|
Paul, you should check out the discussion forum for iMovie 06. http://discussions.apple.com/forum.jspa?forumID=1115 the rest of the iLife 06 suite is pretty good. But iMovie has some serious crash/bug issues.
Loyal Apple user since 1985 -January 31, 2006
What's the point here? It's nice that iLife is a wonderful suite, but why is Microsoft and the entire PC world dragged into it? Is there anything else on the Mac side of the fence that approaches its quality? It sounds like a unique product from what I hear, and it seems silly to ask "Why is there nothing like this on Windows?" when "Why is this unmatched anywhere?" would be just as accurate.
Paul Donnelly -January 31, 2006
Actually GarageBand is only at 3 not 6.
MrPants -January 31, 2006
Apple can make iLife so great because all the apps are just stripped down, consumer friendly versions of apps that they sell for a bundle. It's a great business move. iMovie is based on Final Cut Pro and Motion and LiveType, GarageBand is based on either Soundtrack Pro or Logic (not sure which), iPhoto is now being based off of Aperture, and iDVD is based off of DVD Studio Pro. The only app that isn't based on something that makes Apple a butt load of money is iTunes, because it makes Apple a butt load of money all by itself. When the R&D is paid for by other departments, it's easy to be able to do this.
Super Dave -January 31, 2006
Sure it is unmatched elsewhere. But the point is, this kind of quality is not available on the PC side. And even bigger, this stuff comes with a new Mac. What do you get on that PC? Adobe Elements? Works? Plus on a Mac you get AddressBook, iCal, Mail, Safari, iChat and of course OS X. Not too shabby in themselves.
drenrav -January 31, 2006
Picasa doesn't even come close to iPhoto. Picasa has no integration with other media apps (or other system apps like mail, web browser, screensaver, etc.). No full screen editing (the best new feature of iPhoto). No calendars, cards or books. The thumbnails in Picasa don't smoothly scale like those in iPhoto, either.
Cliff -January 31, 2006
Paul Donnelly, the point is: a few years ago Microsoft (and Paul Thurott) claimed that they were just as good if not better than Apple at this. (Remember Paul's silly claims of MM has more transition effects, etc...). The point is: more and more, in the home, people are using computers, not jsut as multimedia devices, but as media content creation devices. And the complete lack of equivalencies on the Windows side is appalling and pathetic. Apple has EVERY base covered in the media game. Most other products cannot compete with them individually, nevermind as a bundled, integrated package. How is that irrelevant? It should be a call to arms.
TF -January 31, 2006
Contrary to SuperDave, the iLife components are NOT stripped down models of the bigger cousins. iMovie's code is totally different from Final Cut Pro's -- they are based on completely different models. And of course Aperture came long after iPhoto.
BobinWi -January 31, 2006
Second the motion! iPhoto is a different animal, developed by a completely different team than Final Cut Pro. It does not work in a similar fashion, something you would know if you just tried it for 5 minutes, really. iPhoto looks, from the outside, like it shares little with Aperture, which just came out, three years after intro of iLife. iDvd does not look or operate like a "stripped" version of DVD Studio Pro. I would suggest that because of the opposite of exact reasoning you offer, Apple has been successful. They understood with the word 'ENOUGH" meant, where to stop and exhibited a tremendous resistance to just "popping out" a stripper version of a big, complex app with features missing. Look at the interfaces closely and you will see that they have different purposes inherent in their design and interface. That is what they do right.
Mark -January 31, 2006
TF, that makes sense. I think that's a good point to make, but I, at least, didn't get it from the artice. To me it looked like a short review bracketed by anti-MS sentiments. Maybe I lacked some context.
Paul Donnelly -January 31, 2006
Works: Why Can't The Mac Do This? Writing a letter, adding some figures, balancing a family budget: easy with Works supplied with PCs but no Apple solution for this - except over-sophisticated Office / OpenOffice / NeoOffice. On that field, Wintel leads!
Rei_Vilo -February 1, 2006
Rei_Vilo: er… heard of Appleworks?
David -February 1, 2006
The integration is the nicest thing about the whole suite - the Mac OS X media browser offers a simple consistent interface to your iLife media to any application, allowing you to actually USE your digital content for something...
Andy -February 1, 2006
Basicly the Windows user is sitting down and keep trying to get the computer works and don't have the knowledge of what you can do with it when it works. Mac user have a easyier time because everything works from the beginning and it's more fun to investigate what you can do with your computer. Oh yea ...I am a computertech for the last 20 years and work daily with both OSX and WindowsXP but a like OSX so much more. OSX is for the consumer and XP is for the techguy to earn money on.
utterbullen -February 1, 2006
Once again, PC complains. If you hate the PC platform so badly then just switch to Mac and stop complaining!. There's NOTHING you can do on a Mac that you can't do on a PC. It may be more expensive, but not impossible!
Nick -February 1, 2006
Uuuh.. Nick, he makes his money fixing windows boxes. If he switched to Mac he would be out of a job.
Guy in China -February 1, 2006
M$ does not want to make Adobe and other mad untill Windose capture that market away from Apple. Them they will make a iLife type app.
Bill East -February 1, 2006
M$ does not want to make Adobe and other mad untill Windose capture that market away from Apple. Them they will make a iLife type app.
Bill -February 1, 2006
Because, Paul, if Microsoft put something like this out people would complain that it's a monopolization and they're, in turn, putting the companies which make these individual pieces out of business. That's the "problem" [sic] with PCs - there are so many different companies making this software that if Microsoft put out a product for their computers which did all of this (and did it well as you requested) then people would complain that MS is overstepping their bounds and trying to put these other smaller software makers out of business. Apple has no such problem as they're (effectively) the only game in town.
Jason P -February 1, 2006
Wrong, Jason P. Apple is not the "only game in town" for such software on the Mac side. Adobe and other major software developers also provide Mac software. In fact, Apple beat out consumer-level media apps for the Mac that were available when they first released iLife, so now 3rd party software developers focus more on high-end media apps for the Mac. Macs are quite popular in the "creative" industries as well as those divisions of larger corporations, and software developers interested in making money recognize that.
