"And Mac OS X still lacks any sort of iterative or task-based UI elements--such as those in Windows XP--that walk users through common tasks such as importing and printing photos, recording or listening to music, or working with documents."

The Window's task based UI is cluttered and get's in the way, most Windows users hide the task pane.

"Apple's online music service uses the nonstandard 128Kbps Advanced Audio Coding (AAC) audio format, rather than the superior Windows Media Audio (WMA) 9 format that other music services use."

AAC is a standard format based on mpeg-4 unlike the inferior proprietary Window's Media (which does not play on the standard mp3 player the iPod; not to mention Microsoft does not let you convert form wma -> mp3 for free, while Apple lets you convert AAC -> mp3 for free)

"both running and nonrunning programs, is still as confusing as ever. However, Apple has finally adopted a Windows-like task-switching scheme (invoked by the familiar cmd +tab key sequence) that simplifies switching between running applications."

This was a mistake, the application switcher menu is a better design: http://www.vercruesse.de/software

"Unlike Windows, with its obvious Start button, Mac OS X lacks a central starting point, leaving new users to wander about the interface with the mouse pointer, looking for something with which to interact."

The Dock has BIG ICONS YOU CANT MISS IT! Images are worth a thousand words and much more intuitive than text. Images are recalled better than text.

"However, it contains nothing that will make Windows users jealous, and maybe that's what Apple needs."

I wouldn't say that, I've used windows for 10+ years and I've learned more in 2weeks on a Mac then on a PC. Mac OS X is STABLE, easy to use, more functional than Window's(I love Unix!), and fun to use!

Hey dude, First I have say that I read your stuff all the time and I don't totally disagree with what you are saying, but I think you forgot the most significant enhancement in Panther and that is Expose! I would have paid for that alone. Once you understand that you no longer have to do the digging through multiple windows. It just makes my work flow so much more productive. If they made this a stand alone app for windows it would be on my machine.

When did WMA format ever become superior to mp3 which, mp3 is inferior to AAC...so the chain of quality, as Everyone in the Sound Community knows is= Worse Quality- WMA Middle- Mp3 and Best aac.

Kind of odd for you to comment on that, almost like you're trying to put a barb in against itunes just for using aac, I like it, and my DJ'ing is definitely helped by the boost in quality that AAC encoding allows.

Mac OS X is the bedest OS in the planet

I've done my own comparisons with AAC and WMA since iTunes came out for Windows. Basically, they're almost identical until you start going to the lower bitrates(under 64kbps). Then it's painfully obvious that WMA is a superior audio compression. But then, Apple is doing this to sell iPods, so I can understand the different format. Rest assured though, whether you purchase music from iTunes' Music Store, MusicMatch, or Napster, they are all encoding their music at a high enough bitrate to give you a "pristine" copy. Still, I prefer WMA because I don't have an iPod, and I kind of like the flexibility of having my choice of playback software and hardware.

"The Window's task based UI is cluttered and get's in the way, most Windows users hide the task pane."

There's no clutter. If you run anything above 640x480, you've got plenty of room for the task pane. Plus, if a side pane makes things so cluttered, why did apple add one to their finder windows?

"AAC is a standard format based on mpeg-4 unlike the inferior proprietary Window's Media (which does not play on the standard mp3 player the iPod; not to mention Microsoft does not let you convert form wma -> mp3 for free, while Apple lets you convert AAC -> mp3 for free)"

Unless you have an iPod(which is very expensive I might add), what possible reason would you have to go from WMA to MP3 if only to add distortion to your music from MP3's archaic compression?

"The Dock has BIG ICONS YOU CANT MISS IT! Images are worth a thousand words and much more intuitive than text. Images are recalled better than text."

Fine, but if you've never used a computer before or are unfamiliar with the various applications on a particular platform, how do you know WHAT to click? Even if the icons are huge, how do you know which one of them you want? At least "Start" gives you some sort of clue as to where to go first

"I wouldn't say that, I've used windows for 10+ years and I've learned more in 2weeks on a Mac then on a PC. Mac OS X is STABLE, easy to use, more functional than Window's(I love Unix!), and fun to use!"

In the end it's whatever you're most comfortable with. Both are quite stable, ease of use could go either way depending on whether you are more at home with a task based approach or an application based approach, and either platform is functional for whatever you want to do.

Not bad for a hardware company.

Pity Microsoft will never be one :-)

You jackass. OS X has had Alt+Tab support since 10.1. Nice in-depth review.

I don't want to make any personal attacks, but some of the comments and the tone of this article have aspects that make anyone with any experience in the field of desktop computers wonder if these people half understand what they are saying. Some of the points are not an issue of personal preference or whether the person is a Mac or Windows person, but what is for the most part common knowledge.

"Apple has finally adopted a Windows-like task-switching scheme (invoked by the familiar Alt+Tab key sequence) that simplifies switching between running applications."

Was this the first mac the author ever touched? Command (also called the Apple key) - Tab as a command has been around since the late 80's when Apple introduced the Multifinder (ability to run more than one application at once and switch in between them). As already mentioned, the visual cue for this outside the dock appeared in 10.1, which came out back in 2001.

