nope. The case was over "look and feel" and pretty much ended when most of the "look and feel" of both products (Windows 3 and Macintosh Finder) were essentially copies of Xerox' prior work and the rest had been legally licensed. As Xerox said when testifying on behalf of Microsoft in the case, "Apple got it from Xerox and Microsoft got it from Xerox so Apple's claim here is that they stole it from us first?"

At the time it wasn't quite as silly as it sounds since "look and feel" wasn't as solid a legal property as it is now when Linux distros can be virtual clones of older Windows UI designs without fear of litigation.

As you said, "Case closed, thanks for playing, collect your parting gifts at the door."

Pingback from  How We Really Designed the Look and Feel of Windows 7 | Windows Seven 7

panache

Compositing desktops: First publicly shown by Microsoft, first shipped by Apple

Multi-touch consumer devices? Depends on how you choose to define "consumer device" since multitouch devices predate the personal computer. Apple DID ship the multitouch interface code they bought from a 3rd party (Apple did not invent their tech) in iPhone after Microsoft shipped the multitouch code that Microsoft Research invented in Surface. Both are sold to consumers (one is "mass market" one is "vertical market") .

Right Mike,

You proved my point...so if MS "legally" licenses something, it's not copying?  Even if it looks very similar and functions very similar?

Meanwhile, in your own admission MS was 3rd to the game.

That's right Mike, thanks for playing....collect your...whatever.

Mike,

Compositing desktop was first shown by MS...but they were last to get it implemented, even behind Linux?  Show me.

Mike.....Repeat after me

"Apple had multi-touch devices in the hands of millions of consumers, earning lots of profits years before MS had any shipping multi-touch products, for corporate or consumer use"

It won't hurt....trust me.

"The post industry changed in 1993 when desktop compositing made its debut. At the time, the introduction of a $700 program called After Effects by tiny Providence, Rhode Island-based CoSA didn't seem like a revolution in the making. But the idea of deploying inexpensive compositing software on unremarkable workstations soon started to make sense. Good-quality compositing was no longer the sole realm of film-based optical-effects houses or those with expensive black-box workstations."

digitalcontentproducer.com/.../video_desktop_compositings_next

When did Microsoft "first publicly show" desktop compositing...Mike?

panache

I've posted many, many times on here how I wish Apple were still an innovative company like they were when they did Lisa and LaserWriter and didn't think "innovation" was picking next year's fashionable color.

But, if it makes you feel better, yes, Lisa and Macintosh shipped before Windows 1.0x. And now you can brag that through their acquisition of NeXT, Apple finally has used the "icon at the bottom of the screen to represent a running application" visual metaphor that originated with Windows 1.0x.

Mike,

That last comment was way off base, and didn't address a single point I was making.

Well done.

Believe me, I don't feel the need to brag about Apple or MS's success, or deride the other on their failures, like you and many on others on this site do.

I find it annoying and hypocritical that you and many others live in glass houses, but have no problems throwing stones.

panache

The link you have shows you don't understand the terms but know how to do a word search.

"Desktop compositing" in the context of your article is "doing compositing work ON at destop computer"

What we're talking about now with "desktop compositing" is "using compositing to render the desktop of a computer"

As for when Windows was first show using desktop compositing (in the modern sense) there are several dates.

The November 2002 build leaked and that was when it first became public (if not officially confirmed) knowledge.

The first official external showing was the partner build in February 2003

The first real "open to anybody" public showing was at WinHEC 2003 in May 2003.

Lol @ TT.

After that, I didn't bother to read: this is probably a 'microsoft saves the world'-post by a guy who is on microsoft paylist to spread blatant lies about their god software company.

But on a positive note: I just did make five bucks because I made a bet stating that a certain wacko named Mike Galos would be a prominent poster (i.e > 5) in this topic.

Thanks Galos, for not letting me down and earning me a few bucks on the side.

But Microsoft has been and always will be a SOFTWARE COPYING COMPANY THAT WILL MARKET YOU SILLY WITH CLAIMS THAT THEY INVENTED IT ALL.

Only certified fruit cakes will believe that. I mentioned one of those fruit cakes a few lines earlier.

Mike....

If the first time desktop compositing was shown by Microsoft as a demo was in November 2002 how does that predate the shipment of OS X in March of 2001?

I must be missing something here.

Are you referring to hardware accelerated desktop compositing?  Because OS x 10.0 & 10.1 had software compositing, not hardware.

Hardware accelerated desktop compositing did not ship in OS X until 10.2 which was not released until August of 2002, which is once again before November 2002.

yoshipod

What we're talking about is actually "hardware assisted 3D desktop compositing"

I may be wrong but if I remember it was only partly implemented in Mac OS X 10.2 in August 2002, and didn't get all of its API completed until 10.3 in October 2003.

