Windows 95 vs. MacOS 7.5. How was it then? And what has changed something?
I stumbled upon an interesting article (under the habroath) dated December 1995. Now it’s funny to read, maybe you will smile :). But the article fully describes the current situation, nothing has changed, all the same questions, all the same answers :)
Learn ten things about Mac OS and Windows 95 that every Mac user needs to know.
The smoke from the fireworks dissipated, the dust raised by the crowd settled, and the brass band gathered and left. The welcome reception for the release of Windows 95 is over, and we - Mac lovers - like anyone not on the guest list, may experience a strange mixed feeling of regret and relief: have we not missed anything important? Has anyone been somewhere more fun than us? Or are we just lucky enough to evade a publicized dull event?
')
Answers to these three questions: "yes", "no" and "maybe." Although not becoming a Mac gravedigger (and that’s how Microsoft would like to make us think), Windows 95 is an important product that affects all PC users, including us, the Mac family. And, despite the fact that we managed to avoid its installation on our machines, it would be naive for us to remain stubbornly in the dark about its importance.
Windows 95 threatens stupid neophytes with the belief that a Wintel computer (Windows operating system plus an Intel microprocessor) is "as good as a Mac." It strengthens the position of those information system managers (IS) who are just looking for an excuse to remove Macs from workplaces.
But the user experience with Windows 95 (Applespeak - for the user interface) is not “as great as the experience with a Mac. Just do not take our words like this: read, they say, that the press writing about the PC has to admit. And as a Mac user, although you don’t have to worry about renaming your WINSOCK.DLL file (see fact 6), you still need to know some basic facts about Windows 95, because only in this case you will have no answer. "As good as the Mac."
FACT 1. Windows 95 will be a great success.
Do not doubt this for a minute. Forget all the hints in the popular press. Ignore considerations of numerous complaints about Microsoft technical support. Do not pay attention to the empty e-mails of disgruntled fools and restrained pessimism of many corporate IP managers - Windows 95 will sell out like hot cakes and become the main operating system for PC-compatible desktops.
In the first 4 days of Windows 95 sales, up to 1 million copies were sold, which is surprising even with the frenzy of the August week of Windows. It is estimated that by the end of 1995, 30 million desktops will be equipped with Windows 95. We can talk about tremendous success, and it is caused by one very simple reason - necessity. Windows 95, which appears to many in the image of a “knight in shining armor,” has a clear marketing advantage: the operating system that it replaces, strongly binds the user to itself.
FACT 2. Windows 95 - is the progress compared to previous versions of Windows
Windows 3.1 and its healthier successor Windows for Workgroups 3.11 are almost disgusting. They are difficult to install. They are difficult to use. Irreversible failure often occurs with them. Installing new hardware for them is fraught with great pain.
With all its flaws, Windows 95 is a boon to the Wintel family. However, as was rightly pointed out in Apple's advertising, the most important innovations of Windows 95 are old news for Mac users: long file names, a trash can (trash can (called Recycle Bin), aliases aliases (called “shortcuts”) - shortcuts ), a truly clear organization of the “desktop”, ease of switching between running programs and the promised simplicity of plug-and-play technology ("plug-and-play"), as soon as the peripheral manufacturing industry implements Microsoft standards.
FACT 3. It is more difficult to work with Windows 95 than with Mac OS.
You might think, “This is a Mac journal. That is how they should speak. ” Well, we do not dispute this, but here is a comparative analysis of one of our sister journals - PC / Computing: when they tested Windows 95 in their Usability Lab, new users rated the system as bad for managing files and not suitable for working with software (on in fact, they even preferred Windows for Workgroups 3.11). One comment: "Testers were confused when performing even the simplest tasks in a Windows 95 environment." In addition, PC / Computing writes: "A perfectly managed Macintosh environment is still a usability standard." Thank you, guys.
For a variety of different reasons, users find it easier to work with Macs than with Windows 95. Take, for example, the praised Start button and Task Bar. Sorry, but they didn’t delight us - the menu bar, the program menu and the Apple menu on the Mac do the same much more elegant functions.