Bob -February 1, 2006
I prefer that Microsoft leave the field open to developers.
cc -February 1, 2006
Paul, why isn't there anything like Windows Media Center on the Mac? Different operating systems develop different products to address the needs of their customers. Apple considers multimedia production a selling point for Mac OS, while Microsoft considers multimedia consumption to be more important for a wider audience. I wouldn't trade Media Center for iLife, and I suspect most users wouldn't either.
Nathan Weinberg -February 1, 2006
"I prefer that Microsoft leave the field open to developers." Yea? tell that to the makers of Wordperfect. I think Apple did iLife because they felt they could make compelling products, with a different focus from what was available. And that's pretty much what they did. For my money, I love iMovie, Garageband and iDVD, but don't mess with the others in the suite-- I have 3rd party solutions I prefer.
TomB -February 1, 2006
Paul, it's simple, Microsoft doesn't innovate. People are finally discovering there's a better way. 100 XP PCs = 10 tech support personnel. 100 Macs = 100 satisfied productive users.
Mark Bucher -February 1, 2006
umm... Nathan... ever hear of Front Row?
Kyle -February 1, 2006
Kyle: That's hilarious. Because I can turn on Front Row, record HDTV shows on four tuners, drop in plugins, browse the web on my TV, IM on my TV, Caller ID on my TV, Download Comedy Central clips on my TV, and do all sorts of things the OS couldn't do without Front Row. And I can stream all that to hundreds of devices wirelessly. Front Row = Front End for existing apps. Media Center is a whole platform. There's nothing like Media Center on a Mac. When there is, we'll talk again.
Nathan Weinberg -February 1, 2006
MS sure markets their operating system to do all the things that iLife can do, but they fall short. Only recently did windows come with the capability to crop a photo. Plus no one said M$ needed to produce the iLife sweet for windows either. There are tons of other companies that could make a lot of money making one. To defend FrontRow, Apple does not claim to make a media center type OS, but they give you alot of those capabilities in there standard OS for free. You don't have to buy a special OS X to get them and what they give you is much better quality and easier to use. Plus it has only been out for a few months. M$ has been pushing the media center for a few years now, and it still barely works. After my TV crashed the 100th time, I sold the junk on ebay as it was more hastle than it was worth.
Jeff -February 1, 2006
"Why is this unmatched anywhere?" would be just as accurate. Get a clue. It's because Windows is nearly everywhere, you dork wannabe.
vanax -February 1, 2006
Nathan.. you're actually drowning in Marketing-Speak... There's nothing too impressive about MC. TV tuning for a PC? Not new..
Mike -February 1, 2006
So if jason P:s theori is correct, then apple would be accused of monopolizing media software when/if for some reeason the Ilife suite would appear in Windows version similar to Itunes? I do not think that is why MS do not develop Ilfe quality/type software. I think they simply can't. they are not that kind of a company. apple is unique in so many ways. but they have market share so anything goes :)
Håkan -February 1, 2006
No, they won't. Apple is forgiven for its exclusivity policy because "it makes things simpler for the user". Why can't you take an iPod and download subsription tunes from Yahoo or Napster? Apple wanted to lock out those other music stores. Is it a monopoly? It depends if you ask a non-interested party (who might say yes) or an Apple fan who will say no and start making excuses why it's okay for it to be a monopoly.
Jason P -February 1, 2006
oh no! another stupid windows vs. macintosh war!
nelson -February 1, 2006
If Apple had half a brain, they would make a version of iLife available for Windows. I, for one, would buy. It would be the perfect compliment for MS Works. Apple fans, I said that because Works doesn't have video, audio, or web editing.
LibertyandJustice -February 1, 2006
Apple can give/sell the ILife software so cheap becuase to full realize its potential you need to fork over a continunal stream of dollars for .Mac membership...and for a family that wants to store any real volume of data (ie more than 2GB) you are going to be paying upwards of $300 a year...not a bad business model...until they up the storage space to 25GB, I am not interested, especially when Google gives me almost 3GB for free...
Greg -February 1, 2006
@Jason: Apple has no monopoly with iPod/iTunes. There are hundreds of other portable music players to choose from and several music download services.
iUser -February 1, 2006
Erm funny I thought there were photo editing suites and movie editing programs for PCs. Microsoft doesn't do it because it's not critical to their bussiness model which is selling Office and Windows. Apple does it because their bussiness model involves getting artists and home users. It's like asking why can't Microsoft and Apple provide all their applications for free in 100 different flavors like Linux. Because Microsoft wouldn't gain too much from making an ILife clone and I dare say Apple only does it because it gets some people to buy their machines.
Vermouth -February 1, 2006
There is nothing wrong with Windows XP, and Vista will be even better. I use Macs and PCs, and while I admire the power and sophistication of the Mac, the simplicity, stability and consistency of Windows is excellent as long as you keep out the viruses. I don't think there is any reason to put down Microsoft at all. Let's be fair and impartial. If you want to do some putdowns, look at the nomenclature and organizational inconsistencies in iTunes. The application doesn't know what to do with its newfound capabilities. Podcasts are under music on the iPod, even though some are videos. Similar nomenclature problems exist throughout, and Apple needs to do a complete remake of the app. Some problem with dissonance between the way Carbon and Cocoa apps function. No such strange disconnetcs in functionality are found in the Windows operating system, though Windows apps can be quite inconsistent, depending on the software maker.
Roger Mercer -February 1, 2006
iTunes is a poorly interfaced opportunity for apple fanboys to buy DRM crap from Steve Jobs on a daily basis.
seth brundle -February 1, 2006
I agree with L&J. I do photo editing with Photoshop Elements 4, and have used a trial version of some video editing app, and some other dvd creation app, but I'd REALLY like the iLife "solution" on my PC. A set of apps that are designed to work together to let me create greeting cards, movies, dvds, photo books, online albums, etc. not sure why no company has done this for Windows, or maybe they have and I'm not aware of it yet?