I'm not at tlat level of expertise on Apple APIs so if I'm wrong feel free to correct me.

Mike,

I understand exactly what is meant.  I don't have time to read full articles at work...a quick glance is the best I can do right now.

Regardless, You are saying MS showed compositing desktop publicly first, without any proof whatsoever.

Meanwhile, there is proof that Linux users and Mac OS X users were using desktop compositing before Windows users..

So...once again.

Which had desktop compositing first?  Windows, or Mac OS?

Logjamming

"Thanks Galos, for not letting me down and earning me a few bucks on the side."

Seeing how many of my posts were replies to messages directed to me, whoever paid you should check to make sure you weren't the ones asking me questions. That would be a pretty slimy way to win five bucks.

panache

"I understand exactly what is meant. "

Seeing how you countered a discussion of "compositing a personal computer desktop" with an article on "doing compositing on a desktop computer" (a totally different topic) you're probably better off just giving it up.

panache1023,

You persist in arguing with mikegalos@msn.com.  This is the fifth most futile activity know to man, behind only 1) tugging on Superman's cape, 2) spitting into the wind, 3) pulling the mask off the old Lone Ranger and, of course, 4) messing around with Jim.

Mike,

"I'm not at tlat level of expertise on Apple APIs so if I'm wrong feel free to correct me."

That makes two of us!  LOL

I think that 10.2 had full hardware acceleration, but only supported the newest graphics card hardware (surprise :) ). At that time I had the original G4 powerbook and recall that the hardware acceleration was not supported on my machine since I only had 8MB RAM on my graphics card. Although to be honest, I never noticed any real issues with the software compositing until I started to try and make it stutter by opening a dozen windows on top of each other then shaking a video around them all.

Again,

Galos, I only had time to read the first paragraph,

What's REALLY funny is you can't answer the question.

When you don't like the truth, you point out meaningless facts, (for example "Apple bought their tech, MS invented theirs), or just avoid answering all together.

So..MS invented desktop compositing.  They had it first...

But MS's customers couldn't use it until after Mac OS X users, and Linux users had been using it for years...

You still fail to back up your claims and do so becuase I posted a link to an article where I admitedly only had a chance to skim the first paragraph....

weird.

Yoshipod,

If Apple didn't have all the APIs publicly available, then it doesn't count that they had it at all...according to Mike.

According to Mike...MS had it first, even though it didn't appear until Vista, while Mac and Linux users already had been enjoying the graphical effects provided by their compositing desktops.

The Windows taskbar is not a copy of MacOS Dock bar because these to bars are complementary... (Effectively I talk for myself here)

I mean, I like the Windows taskbar but it miss something... a great Application Laucher, I hate to go in the orb menu to start application... I hate the mixed up of running an shortcut in the Windows taskbar ... OSX dock bar is best for launching apps.

Also, I like the OSX Dock bar but it miss something... a great running application bar, a taskbar... I hate minimization of application in the OSX dock bar mixed with the launcher... Windows Taskbar is best for tracking running apps.

So... Why don't get BOTH!!!???

So I use the Windows 7 Taskbar for running application at the top of the screen and I use the stardock ObjectBar (copy of the OSX Dockbar for Windows) for launching application at the bottom of the screen ...

Its great and it is a mixe of the best of both worlds... I only use what I like with the Windows 7 Taskbar and I only use what I like on OSX Dock bar.... And I drop bad features of both...

Isn't it great!!?? :)

MS has been aping the Mac OS ever since Windows. Non-debatable.

I see Mike is out in force with the standard rhetorical device of "So what you're saying is" followed by something that no one was saying.

Windows is derivative of the Mac. Period. Bill Gates did really say, "I want Mac on PC!" He did really say that the Mac was the new standard, the only new OS that would inspire people. Microsoft did copy it, in an inside out, really bad way, pasted on top of DOS. Since then, they worked on it many times, finally getting it stable at NT, workable for consumers with XP, and not too bad looking with Win7-----because it does look a lot like OSX.

That's the fundamental truth.

The back and forth here, over the position of buttons, whether jumplists and contextual menus are the same, how OS X does "Dock Expose" vs. Window Previews, is a bunch of minor detail

A----probably soon to be former----Microsoft employee spoke the truth and the word got out.

"Wow. Windows 7 is a Vista SP with a new look copied from OS X. Ouch."

So on Tuesday we went to a Microsoft event that covered, Windows 7, Windows 2008 R2 and Exchange 2010.  My sister is thankful for the copy of Windows 7 Ultimate.