A more specific (but quite typical) example is the sequence of actions in Windows 95 for adding an item to the Startmenu launch menu. Place the cursor on the taskbar and right-click. When the pop-up menu appears, type R on the keyboard (no, this is not indicated in the menu, but don't let this trifle bother you). Now press <Control> + <Tab> and then enter A. You will be presented with a sequence of dialog boxes where you will be asked to first enter the element you want to add to the Start menu, then choose where you want to place it, then enter its name and finally choose an icon for it. In contrast, if you want to add an item to the Apple menu on Mac OS, you select it and then select the item “Add Alias to Apple Menu” from the list of Automated Tasks in the Apple menu. Done.
Another area where Windows 95 is lagging behind Mac OS is managing removable storage media. The icons of the floppy disk and the CD-ROM drive are always present on the “desktop”, even when no media is inserted. Click on the floppy icon and you will receive an alarm message: “A: \ is not accessible. The device is not ready. ” (Disk A: \ not available. The device is not ready.) Rest assured guys, it is ready. It is simply empty. But if you insert a floppy disk or a CD, the icons will not tell you the name of the inserted disk - they will not even change to inform you that they are now “ready”.
Finally, there are frequent reminders that right under the smooth surface of Windows 95, the soul of a meager DOS lurks. For example, every time we restart one of our test PCs at MacUser Labs, we get this warm friendly message in DOS text mode: “Invalid VxD service link to ATR (01) + 00000AA3 to device“ 3155 ”, service E. Microsoft technical support comes to a standstill - and we along with it.
FACT 4. Windows 95 has several advantages over Mac OS.
But pretty kicking windows. If you are going to convincingly prove that the Mac is still out of competition, you should somewhat give in and admit that in some ways Windows 95 is ahead of Mac OS.
For example, more developed system administration. Network administrators will definitely be delighted with the two new Windows 95 system programs: the Registry (System Registry) and the System Policy Editor (System Resource Allocation Editor). Registry allows administrators to view and adjust information about the system configurations of individual users, and the System Policy Editor to enter default settings for each PC on the network (or its parts), from parameters defining the available printers and servers to “wallpaper” patterns for “ desktop. Such functions might look utopian in Orulellian style, but for corporate IP managers it would be a heartfelt gift for God and many Mac administrators.
On paper, the networking features of Windows 95 look impressive. These include compatibility with NetWare (which has become an industry standard), Microsoft network operating systems, and a number of network protocols that would satisfy the wildest dreams of a network administrator. The picture becomes even better when you add secure remote connectivity and simultaneous work with multiple networks using multiple protocols — the same multihoming capability that Apple recently introduced through the system extension Open Transport.
However, as might be expected, the utopian picture contradicts reality. The first reports show that Windows 95 network “sweets” are poisoned by incompatibility problems, which may take a long time to overcome.
FACT 5. Windows 95 has a more advanced architecture than Mac OS.
The most powerful advantage of Windows 95 over Mac OS is not on the surface. They, undoubtedly, are preemptive multitasking. This, without the slightest exaggeration, is a real blessing. In a system with preemptive multitasking, the OS takes care of the allocation of CPU time: background processes can coexist peacefully and efficiently, file transfers and disk formatting are performed without blocking the computer, and user interaction remains continuous and reliable, despite many background tasks. However, in Windows 95, these benefits are realized only if 32-bit programs are used, which are compiled with respect to preemptive multitasking; the current 16-bit programs are not designed for this.
Mac OS does not provide preemptive multitasking. And, even worse, the next version of Mac OS - Copland - will correspond only to its limited version, applicable only to processes that do not require user interaction with the interface (for example, file transfers and image rendering). Thus, in the foreseeable future, preemptive multitasking will remain inaccessible to Mac users.
Architecturally, Mac OS has one important advantage over Windows 95 — multiprocessing capability. Specifications created by DayStar Digital engineers and now distributed by Apple allow developers to create Mac programs that take advantage of the use of multiple processors in the same task. Windows 95 does not provide multiprocessing.
FACT 6. Windows 95 is not fully compatible with existing software.
If you prefer, you can compare Apple’s move to the Power Macintosh computer with the Wintel world transfer to Windows 95 — Apple released a robust, emulator that allowed Mac users to transfer their existing software with minimal difficulty. Microsoft, through its own efforts, has created hundreds of application programs, utilities and tools for users, many incompatibility problems when working in the Windows 95 environment. But it’s pretty painless to port old programs.