Mohit -February 1, 2006
Honestly! All sides have their pros and cons: Mac for being so simplistic to cater to the amateurs, Windows for not including anything at all and third-party developers that develop the proper programs, but jack up the prices so only professional studios can afford them. With that in mind, it's nice that mac tries to make an out-of-the-box solution for the general masses, nice that windows tries to focus coding time on writing actual operating system code, and nice that the third party developers are the only ones writing proper media creation software. (note - I'm excluding all of the professional-grade free software readily available for linux users, because I doubt people would listen)
stopTheFussinAndAFeudin -February 1, 2006
Think about this: Apple controls all the hardware. This means that they don't have to do near as much testing as MS does.
slapout -February 1, 2006
Right on Stop the Fussin. Linux is free and just as powerful and sophisticated as Apple's BSD unix. It's also just as secure in my experience, and maybe more secure. You can run it on almost anything, and it's a great server OS. I don't think some of the apps match Apple's, but you can do almost anything you need to do on Linux that you can do on any other OS.
Roger Mercer -February 1, 2006
I love iLife but, Apple needs to allow us to upgrade our DVD burners should we so desire. I found out the hard way that upgrading to a DL DVD burner essentially shut me down from using iDVD. Apple doesn't "support" the Pioneer DVR 110-D burner I purchased and now I'm stuck with a non-functioning DL DVD burner. At least when using iDVD. There IS a workaround but, it worked once and now I am without iDVD. It sucks and it isn't right. I basically have to buy another, older single layer Pioneer drive like what came with my G5 and house it in an external firewire box to use iDVD. Absolutely ridiculous.
bebopredux -February 1, 2006
Windows causes brain damage. It's sad, but there it is.
Ricky Dock -February 1, 2006
Probably because they are too busy building and maintaining operating systems used for 700+ million users across millions of hardware configurations.
Steve Jobs -February 1, 2006
Remember that little incident involving the bundling of IE with Windows? So it's probably not that they couldn't, they just don't want to get sued and forced to remove it. You know if they included a decent video editor etc third party developers who be foaming at the mouth and going to the courts say how Microsoft is killing their buisness by including this. Besides how many people actually need that stuff?
Patrick -February 1, 2006
Because M$ sucks of course? Why doesn't Hyundai make a Viper? Nuff said.
Rune -February 1, 2006
Well, it didn't take long for this conversation to degrade, did it? I've often wondered why, with the healthy Windows ecosystem, someone couldn't come up with an integrated suite of applications to challenge iLife on the PC side. But the point is--I don't care. If I'm a media creator, I'm probably on the Mac already. And when people ask me (and believe me, they do all the time) what they need in order to edit video on their PCs, I tell them to either hire a professional, or buy a Mac. It really is that simple. And this isn't coming from a zealot, folks. I own and use machines on both platforms. But Paul's right--when it comes to these tools, there's nothing even close on the PC side. It ain't religion, and it ain't partisanship...it's the truth.
iLoveit -February 1, 2006
Mike, I'm talking as a consumer. I love Media Center, I use it every day, and I use it for the things I described. That's not marketing speak, that's customer satisfaction. Or customer evangelism, in marketing speak :-) Microsoft does release good products, hard as it is to believe. Try them sometime.
Nathan Weinberg -February 1, 2006
Why? Because Mac is the bestest OS out there and Windows is crap. Now, please go jerk off to Steeve Jobs in a black turtle-neck.
Anonymous -February 1, 2006
Linux is free and just as powerful and sophisticated as Apple's BSD unix. It's also just as secure in my experience, and maybe more secure. You can run it on almost anything, and it's a great server OS. I don't think some of the apps match Apple's, but you can do almost anything you need to do on Linux that you can do on any other OS. Roger Mercer -February 1, 2006 Yeah Roger I should just replace all the Macs, I've placed with clients, with Linux boxes. That should make my life easier.
lantzn -February 1, 2006
I love all the "Mac" fanboys. You guys all think you know what your doing and that MACS rule. iLife is an iteresting app if your into all that crap. However, I perfer Movie Maker 2, Photo Story, MS Producer, Nero for DVD creation. All Free. Try them sometimes. Between you and me, I spent 5 times more on configuring MACS (10.3.9) for networking going against a xServe then I do with windows and active directory. Apple was never strong in networking protocols and directory access. Windows definately has more to offer here, that is why businesses use them, they just work in a domain and managed environment. If you are stupid enough to go to websites that you don't trust and open email attachments that you don't know who they are from, you should be virus and spyware prone.
my2cents -February 1, 2006
Actually the mac as DVR is a better way to go since using eyeTV (or other third party add ons), there's ZERO DRM and it's even smart enough to save it in a variety of formats from uncompressed DV to MPEG-4 to ipod video. Or I can watch and record TV directly with imovie and edit away. The Mac gives you options that MC does not. The bottom line is that MS (for good or bad depending on your perspective) is 5-6 years behind the Mac OS as it has been since the Mac first arrived. Don't believe - do the math yourself. Mac arrived in 1984. Now look to see when the first stable Win arrived with 3.1 - same with each major upgrade to '95 & '98 and why is XP the crappiest Win OS - because during that time the Mac had the OS transition from Classic to OSX and now lo and behold, about 5 years after the intro of OSX, here comes Vista ... I'm not saying it's a bad thing - MS merely looks at what's going on after the early adopters test it out on the Mac and then they built their OS with it - that's just their business model & culture (XBox, MSN, etc, etc ...). The only problem is now that software & hardware have to mesh together, MS falls further and further behind because while corporations are willing to wait a few years for technology & features to sift themselves out before putting down their $299, consumers move at a much more rapid rate and so far, MS seems pretty clueless about marketing to consumers (other than offering the lowest price) - just like it took them two years of being relentlessly hounded before they came up with the first XP patch, why tabbed browsing took so long (what are those 40,000 programmers doing?) and of course, why they've already lost the audio & video market. MS is the new GM - still cranking out cash by the buckets from servers & licensing - I'm not knocking it and they'll still make money and be profitable for years but when you spend BILLIONS to sell a few million XBoxes and MS OS watches ... they are not headed in the right direction.
Jbelkin -February 1, 2006
Paul - shame on you! Of all people!! If Microsoft did this - we'd be in the middle of another anti-competitive law suit. The fact that Apple gets away with this kills me - yet Microsoft gets yelled at for bundling TWO of the above list and get told they have to remove it. Give me a break! I'm really ashamed of you Paul - you usually have a very open mind to these things!