"And Mac OS X still lacks any sort of iterative or task-based UI elements—such as those in Windows XP—that walk users through common tasks such as importing and printing photos, recording or listening to music, or working with documents."

Other than the extensive help built-in to the OS, with similar interfaces dating back to OS 8, I don't know what he is talking about. Sure it doesn't invade your screen every time you try to do something , but there are plenty of clear ways to invoke it. This being the help menu (assumed users can recognize that combination of letters even if they can't really read), the question marks that litter all applications, or the key on the keyboard labeled help. These help dialogs are often launched automatically the first time the user uses a program, and then don't bother them again. The help application integrates well with well designed programs so that their help is available in the same place. The search option is also quite intelligent in the way it looks for terms, and also can check internet for more resources.

"For example, when you switch between users on a high-end Mac (another feature mined from Windows)"

One could see it this way, or one could realize that this is a UNIX feature predating the Windows by decades, finally worked graphically into OS X. Previous versions of OS X allowed this, but only from the terminal perspective. I guess you could call this a new feature, but I wouldn't say it came specifically from Windows, especially since OS X has a UNIX base.

"But copying Windows is de rigueur these days, and we can't fault Apple for looking to the market leader for ideas."

This is an incredibly hard argument to make since Windows has introduced nothing new other than another name for a multi-purpose menu (Start) and even more annoying errors. It has been long accepted that the GUI on Windows came from the Mac GUI. The other part of the story not told as much is that Apple borrowed many of the elements from their GUI from the one developed at Xerox PARC, which even Alan Kay (important Xerox PARC member) points out was influenced by ideas much earlier. It was correct of the courts to rule that Microsoft didn't infringe on copyright with the Windows GUI from the Mac GUI, not because they didn't copy it, but because an idea can't really be copyrighted. Honestly, one's world must be pretty skewed to see Microsoft as cutting edge, just look at Longhorn. Want to know why it is taking so long other than Microsoft programmer's incompetence? They are waiting for other members of the industry to release new features to copy.

"My final caveat is that Apple's online music service uses the nonstandard 128Kbps Advanced Audio Coding (AAC) audio format, rather than the superior Windows Media Audio (WMA) 9 format that other music services use."

Not only does this have a biased tone, its blatantly wrong. Its not even a matter of personal taste since everyone prefers their audio to sound good. Unless the author has very odd taste and likes poor audio quality so he is reminded that what he is listening to is digital, this makes no sense. It is true that AAC may not be as popular yet with the masses (audiophiles still laugh at the idea people listen to wma), but certainly has much clearer quality. The iTunes Music Store is the current leader in its industry by a large margin, showing that AAC isn't a little odd thing a few people use. Just a quick example of this http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/36463.html but I must add the fact that they considered using wma is an insult to the other 2 formats.

This comment clearly has gone on much longer than needed. The important thing to realize is that the author did not use Panther or previous versions of a Mac OS that much. His viewpoint is also quite biased considering all the Windows magazines he writes for (click on his name to see credentials and other articles), and seems to take every chance to get a knock on Apple, even if distorted. Yeah $130 may be a little steep for Panther, but this article gives no credit to OS X which is greatly deserved.

I think the poster above did an excellent job pointing out the bias of this author. I've used every version of windows extensively from windows 3.1 through windows xp, and having recently switched to mac os x I am aware of the major pros and cons of both operating system. This author clearly is harping on the cons, without mentioning most of the pros.

One thing I would like to comment on, however, is the claim that the OS X dock is confusing. I can see why you would believe this, as it performs two functions, both to show open apps and to act as a quick access to certain programs. But once you use it, it is pretty clear which apps are open. Also, it makes my life so much easier, as I never have to go through the multiple step process of going into the start menu, then into programs, and then cycling through a long list of programs until I finally get to the app I want. I use the finder maybe once a week, as all of the apps I need are right there.

Another thing that makes the dock so much easier is that its based on icons, not words. I know that at least for most people, the human mind connects much better with pictures than with words, especially with pictures they associate with a certain function. I react much quicker to the icons in os x than I do to the list of words in the start menu.

I'm not just saying this off of my own experience either. One of my friends recently switched as well, and she had no problem at all picking up OS X on her own (she isn't very technically advanced). And I was showing another friend OS X, and I quote her word for word, "Wow, I always thought macs were harder to use. I didn't realize it was this easy"

My point is that I can understand how Macs may be less intuitive if you are completly oblivious. It would make much more sense if it came with at least a manual or a video or something. But after using it for about a day, it really just makes more sense. And thats what it all comes down to.

He just basically told us that he never actaually used the OS, or perhaps fiddled with it at the Apple Store. Everyone knows you can change the minimization effect to a muc more simpler Scale effect. Duh.