In addition, there is still the problem of the missing WINSOCK file: Internet users who migrate from previous versions of Windows and access the Internet through the Microsoft Network or use Windows 95 remote access, find that Windows 95 has skillfully prevented them from accessing the Internet through their former service provider. If you give technical details, Windows 95 simply corrupts an important WINSOCK.DLL file that tells the computer where to find the means to access the Internet. What is it - harmless technical problem or dishonest blocking of all gateways to the Internet, except those provided by Microsoft? You decide.
FACT 7. Windows 95 will require a significant software update.
If we were not so afraid of a conflict of interest (and observers from the SEC), we would have made significant investments in companies that specialize in developing programs for Windows 95. Windows 95 users, as well as Mac users, will have to update their software, to fully experience the benefits of their new systems. Accelerated memory management in Windows 95, higher resistance to irreversible failures and numerous advantages of preemptive multitasking are realized only for specific 32-bit programs for Windows 95. Hmm ... Thirty million users, a couple of programs per user, all this looks like a good year work for manufacturers floppy.
FACT 8. Windows 95 may require a significant hardware upgrade.
Microsoft claims that the minimal platform for running Windows 95 is a 386DX PC with 4 MB of RAM. Do not hesitate, and System 7.5 works great on the 4MB Macintosh Classic. But let's be closer to reality: PC WEEK Labs tests proved that no sensible person would call Windows 95 performance “good” unless at least 33 MHz PC 486DX4 with 8 MB of RAM is used to run it.
One last thing: according to PC Magazine Labs testing, to really improve the performance of Windows 95, you would need 16 MB of RAM and a Pentium processor, which would take better advantage of the increased memory than the 486 processor. You can almost hear the rustle of checkbooks, is not it?
Most corporate IP managers assume that the cost of upgrading hardware and software to match the capabilities of Windows 95 will be between $ 500 and $ 1,000 (per PC). Add to this the cost of staff training, which, according to usability tests, should remain substantially higher than for Mac OS. Taking all this into account, you can, and without being a rocket scientist, doubt the wisdom of an immediate switch to Windows 95.
FACT 9. Windows 95 does not improve performance.
Windows 95 is an improvement in some features, but not performance. Testing has shown that the performance of 16-bit application programs running on a PC with a Pentium processor does not substantially change when the Windows for Workgroups 3.11 operating system is replaced with Windows 95.
But what about the future? What happens when the latest Intel microprocessor, the Pentium Pro, becomes widely available? There is news that is not very encouraging to users of Windows 95: although the arrival of the Pentium Pro promises excellent performance for fully 32-bit operating systems, such as Windows NT and OS / 2 Warp, this does not apply to Windows 95, which contains a considerable balance of 16- bit code. Testing PC Magazine testifies that the current 16-bit programs running on a Windows 95-equipped PC with a Pentium Pro processor will practically not gain in performance and can even run slower than on a PC with a Pentium processor. And Windows 95-oriented 32-bit programs will run about 20% faster on a PC with a Pentium Pro processor than on a PC with a Pentium. Has it still not impressed you?
At the same time, we should expect a significant increase in the performance of the Mac OS system after the release of its version of Copland. Unlike the current Mac OS, which contains decent chunks of code that must be executed in emulation mode on Macintosh or Mac-compatible computers with a PowerPC processor, the Copland system will be 95% native. The “native” code plus the PowerPC processor add up to a fast operating system.
FACT 10. Mac will not give up their positions.
Windows 95 is a much-needed improvement over its predecessors. Nevertheless, it has significant compatibility problems, it does not increase speed and sensitivity to user actions, it requires significant investments in new hardware and software, and, finally, it is simply difficult to work with it.
However, quality in itself does not guarantee success. (Otherwise, we would all record quad soundtracks on Betamax cassettes with the song “My so-called life”.) Numbers are of paramount importance in business, and the PC industry is no exception.
But even if only the numbers are considered a barometer of success, then here, I assure you, Mac is fine - more than 20 million Macintoshs are sold. Every tenth desktop computer is a Mac. It is expected that in 1995 Mac sales in the United States would significantly exceed ten billion dollars - a jump of more than 30% compared with 1994.
And there is one more number - less well-known, although perhaps even more important: in 1995, the Apple Worldwide Developers Conference was the most visited in history and gathered over 4,100 people - 30% more than a year ago. . Advanced software will continue to be available for Mac and compatible computers.
Mac lives and well.
What they're saying
"The Windows 95 interface has been rigorously torn from the Mac OS system, but the matter hasn’t gone further than pure external similarity."