Shawn -February 1, 2006
 |
The question is, has Apple been accused of, and found guilty of monopolistic practices, regarding the iLife suite, and Safari in particular? No. Has M$? Yes. And it's not even about bundling a browser with the OS -- STOP LYING. IE is not "bundled" with the OS; it IS PART of the OS. That's a far cry from what Safari is to OS X. The two companies have different philosophies. Apple provides stuff to the user, but does not penalize them for not using it. M$ makes their products part of the OS (hello, Active X, Direct X, DLLs galore) -- and penalizes you if you remove them/don't want to use them/install other browsers. No lie -- I have installed Firefox on my brand new XP laptop. It crashes at random times. It crashes about 1/100th the frequency on my OS X box. Coincidence? I don't think so, if you know about the Halloween documents. Now if someone said "Apple is headed towards a monopoly and is starting to rule with an iron fist", I'd agree with that. But the two companies at least up to this point, have been very different.
Moi -February 1, 2006
Sorry - forgot this url in case you're wondering about Vista ... http://tauquil.com/archives/2006/01/06/re-introducing-the-real-windows-vista/
jbelkin -February 1, 2006
|
Hold on just a second.... I wouldn't say Apple has "all" the media bases covered in a way that is best of breed, nor would I say that the Mac always does. People make a lot of assumptions, but they don't always do the research! I've got Macs, Linux machines and Windows XP and 98 machines. One PC app that stands out *way* above the crowd is a fifty dollar image editing and animated effects package called "WinImages" which I have not yet found even a close match for. To give you a point of reference, I own both Photoshop and AfterFX on both PC and Mac, and they just don't compare. Photoshop's 20 odd layer modes are dwarfed by WinImages 70 or more, and there are UI differences that make working in WinImages about twice as fast on a per operation basis if you like working that way (it can also work like PS does.) Plus it is tight, weighing in at just a few megs and it starts like lightning when I need it, while PS and AE are pig slow. This app is only available for the PC, sadly, because I *really* prefer to use my Mac. But that's the thing -- you think ilife is the digital media king, but this is an example of where it doesn't even come close, doesn't really cover the ground at all (iPhoto is laughable... that's no image editor!), and the best stuff isn't even available for the Mac at all!
Chuck -February 1, 2006
I have two comments to make on this thread. 1) The article asks "Why can't the PC do this?", not "Why can't Microsoft do this?". Similar programs exist on the PC. Probably the best examples are those from Roxio such as the Easy Media creator, photosuite, etc. products. Their actually half decent, but I'd agree they aren't up to the iLife standard. iTunes is available on Windows, but Apple's software tends to run much better on their own OS - just as MS products tend to run better on Windows. Picassa is probably the best consumer Photo product on the PC, but I wouldn't argue it's better in any way over iPhoto 6. Most of this has already been mentioned, but I'd be happy to entertain specific comparisons if necessary. Anyway, in addition to each element in iLife being first class products, what sets them above the rest is how well they integrate with each other. I'm often frustrated when using similar programs on the PC over this issue. iMovie seems to always need a point release after every major release before it's the product it was meant to be. iWeb is interesting for a 1.0 product. Let's see where they go with it. 2. As for MediaCenter, I'd agree that the purchase of a Media Center PC comes with more than something like Front Row. Front Row is a nice start at how the interface should be, but it's not a substitute for the many Media Center's recording features, etc. That said, Media Center PCs aren't exactly all that popular for a reason. The media center interface is severly lacking. It's hobbled by DRM restrictions, etc. In short, it's a good idea that's poorly implemented. As mentioned by another poster, something like El Gato's Eye TV is a much better solution for this niche market. I'd like to see Apple pursue something like this, but not at the expense of putting El Gato out of business. So, I'd agree Front Row is not a competitor to the full Media Center's capabilities, I'd also agree that the MS's Media Center PCs are far from ideal and there are better solutions out there already. Steve
Steve -February 1, 2006
Apple = Appliance PC = Personal Computer
A.I. -February 1, 2006
Basically I think they're competing in different markets is the reason why. No commercial reason for Microsoft so to do because it'd cost them money for no income stream; with Apple it's all part of the master plan. http://www.emudir.com/blog/b_43.asp
lunarship -February 1, 2006
bebopredux: The new iLife supports ANY DVD burner, not just apple's SuperDrive. Please watch the keynote at www.apple.com/quicktime/
James Dorn -February 1, 2006
PC = Choice of software + Gaming Mac = Spoon fed software + fruity looking hardware - Gaming
EyeDye -February 1, 2006
"However, I perfer Movie Maker 2, Photo Story, MS Producer, Nero for DVD creation. All Free. Try them sometimes. (sic)" I have. There's no comparison--iLife wins hands-down, especially in the area of interoperability between apps. MovieMaker is a joke compared to iMovie, and there's nothing on the PC side that offers the kind of quality templates that iDVD has. You may prefer those apps, but I guarantee you this--you'll spend more time to get the same result with poorer quality. Been there, done that. "Between you and me, I spent 5 times more on configuring MACS (10.3.9) for networking going against a (sic) xServe then I do (sic) with windows and active directory. Apple was never strong in networking protocols and directory access." BWAHAHAHAHA. Seriously, you're joking, right? The last IT guy I saw that had to connect a Mac to a PC network took...oh, 30 seconds.
lotsamystuff -February 1, 2006
I hate that this thread has become another platform flame war, but some things just can't be allowed to stand: "PC = Choice of software + Gaming" Uh-huh. 90% of that software is discount crap you find at Wal*Mart in the $2.99 aisle. But I'll grant you this--there IS a lot more of it. I'm not sure that 20 versions of "Ultimate CalendarMaker" and "Daily Horoscope Generator" is really a competitive advangage, but whatever. I cede the point. But GAMING? Please. PC Gaming is dead, they just haven't written the obituary yet. Consoles are taking over, my friend. Mark my words. "Mac = Spoon fed software + fruity looking hardware - Gaming" What the hell is "spoon-fed software"? MS Office? Photoshop? Every major productivity app? I have over 100 apps on my Mac, and I don't consider that any of them are "spoon-fed", whatever that means. And please define "fruity-looking hardware". When was the last time a DELL won a design award? I'm proud to have my Mac out where clients can see it. The DELL is hidden under the desk where it belongs. But you are right about this: Macs aren't great gaming machines. They're much better for getting real work done.
lotsamystuff -February 1, 2006
I never play any games on my computer anymore, the last PC game I had installed on a computer was probably Command and Conquer like 5 or 6 years ago and honestly I have no interest in trying to keep up with top end gaming anymore. Top end PSU's to ensure frame rates measured by the nanosecond are achieved, meh. That's why I have gaming consoles under my TV. (not that I even have time to play those anymore anyways).