If Mac OS X PC version is released, will that affect Windows Market? I think it will. What d'you say?

do you like some virus? install the big virus: microsoft güindous hehe

Well, I have read articles from this guy quite a bit and he is a plain and simple Mac basher. I will make this short. I have used windows for 10 years including XP and have since switched to Mac(about 1 year now) so I have seen both sides. You tell me why I have never met anyone who has switched to Mac ( and I mean used it faithfully for a while, not just 10 mins) and has ever wanted to go back to windows. As far as all his comments about OS X imitating windows, please. Mac had the first GUI and look at the Longhorn previews, if that is not a copy of OS X, all the new features are in some way copying OS X, which has been out since when? Look at some reviews of the college computer stores and their sales, USA Today for example. They sell more Apple computers now than PC's. Once the world catches on, Apple will be on the rise. Why settle for 2nd rate Windows garbage, the word will get out. "ONCE YOU GO MAC, YOU'LL NEVER GO BACK"!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm sorry, this guy's an idiot. How is the dock confusing? Does he LIKE the crappy insufficience of a windows operating system? He must also like it up the ass.

AquaLuna wrote "Fine, but if you've never used a computer before or are unfamiliar with the various applications on a particular platform, how do you know WHAT to click? Even if the icons are huge, how do you know which one of them you want? At least "Start" gives you some sort of clue as to where to go first."

When you mouse over each icon, the name of the program appears above it in clear text. And if you need a button that states "start" to tell you how to browse a computer, maybe you also need to be spoon fed.

i Like Mac Better i Got Xp i Wanna Change It

FYI, AAC IS an standard. WMA is popular and thus it is a "de facto" standard just because Windows is all over the world and whatever "thing" Microsoft includes on Windows will instantly be a "de facto" standard, in many ways just because users can't use any other thing (remember Internet Explorer?).

AAC is a standard recognised by industry and is used in 3G mobile communications.

Amazing at the amount of Mac-bashing that went on in this article. Funny how "who are these people?"'s comment was much more accurate and informative than this article was. While I agree with some of the author's points (iTunes' close/maximize/minimize buttons are cheesy on a PC, at least in its first few versions), he proves his blissful ignorance with the quote "nonstandard 128Kbps Advanced Audio Coding (AAC) audio format, rather than the superior Windows Media Audio (WMA) 9 format," which has already been torn down by many posters before me (so I won't reiterate).

Whatever. You reap what you sow. And while you may enjoy to point out the ratio of Macs to your inferior Windows monopoly, I will enjoy to point out that I haven't ever had a virus on my Mac, or spyware. Not that the Mac is immune--but there are 0 (zero) viruses. So stick that in your pipe and smoke it, Mr. I love Bill Gates and DRM Fanboy!

GAY GAY GAY Macs rock, pcs suck. HAHA friggin mac fanboys.. the author can review anyway he wants.. i like both but macs are too expensive hahahaha gaygaygay

Microsoft can afford to do whatever they want. Apple can't. If there was a version of Mac that stunk like a dead animal, people wouldn't buy it and Apple would suffer, and maybe even lose their business. If microsoft did it, they're short a few millions and it doesn't even hurt them.

And WMA is, in my opinion, a "forced standard," a format that is used by almost everyone that it becomes a "standard." AAC is a "true standard," a format that is actually ratified by a group and people and made to become a "standard." MPEG is a true standard. JPEG is a true standard. PNG is a true standard. WMA is NOT a true standard. WMV is not a true standard.

And think about this: Apple's Quicktime is expanable on Windows, but Windows Media Player on the Mac is VERY BASIC and NOT EXPANABLE. You CANNOT add codecs to WMP for Mac, but you can add Codecs to QT for Windows. Microsoft's monopoly at work? I think so.

Maybe some mac fans will reply: My ONLY complaint with OSX happens to be the lack of a start button, or some other centralized button or icon to quickly access ALL applications installed on the machine. The Dock is great if you use the same 15 or so applications, but on my XP machine I have something like 150 applications installed, and frequently use about 50 of them.

Oh, and also - I can't remote-admin my servers and workstations at the office because OSX doesn't fully support the activex needed to connect.

I'm not at all a mac-basher, but for my business (mechanical engineering), all the professional parametric design software is made for Windows. (Pro/Engineer, Unigraphics, Solid Works, Inventor, etc.) It's the lack of compatible software that prevents me from using the mac more.

couple of things: first, the "Alt-Tab" function (ie switing apps faster) has been with mac os since at least OS 8 second, if you can't figure out the dock, GENIUS maybe you should get your head out your *** and actually use the damn thing. and as for a complaint about the dock not holding enough applications... the dock can be modified.. so if you're really obsessed with the windows like format of having all appllications in a nifty little folder, simply drag your "Applications" folder into the dag and BAM, there you have it. it's actually quite convenient. you can do the same thing with your "Utilities" folder, or any other Folder or App you use often. ps... a lot of the stuff that's really visible on the mac os x has actually been around for quite some time (NeXT, pre OSX)- just people don't do their research before mouthing off about stuff they know nothing about =)

I've converted many a person to using mac simply by showing them a system that can run for over an hour without crashing...

READER COMMENTS: We want to hear what you have to say about this article!     Acceptable Use Policy Your Comments (required): Your email is only used if our editors need to contact you. It is not used or stored for any other purpose, nor posted with your comments. Enter the text from the image below Please refresh the page if you have trouble reading this text.