Herb Betony and Peter Kofi, PC WEEK
"... If Microsoft really was an innovative company, as it names itself, it would use the opportunity to drastically circumvent the Mac, and not create a frail design like" me too. "
Douglas Adams, author of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.
"Macintosh System 7.5.2 is the easiest, most reliable and convenient operating system."
Paul Somerson, PC / Computing
"... [In Windows 95], irreversible failure can happen relatively easily, [and it] saves significant pieces of old DOS code ..."
Linley Guanap, Microprocessor Report
Who has the advantage?
Messages from the battlefield of operating systems
The creators of Windows 95 have released quite a few critical arrows for borrowing the features of the Macintosh interface, but many of the components of Windows 95 give new sound to well-known Mac features — or offer their own completely new features. Conversely, Mac OS has many features that Windows 95 is still not close at all (can't it come close?). So which operating system is better - and for what tasks? Here is our summary of features showing the advantages of one or another OS.
Learn ten things about Mac OS and Windows 95 that every Mac user needs to know.
The smoke from the fireworks dissipated, the dust raised by the crowd settled, and the brass band gathered and left. The welcome reception for the release of Windows 95 is over, and we - Mac lovers - like anyone not on the guest list, may experience a strange mixed feeling of regret and relief: have we not missed anything important? Has anyone been somewhere more fun than us? Or are we just lucky enough to evade a publicized dull event?
')
Answers to these three questions: "yes", "no" and "maybe." Although not becoming a Mac gravedigger (and that’s how Microsoft would like to make us think), Windows 95 is an important product that affects all PC users, including us, the Mac family. And, despite the fact that we managed to avoid its installation on our machines, it would be naive for us to remain stubbornly in the dark about its importance.
Windows 95 threatens stupid neophytes with the belief that a Wintel computer (Windows operating system plus an Intel microprocessor) is "as good as a Mac." It strengthens the position of those information system managers (IS) who are just looking for an excuse to remove Macs from workplaces.
But the user experience with Windows 95 (Applespeak - for the user interface) is not “as great as the experience with a Mac. Just do not take our words like this: read, they say, that the press writing about the PC has to admit. And as a Mac user, although you don’t have to worry about renaming your WINSOCK.DLL file (see fact 6), you still need to know some basic facts about Windows 95, because only in this case you will have no answer. "As good as the Mac."
FACT 1. Windows 95 will be a great success.
Do not doubt this for a minute. Forget all the hints in the popular press. Ignore considerations of numerous complaints about Microsoft technical support. Do not pay attention to the empty e-mails of disgruntled fools and restrained pessimism of many corporate IP managers - Windows 95 will sell out like hot cakes and become the main operating system for PC-compatible desktops.
In the first 4 days of Windows 95 sales, up to 1 million copies were sold, which is surprising even with the frenzy of the August week of Windows. It is estimated that by the end of 1995, 30 million desktops will be equipped with Windows 95. We can talk about tremendous success, and it is caused by one very simple reason - necessity. Windows 95, which appears to many in the image of a “knight in shining armor,” has a clear marketing advantage: the operating system that it replaces, strongly binds the user to itself.
FACT 2. Windows 95 - is the progress compared to previous versions of Windows
Windows 3.1 and its healthier successor Windows for Workgroups 3.11 are almost disgusting. They are difficult to install. They are difficult to use. Irreversible failure often occurs with them. Installing new hardware for them is fraught with great pain.
With all its flaws, Windows 95 is a boon to the Wintel family. However, as was rightly pointed out in Apple's advertising, the most important innovations of Windows 95 are old news for Mac users: long file names, a trash can (trash can (called Recycle Bin), aliases aliases (called “shortcuts”) - shortcuts ), a truly clear organization of the “desktop”, ease of switching between running programs and the promised simplicity of plug-and-play technology ("plug-and-play"), as soon as the peripheral manufacturing industry implements Microsoft standards.
FACT 3. It is more difficult to work with Windows 95 than with Mac OS.
You might think, “This is a Mac journal. That is how they should speak. ” Well, we do not dispute this, but here is a comparative analysis of one of our sister journals - PC / Computing: when they tested Windows 95 in their Usability Lab, new users rated the system as bad for managing files and not suitable for working with software (on in fact, they even preferred Windows for Workgroups 3.11). One comment: "Testers were confused when performing even the simplest tasks in a Windows 95 environment." In addition, PC / Computing writes: "A perfectly managed Macintosh environment is still a usability standard." Thank you, guys.