Mike -February 1, 2006
The linux folks are getting there. Ubuntu is trying to offer a mac-like experience, which is probably why they went with gnome. You could build a decent tuxLife out of gaim (messaging) inkscape (vector drawing) the gimp/gimpshop (photo/raster/bitmap editing), kino (video editing) scribus (DTP) and blender (3d graphics) which all use the gtk toolkit. Scribus, inkscape, gaim and blender are all working together on interoperability. It's not as slick as OS X yet, and the major failings are in the audio side. Audacity is excellent, of course, but there isn't a garageband app on linux yet. On the other side of the fence, KDE has doubtless got programs for all these things. Both desktops have iTunes clones, and they even have their own office suites. In a few year's time, we'll have the situation in Linux where you have a sort of G-Life set of apps with gnome, and a K-life set of apps with KDE. And a good chunk of both will be ported run on windows. Sadly, they're not there yet, but they are heading in that direction. I always assumed that 'google pack' was supposed to be the sort of iLife for windows... they just haven't got it right yet.
Chris -February 1, 2006
To each is own. you enjoy gaming on computers: windows you enjoy using ilife: macs you enjoy using media pc: windows you enjoy owning pretty looking computers: macs its all about what you enjoy doing isnt it? question paul should also ask is, why not sell ilife for windows and make everyone happy.
happy -February 1, 2006
Microsoft can't do something similar to iLife without everybody saying it's a monopolist, Bill Gates is killing the competitors, etc. But a company like Adobe/Macromedia or Corel could make something similar to iLife.
ZBrando -February 1, 2006
I am not a big fan of him (I had a very bad professional experience with the iSync/iCal team), but the difference is due to Steve Jobs, you need to have to make a strong business decision to put so much money in the iLife making. Take in account that it does cost a lot of money to code the iLife suite. To polish it as it is. There is a very long path between a 'good enough' application and the ones we find in iLife. There is an obvious economic reason for that : sell Macintosh. Microsoft prefers to put money in the XBox, It seems to me that it is not a too bad decision. And I am not sure that Windows based customer take care so much about software quality. Not enough to justify to spend too much money. You know that a lot of manager are driven by the ratio cost/revenue, and this is a kind of motivation which give you a just 'good enough' software. When KDE or Gnome will catch up with Apple software of 2006, we will be in 2010 maybe, and where will be Apple ? Closed maybe ;)
GI -February 1, 2006
There is absolutely no legal issue with Microsoft releasing MS Life (except maybe a trademark issue). It would be an issue if MSFT bundled it with Windows, but if they sold it for $80, like Apple, they would be totally fine (assuming no other strong arm tactics). Methinks MSFT has been working on MS Life for several years now. That means it's probably going to be released very soon...by "soon" I mean not likely. MSFT has proven itself unable to deliver successful products to the consumer. They should focus on enterprise markets and milk the Windows and Office cows.
Macslut -February 1, 2006
I find it so funny that people spend so much time arguing over which is better - a Mac or a PC. Frankly your opinion is only valid according to what you do. I use both all day - just depending on what I am doing. Yes I would like to see Mac's do better at business apps Yes I would like to see Windows do better at graphics apps. What I would really like to see is people stop complaining about how the OS they are not using sucks. If you don't like it go write your own OS and see how hard it is.
Best of Both Worlds -February 1, 2006
It's incredible to me the prejudice you show in this kind of articles. What do you want to demonstrate? IDVD 6 is the better dvd application for what??? because have many templates????? Please, be more serious. If you want persuade housewifes, it's ok. Otherwise...
Nacho Garcia -February 1, 2006
lotsamystuff... Really you don't see, saying this, that you are praising the network capabilities of windows? Now consider how many time will take an It guy to connect a pc to a mac. THIS is the really matter. And I am an IT guy. Regards. Nacho Garcia.
Nacho Garcia -February 1, 2006
As a cross platform user, Apple has strive to make networking and cross-platform compatible files of applications such as Photoshop, MS Office as well as PC fonts (.ttf files) to enable PC files to be used in a Mac, but what MS has done to make Mac files usable in a PC? First IE was scrapped from Mac, now what's next? The new iWorks seems to be looking better than Office? Another thing... what the hell MS is doing to infiltrate the Print&Publishing market? Clearly ruled by Adobe/MM & Quark, it's a big joke Microsoft is introducing it's MS Graphic & Interactive Expression Suites. Well the interface is nice but is MS so desperate and heading towards 'Jack-of-all-Trades' tag? Gates : Stick to your XBox & your OS/Office Development Jobs : Good job. We showed that we are trying to be Cross-platform compatible machines only to be viewed as enemy by the opposite users. GAMERS: Gaming earns you no money.
Kenneth Teh -February 1, 2006
Nero Ultra 7 Edition is far superior to iLife. There is help for the PC. The only thing that iLife adds is iweb, which any 2 year old can use. Reminds me of PageMill for the Mac.