The next day we had a webex with a MS rep.  This rep said the same exact thing "Windows 7 is Vista SP3 or Vista fixed"  he went on to admit "We really screwed up with Vista".  He asked us if we had a chance to play with Windows 7, I told him on Macbook at work I have a Parallels VM of 7 and that I thought is was a big improvement over Vista.  He then tells us that everyone in his family, (wife and kids) wants a Mac but he wont let them because he has to tow the line.

Pingback from  Microsoft desmiente que Windows 7 se haya inspirado en Mac OS : Blogografia

"The first "lot" is a bigger "lot" when you get the same-sized second "lot" when you buy a PC."

I don't know...people who've switched seem to swear that the switch was worth it.

gadfly10 said: "MS has been aping the Mac OS ever since Windows. Non-debatable."

Absolutely NOT!!

Windows always been historically a applications based OS and MacOs always been historically a documents based OS... This is two different concept in OS's that are opposed... So no one try to copy each other on this aspect.

You know the only thing Windows has tried to mimic from OSX is its fluidity... But, fluidity in a OS is not a copyright thing, isn't it???

"Fluidity" is like "beauty" ... This is a thing that cannot be copied... When you see a painter artiste that have done a really beautiful paint, do you tell him he copied from another painter artist that do beautiful paint too??

Windows is better simply because Microsoft take time to write a rock solid OS Kernel before working on details... Rather than Apple that work on details before working on more important thing... This is why Apple use a Unix base for OSX ... They don't take time to work on their OS kernel ... They prefer doing fluid GUIs, that is not necessarily a success has my opinion...

For the rest,  as you add probably red on the Paul articles, the one about "Windows Vs OSX", he explain exactly that even if Apple release features before Microsoft, these feature has been presented publicly be Microsoft before Apple... Not on all but on a lot of features... So which is a copy of the other??

"For the rest,  as you add probably red on the Paul articles, the one about "Windows Vs OSX", he explain exactly that even if Apple release features before Microsoft, these feature has been presented publicly be Microsoft before Apple... Not on all but on a lot of features... So which is a copy of the other??"

That's because Microsoft has historically showed very early demos of new technologies and features, well before they are ready for prime time, while Apple tends to wait until the technologies and features are ready to ship before announcing them. Microsoft used to love to talk about upcoming products years before they shipped. Just because Apple does not show off technology in early stages, does not mean they are not working on it.  

I think you will find that Microsoft is taking an approach that is much closer to Apple's now.  Showing off stuff too early has come back to haunt them in the past when they really hyped up new technology then failed to deliver it.

"An inaccurate quote has been floating around"

Why not "report" the truth? Someone said something that they now want to cover up and they are now "correcting" the "inaccurate quote". That's a fallacy as the quote was not inaccurate, it was a word for word quote.

There is nothing in the quote that anyone with half a brain, and that includes some of the dim-witted Windows users on this blog, that WIndows copies OS X like it's the end of the world.

Pingback from  How We Really Designed the Look and Feel of Windows 7 - SuperSite Blog | www.windows7vista.com

I personally hate the default taskbar in windows 7, the same as I hate the one on the Mac, the same as I hated all the ones in the various Linux themes.  I just like the basic taskbar, with the vista look being my favorite.  Never saw the draw for the flyout icons on the Mac/Linux docks.  It's cool, no doubt, the first time you see it; but amount 2 minutes later it's like "um, okay, so what?".  

Speaking of Microsoft copying OS X in WIndows 7 (and all previous versions of Windows), they also were lame enough to also copy Apple's stores. The difference? Apple stores are classy, cool and have style, three things that are not part of Microsoft's DNA. Those and other qualities come from the top. And the sweaty monkey man that is Ballmer has none of those.

They want to copy these, but have no chance. When Microsoft has no taste, they just have no taste and no chance. Pathetic really. But that's Microsoft in a nutshell.

gallery.me.com/ifoman

Pingback from  Microsoft desmiente que Windows 7 se haya inspirado en Mac OS

"There is nothing in the quote that anyone with half a brain, and that includes some of the dim-witted Windows users on this blog, that WIndows copies OS X like it's the end of the world."

It's nothing new. Both companies have copied junk from each other. It's what lots of companies do.

Fact of life. Nothing new.

Pingback from  How We Really Designed the Look and Feel of Windows 7 - SuperSite Blog | All about windows 7

Hope that particular employee enjoyed his time at Microsoft. I'd imagine he's currently scouring the internet for employers looking for a man with a foot in his mouth.

Pingback from  UR-VE.COM  » Blog Archive   » Microsoft desmiente que Windows 7 se haya inspirado en Mac OS

hammers I tell ya'.... hammers

Pingback from  Microsoft Desmiente que Windows 7 se ???inspir????? en Mac OS X | EvoluSoft v2

Pingback from  Microsoft desmiente que Windows 7 se haya inspirado en Mac OS «  Tecnica 9 Lan??s