For a variety of different reasons, users find it easier to work with Macs than with Windows 95. Take, for example, the praised Start button and Task Bar. Sorry, but they didn’t delight us - the menu bar, the program menu and the Apple menu on the Mac do the same much more elegant functions.
A more specific (but quite typical) example is the sequence of actions in Windows 95 for adding an item to the Startmenu launch menu. Place the cursor on the taskbar and right-click. When the pop-up menu appears, type R on the keyboard (no, this is not indicated in the menu, but don't let this trifle bother you). Now press <Control> + <Tab> and then enter A. You will be presented with a sequence of dialog boxes where you will be asked to first enter the element you want to add to the Start menu, then choose where you want to place it, then enter its name and finally choose an icon for it. In contrast, if you want to add an item to the Apple menu on Mac OS, you select it and then select the item “Add Alias to Apple Menu” from the list of Automated Tasks in the Apple menu. Done.
Another area where Windows 95 is lagging behind Mac OS is managing removable storage media. The icons of the floppy disk and the CD-ROM drive are always present on the “desktop”, even when no media is inserted. Click on the floppy icon and you will receive an alarm message: “A: \ is not accessible. The device is not ready. ” (Disk A: \ not available. The device is not ready.) Rest assured guys, it is ready. It is simply empty. But if you insert a floppy disk or a CD, the icons will not tell you the name of the inserted disk - they will not even change to inform you that they are now “ready”.
Finally, there are frequent reminders that right under the smooth surface of Windows 95, the soul of a meager DOS lurks. For example, every time we restart one of our test PCs at MacUser Labs, we get this warm friendly message in DOS text mode: “Invalid VxD service link to ATR (01) + 00000AA3 to device“ 3155 ”, service E. Microsoft technical support comes to a standstill - and we along with it.
FACT 4. Windows 95 has several advantages over Mac OS.
But pretty kicking windows. If you are going to convincingly prove that the Mac is still out of competition, you should somewhat give in and admit that in some ways Windows 95 is ahead of Mac OS.
For example, more developed system administration. Network administrators will definitely be delighted with the two new Windows 95 system programs: the Registry (System Registry) and the System Policy Editor (System Resource Allocation Editor). Registry allows administrators to view and adjust information about the system configurations of individual users, and the System Policy Editor to enter default settings for each PC on the network (or its parts), from parameters defining the available printers and servers to “wallpaper” patterns for “ desktop. Such functions might look utopian in Orulellian style, but for corporate IP managers it would be a heartfelt gift for God and many Mac administrators.
On paper, the networking features of Windows 95 look impressive. These include compatibility with NetWare (which has become an industry standard), Microsoft network operating systems, and a number of network protocols that would satisfy the wildest dreams of a network administrator. The picture becomes even better when you add secure remote connectivity and simultaneous work with multiple networks using multiple protocols — the same multihoming capability that Apple recently introduced through the system extension Open Transport.
However, as might be expected, the utopian picture contradicts reality. The first reports show that Windows 95 network “sweets” are poisoned by incompatibility problems, which may take a long time to overcome.
FACT 5. Windows 95 has a more advanced architecture than Mac OS.
The most powerful advantage of Windows 95 over Mac OS is not on the surface. They, undoubtedly, are preemptive multitasking. This, without the slightest exaggeration, is a real blessing. In a system with preemptive multitasking, the OS takes care of the allocation of CPU time: background processes can coexist peacefully and efficiently, file transfers and disk formatting are performed without blocking the computer, and user interaction remains continuous and reliable, despite many background tasks. However, in Windows 95, these benefits are realized only if 32-bit programs are used, which are compiled with respect to preemptive multitasking; the current 16-bit programs are not designed for this.
Mac OS does not provide preemptive multitasking. And, even worse, the next version of Mac OS - Copland - will correspond only to its limited version, applicable only to processes that do not require user interaction with the interface (for example, file transfers and image rendering). Thus, in the foreseeable future, preemptive multitasking will remain inaccessible to Mac users.
Architecturally, Mac OS has one important advantage over Windows 95 — multiprocessing capability. Specifications created by DayStar Digital engineers and now distributed by Apple allow developers to create Mac programs that take advantage of the use of multiple processors in the same task. Windows 95 does not provide multiprocessing.