my2cents -February 1, 2006
It has been so long since they have seen integrated easy to use software, MS users wouldn't recognize it if it bit 'em on the a*ss. NERO, NERO, NERO! It's perfect and it's FREE, FREE, FREE! Hahahaha! I am sure it is worth exactly what you pay for it. Media center PC's are really successful. Everyone wants one. They are so easy to use and....hahahahaha, sorry, I couldn't keep a straight face, even while typing! Just what I want, a PC that is as byzantine and piecemeal as a desktop machine, just in the living room. No, really, I love remote controls with 65 TicTac sized buttons labeled with 6 point type! Of course, I also am fond of hangnails, so there you have it. About Linux: "You wait and see, you big bullies. I'm gonna go get my big brother Gnome and then you're gonna be sorry! You wait and see! Linux will rule! Just look at Limp and Gnuts and Blug and xgarBingzo and GibNifGnuTux Pro 2.0. These are perfect replacements for Photoshop, Quark, Final Cut Pro and Maya. I read it at penguinOs.com, so it must be true! And it only takes two days and a computer science degree to install it, which everyone has, right? Everyone wants a server, right? Who the heck needs color management or manufacturer's drivers for printers. Isn't it more important that it runs on any random piece of computer detritus that you have laying around? After all, don't we all have ALL THE TIME IN THE WORLD TO ACCOMPLISH NOTHING WHATSOEVER USEFUL? So we can spend vast amounts of time in forums complaining that Linux isn't the worldbeater that we believe it is. And download internet ****. And mp3s....with our Linux server. Just wait, we will win! Bwahahahaha! Plop!" <Passes out from drinking Jagermeister and Tang cocktails.>
Hahahaha -February 2, 2006
one word : monopoly if microsoft were doing a full integrated suite like apple had done they would be accused of monopoly practice. besides appple is more and more eating space for 3rd party dev as more and more of their tool replace more "professionnal" ones.
dvhh -February 2, 2006
Nacho, If you are having a difficult time networking with a Mac, you are not long for your job.
Wibble -February 2, 2006
Uffff. After the BIG patience required to get at the bottom of that it would be stupid not to write down my opinion. Premise: I used Windows (every single version but NT3) (yes, I used NT4!), Linux (Yggdrasil, Slacware, RH, Fedora, MDK, Debian and Ubuntu, in order of appearance) and Mac (OS7/8 and X10.3 and 4). First: there is no lack of software for the Mac, there is lack of software for windows! AND for linux! Nero comes close to close the gap, but there is a very rich programming community for the mac that simply cannot survive doing crap, so they do good programs, often for free (look to AdiumX, based off GAIM, but hundreds times better). Second: I'll never ever ever more use windows. Not about politics, monopoly anything political. I just find easier work on OSX or GNOME (I don't like KDE too). I think that it's a matter of "Usability" in the real technical sense. Look in the web for more information on usability, there are some people who do usability tests, and find that, for instance OSX.4 has 57 usability bugsm Ubuntu Breezy 48, and they are the most usable OS in the field! iLife is VERY good, but it's half of what's good the mac as a whole. NO configuration required. Once I had my iMac connected by ethernet to my router, then came a friend with his iBook, and with maybe 3 (three) clicks he could connect to the internet through a wireless communication with my iMac. Yes iLife is good, but people can live without it (if they don't know). In M$ world people doesn't even imagine the existance of something like this, there is no hint that something like this is possible. NO INTEGRATION. And microsoft could do this without monopolizing, just open your OS specifications (OLE for a start) and people will start to flock around doing "plugins" around your "engine". I hope that new intel macs can emulate windows effectively, then everyone of my family will get one, and use emulation for the 2-3 proprietary sw they need for work!
Saverio -February 2, 2006
""NOTHING you can do on a Mac that you can't do on a PC. It may be more expensive, but not impossible!"" All comments are from my experience only having used windows at home and osx at work for the last 2 years I have come to the conclusion that 86% of the people in my country who bought a dell last year for over $1000 should have gotten a mac mini for $599. 8 out of 10 people can't tell the difference between microsoft word, wordpad, and the word processor in open office. it's easier to diagnose and fix an apple hardware problem it's easier to diagnose and fix an apple software problem Apache and php work better, are easier to setup on osx than windows The inner workings/settings of osx for advanced users are easier to use than windows. The gui for regular every day stuff is faster and more flexible in widows....when it doesn't crash/hog all the ram/doesn't have redraw glitches. Explorer beats the crap out of Finder Finder doesn't crash
thin -February 2, 2006
"Now consider how many time will take an It guy to connect a pc to a mac. THIS is the really matter. And I am an IT guy. Regards." Ummm... Well, I was able to "connect" my PC to my Mac in about five minutes. Oh, and most of that time was spent walking between two offices to check the two machines. With Microsoft's Remote Desktop Connection, I can run my DELL on my Mac. They talk to each other very well, share printers, files, etc. No problem. YMMV. After all, you're an "IT Guy". I'm just an average user. :-)
lotsamystuff -February 2, 2006
I just want to set the record straight about all of the MS monopoly stuff mention here. MS wasn't sued because they created WMP they were sued because they made it nearly impossible to remove it or replace it on Windows. They imposed penalties on hardware venders that sold machines bundled with other software. They used their market position to force WMP and IE on their users, such that no other software vendors could survive producing similar products. You don't like iLife, uninstall it. It doesn't affect the rest of OSX in any way. You don't like quicktime, no problem just use Realplayer or WMP (but why would you do that). Apple hasn't driven out the competition by using their monopoly market position to make the OS unusable or terribly deficient by making the OS require those components. I guess Safari would be the exception. I think you could delete safari, but the web kit would still be there. Believe me if Apple started to tie iLife into OSX in a way that made OSX unusable, people would start to talk anti-trust.
Sick of the Monopoly talk -February 2, 2006
Not to bash the MAC (I love mine), but the reason that apple had to produce iLife was because of the lack of software available for the platform... Now I paid more money for the individual apps in the categories but there are a "TON" of apps available for windows that will fill all the iLife functionality space on windows
PLT -February 2, 2006
iLife is unique. AFAIK Apple does not prevent VARs from installing alternate software to iLife, therefore there is no antitrust. Microsoft does however have lawyers on retainer that file suits against Apple for potential hearing loss when listening to music on an iPod for prolonged periods of time at stupid-*** volume levels. Thurrot is quite obviously hedging his bets recently since he doesn't want an anti-Mac reputation if Leopard gives Vista a run for its money. And what a surprise, Rick Tempest is shilling on the the thread too. Sheep, make your own mind up. You only have to google for the Apple hate sites to realise. (Then google for the Microsoft hate sites). Kama Sutra, y'all!
Rod Shuffler -February 2, 2006
"Now I paid more money for the individual apps in the categories but there are a "TON" of apps available for windows that will fill all the iLife functionality space on windows" Agreed. But none of them will do the job as inexpensively, elegantly, easily, and with the kind of interoperability as the iLife suite. That's all Paul's saying. And he's right.
lotsamystuff -February 2, 2006
Mac computers are sexy iLife is sexy. Working with them makes me feel good. My last Dell did not.Simple
Conrad Zoo -February 3, 2006
Microsoft keeps getting sued as a monopoly by anyone and everyone mad that Bill Gates has money. Apple doesn't have that problem becuase it is such a minor slice of the computer world's pie. Microsoft can't make anything like this because they would be crucified by the world for stepping on "the little guy" software companies who try to make the same things. Make up your mind guys - Evil Empire or just another company trying to make money? It would be interesting to see how fantastic Apple's software ran if they had to deal with the plethora of hardware options Microsoft has to deal with and make work.
Mark in BG -February 3, 2006
I think it should work good
rohan -February 6, 2006
Great... why argue, some people like Windows some like Mac! I like both! Have a nice day and enjoy your computer (I enjoy my Mac but i USE Windows becuase i HAVE to!) Just a persanal oppinion! I am not a techy- Just a user! Thanks Chris
Chris -February 7, 2006
I loved this article and I've found myself in a conundrum recently BECAUSE i WANT TO USE ILIFE '06!!! I'm actually considering buying an iBook JUST TO GET ILIFE (iWeb to be precise)!!! I second the motion, any can't any Windows-based software be like this? Microsoft has dropped the ball big time. I could care less about Microsoft Money or Encarta, what I really want is something to load photos onto my iPod, create slideshows and movies, create a blog and do a podcast. Guess I should buy a Mac but it shouldn't be that hard. I just bought a $1500 Windows PC!!!
Jim -February 8, 2006
Probably because they are too busy building and maintaining operating systems used for 700+ million users across millions of hardware configurations. ---- Yeah, mostly column B.. Vista (column A) should be coming around aaaaaany day now.. let's not hold our breath on an iLife-killer LMAO
mike -February 22, 2006
Quote: GAMERS: Gaming earns you no money. Nice comment.. See of Sony agrees with you after the PSP launch and the investment in PS3... What area is one of the biggest driver for HW upgrades and drives a large amount of innovation in both HW and SW... That's like trying to say the biggest driver of innovation for web stores are NOT adult sites... far more than any other type of store including itunes, amazon and the like...
Mofo -February 23, 2006
I don't like iLife. I don't want it on a PC, please, god ! save us from this. What can you do with this ugly softy crap. iPhoto sucks, take a look at Irfanview, not on a mac for shure, to good for it. Garageband ?? what's for ? play gamegame ? Huh ! Fisher-Price. iTune ???? Crap crap crap. No use. Well I like Foobar2000 instead, much better yeah ! just fine, just nice. iDVD ? I don't buy DVD because I hate this format, not flexible enough, always that intro to waste my time. I ain't gonna join that gang. Kill them, Boycott DVD !! Video editing ? well there is a bunch of it for every taste, use and wallet. iWeb ? never tried, but stinks from the start. Picasa ? It is not a PC App. It is not an app. To appeal mac user maybe. Hey guys, stay away from the PC, stay with your Mac- "My Little Pony" -intosh SeeYa
Jack -February 25, 2006
You know what's funny? Everytime I hear someone say that PCs are for getting real work done and computing while macs are for music and graphics I think about how everytime a long-time PC user comes into the company I work for and is issued their iBook, they are AMAZED that they could do so much with a computer or do it so productively! With the PC they were always too terrified to try anything for fear that they would ruin their machine.
someguy -March 1, 2006
I have two words for you all, Windows Vista, coming next Christmas. You want things to look like a Mac? So do I, check out the site, they know what we want...
Manny -March 3, 2006
iNteresting... after over 20 years of pc support i still believe 98% of all pc users only need $68 worth of OEM MS Works for personal apps. Half still need phone support to reboot their PC's and the other half can't find the power switch.
workswizard -March 5, 2006
Actually, iLife isn't all that useful. Take one thing. You can't make a blank menu in iDVD. Just a simple blank menu. At first it looks like a limitation, but actually no, it's a clever bit of design that means that you can't really make the disc yours. Always, it has to look like a disc made in iDVD. After all it's an advert for Apple. But really folks, you are being owned by Paul Thurott. He writes an extremely glib and ill conceived 'review' of iLife simply so that you will all fight like children. It's called blogging and it is not in any way real information or news. You are learning nothing from it. Here am I too, in Paul Thurrott's blog, like a little puppet, doing the blog dance. Blogging is rotting our minds folks and every time you comment on a blog you lose a brain cell. BTW, the fellow that keeps telling us that Nero is free. It's free if you steal it. Otherwise pay the makers like you are supposed to.
Tom -June 12, 2006
Just bought the MacBook Pro and it burns soo hot. It is not worth the $2500. My PC friends have proven their ability to match the iLife package. iLife is convienent, but pricing does not favor Macs. I'm returning this mac and going with the HP special addition consumer notebook ($1100). The money saved allows for a SLR digital camrera or Mini DV camcorder...OR both!!
Airborne -June 23, 2006
Really, some people just have the blinders on. There are plenty of applications in both the Windows and Linux worlds that are comparable to the Mac software out there. They are all PCs, even the Macs, so don't even go there. iLife is fine, I can do all that stuff with Ahead's Nero suite. Sure it doesn't come with most Windows machines... but iLife doesn't come with Macs either. As for the address book, calendar, safari and other junk you're saddled with upon installation, there of plenty of similar apps upon installation of Windows and the many flavours of linux as well. Not to mention on the Linux end of things on most distros you have out-of-the-box compatibility with MS Office applications through open office. Don't waste your cash on iWork, you can run open office too! I have to service these machines every day. With the windows machines, people mess up their crap unintentionally all the time, whereas the Apple crowd usually only have hardware and hygeine problems. I'm not kidding either, out of every hundred Mac users, more than 40% of them need to learn how to use a toothbrush. What's up with that? Are they waiting for iBrush 2008? Anyhow, I don't want to start a flame war, but you folks are easily impressed by things with pretty logos on them. Many of the best applications out there are not platform dependant.
Jimmy420 -August 13, 2006
Yes Microsoft did do somthing 100 times better then Mac apple put all of them together Windows media center PhotoStory 3 Movie maker and you have to wait till windows vista it will hit the top even more then windows xp but i love microsoft more then mac but u know wat both should do work together make one hectic strong operating system and make all people happy and enjoy using the computer PC
khalid -September 28, 2006
|
The comments about the difficulties of networking Macs with Windows is being largely misunderstood. There is no difficulty in plugging in a Mac to a Windows network. There is no difficulty in opening Windows network resources from a Mac. The difficulty is in integrating a Mac with Active Directory with network-hosted home directories and central management capabilities. We're talking about managing hundreds or thousands of machines so that data is automatically (without user intervention) stored on servers (where it is easily backed up), while still allowing mobile Macs to run while not connected to the network and still authenticating against Windows servers. We're talking about using login scripting to deploy patches, fixes, and new software so that everyone in the organization is running with the same configuration. We're talking about configuring network-based disk-imaging for the Macs. I have about 750 XP machines and 400 Macs in my organization, and, while 10.4 has definitely made leaps in terms of MANAGED network friendliness, that area of OS X is still not on par with Windows. I expect that by the time I'm using Workgroup Manager 10.6, Mac may be pretty comparable to XP/2003 on that front (of course MS will have since pushed the envelope with Longhorn/Vista). Apple has lots of things that I like (iMovie and Garageband top the list), but in enterprise networking they are simply behind the curve at present. It's understandable...Microsoft started working on their enterprise networking with Windows for Workgroups 3.11 in the early 90's. With the exception of At Ease (which I think we'd all like to forget), Mac didn't really do much with it until the release of OS X nearly a decade later.
Wolfie -October 20, 2006
ur all stupid *** white trash mutherfukin *******
asshole -December 28, 2006
Macintosh is my FAVORATE computer!!!!!!!!!!!! i love the gaymes their so fuuun!!!!!!!! goodby!
Agnus -January 16, 2007
About 20 years ago Apples stragety was for Apple to win Microsoft has to lose. Than Apple started working with MS to release products such as office:Mac. Now I think that Microsoft should start working with apple to make softwares such as iLife:Windows. Microsoft needs to suck it up and admit the fact that everybody is falling for iLife and .Mac.
Mac user -February 16, 2007
Whenever Mr. Jobs and/or Mr. Gates finally decide to create programs that consumers in both worlds can utilize then the consumers will win and one of the Misters will become even wealthier. Apple software products are notoriously much more user friendly but have earned less than 10% of the world market. What do you think would happen IF Apple's friendlier software could be utilized in the MS world? There is a TON of money out there just waiting to be made ..... And a TON of MS consumers willing to give it away. Whomever blinks first, Mr.Gates or Mr.Jobs, will be the eventual victor.
A waiting cconsumer -June 11, 2007
Whenever Mr. Jobs and/or Mr. Gates finally decide to create programs that consumers in both worlds can utilize then the consumers will win and one of the Misters will become even wealthier. Apple software products are notoriously much more user friendly but have earned less than 10% of the world market. What do you think would happen IF Apple's friendlier software could be utilized in the MS world? There is a TON of money out there just waiting to be made ..... And a TON of MS consumers willing to give it away. Whomever blinks first, Mr.Gates or Mr.Jobs, will be the eventual victor.
A waiting cconsumer -June 11, 2007
For those of you complaining about Microsoft computers: Microsoft doesn't make computers. Microsoft makes software. Bill also owns hefty shares in Apple.
Dieter -June 11, 2007
Dieter all the shares owned by microsoft are non voteing. So whats the point?
realfolkblues -October 12, 2007
The Mac may come with professionally produced software, but I could not fond a Mac desktop for under $1000. That's unacceptable considering I paid $500 for my custom built computer. I used the XP disc that a friend gave me when his computer was stolen. iLife may not be "Matched" by anything free on Windows or Linux, but considering the PLETHORA of COMPLETELY FREE programs available on the web for Windows, I have to say the scale is tipped FAR into Microsoft's favor. You can't make programs for the Mac without paying serious money to the Apple corporation. That's one reason why there are so few programs for it. To be fair, I suppose it's a form of quality control. Apple doesn't want a bunch of crappy little programs that all look different from each other crawling all over their OS. That's also a reason that Macs are said to "Just Work." It's becuase the options are so limited, that you can't break your computer. This can be good considering the number of computer illiterate morons out there who seem to ruin their computers at the drop of a hat, but for people who want control over their computer, Mac doesn't allow that to the same degree that Windows does. Winamp, Windows Media Player, Audacity, GIMP, Windows Movie Maker, Windows DVD Maker, Windows Vista Gallery, etc. are all fine alternatives to iLife and all of them are free. The ones that don't come with Windows are pretty small. If you pay what I paid for my PC, and then buy the Adobe Creative Suite, you have the most powerful tools on the market for web design all for less than the price of the cheapest Mac desktop.
NIck -April 20, 2008
Anyone who really needs all those features uses Adobe anyway. Photoshop + Bridge + After Effects + Premiere Pro is all i need. For audio management, I use itunes for Windows, and for audio mixing, I use the pro-level Cakewalk software. To those that believe Garageband is pro-level, you're sadly mistaken.
Alex -August 31, 2008
There are 2 simple reasons why there is no iLife for windows, the easy one: apple is horrible at coding for windows(e.g itunes) The complicated one: one of the big attraction for switchers is iLife so if it were for windows, $79 vs. $1400, if it did come out for windows it would cost a lot more
Baeo, using mac since '05 -January 18, 2009
iTunes for pc dosen't suck. i sooooooooooo wish i either had the $500 for the very basic mac mini, or sue microsoft for not compensating for the wonder of iLife 09. i want to burn a dvd for my many videos i've made on windows movie maker (the worlds most annoying movie editing software but it works) with menus ans stuff but i can't :( i want an iDvd like software for pc and maby a better movie editing software but i have wax on 1 of my pc's and that's ok ya know what? microsoft should say they will stop making office for mac unless apple makes an iLife for pc that might work (saying that iWork sucks)
AJ -July 31, 2009
|
Email this Article
Printer-Friendly