FACT 6. Windows 95 is not fully compatible with existing software.
If you prefer, you can compare Apple’s move to the Power Macintosh computer with the Wintel world transfer to Windows 95 — Apple released a robust, emulator that allowed Mac users to transfer their existing software with minimal difficulty. Microsoft, through its own efforts, has created hundreds of application programs, utilities and tools for users, many incompatibility problems when working in the Windows 95 environment. But it’s pretty painless to port old programs.
In addition, there is still the problem of the missing WINSOCK file: Internet users who migrate from previous versions of Windows and access the Internet through the Microsoft Network or use Windows 95 remote access, find that Windows 95 has skillfully prevented them from accessing the Internet through their former service provider. If you give technical details, Windows 95 simply corrupts an important WINSOCK.DLL file that tells the computer where to find the means to access the Internet. What is it - harmless technical problem or dishonest blocking of all gateways to the Internet, except those provided by Microsoft? You decide.
FACT 7. Windows 95 will require a significant software update.
If we were not so afraid of a conflict of interest (and observers from the SEC), we would have made significant investments in companies that specialize in developing programs for Windows 95. Windows 95 users, as well as Mac users, will have to update their software, to fully experience the benefits of their new systems. Accelerated memory management in Windows 95, higher resistance to irreversible failures and numerous advantages of preemptive multitasking are realized only for specific 32-bit programs for Windows 95. Hmm ... Thirty million users, a couple of programs per user, all this looks like a good year work for manufacturers floppy.
FACT 8. Windows 95 may require a significant hardware upgrade.
Microsoft claims that the minimal platform for running Windows 95 is a 386DX PC with 4 MB of RAM. Do not hesitate, and System 7.5 works great on the 4MB Macintosh Classic. But let's be closer to reality: PC WEEK Labs tests proved that no sensible person would call Windows 95 performance “good” unless at least 33 MHz PC 486DX4 with 8 MB of RAM is used to run it.
One last thing: according to PC Magazine Labs testing, to really improve the performance of Windows 95, you would need 16 MB of RAM and a Pentium processor, which would take better advantage of the increased memory than the 486 processor. You can almost hear the rustle of checkbooks, is not it?
Most corporate IP managers assume that the cost of upgrading hardware and software to match the capabilities of Windows 95 will be between $ 500 and $ 1,000 (per PC). Add to this the cost of staff training, which, according to usability tests, should remain substantially higher than for Mac OS. Taking all this into account, you can, and without being a rocket scientist, doubt the wisdom of an immediate switch to Windows 95.
FACT 9. Windows 95 does not improve performance.
Windows 95 is an improvement in some features, but not performance. Testing has shown that the performance of 16-bit application programs running on a PC with a Pentium processor does not substantially change when the Windows for Workgroups 3.11 operating system is replaced with Windows 95.
But what about the future? What happens when the latest Intel microprocessor, the Pentium Pro, becomes widely available? There is news that is not very encouraging to users of Windows 95: although the arrival of the Pentium Pro promises excellent performance for fully 32-bit operating systems, such as Windows NT and OS / 2 Warp, this does not apply to Windows 95, which contains a considerable balance of 16- bit code. Testing PC Magazine testifies that the current 16-bit programs running on a Windows 95-equipped PC with a Pentium Pro processor will practically not gain in performance and can even run slower than on a PC with a Pentium processor. And Windows 95-oriented 32-bit programs will run about 20% faster on a PC with a Pentium Pro processor than on a PC with a Pentium. Has it still not impressed you?
At the same time, we should expect a significant increase in the performance of the Mac OS system after the release of its version of Copland. Unlike the current Mac OS, which contains decent chunks of code that must be executed in emulation mode on Macintosh or Mac-compatible computers with a PowerPC processor, the Copland system will be 95% native. The “native” code plus the PowerPC processor add up to a fast operating system.
FACT 10. Mac will not give up their positions.
Windows 95 is a much-needed improvement over its predecessors. Nevertheless, it has significant compatibility problems, it does not increase speed and sensitivity to user actions, it requires significant investments in new hardware and software, and, finally, it is simply difficult to work with it.
However, quality in itself does not guarantee success. (Otherwise, we would all record quad soundtracks on Betamax cassettes with the song “My so-called life”.) Numbers are of paramount importance in business, and the PC industry is no exception.
But even if only the numbers are considered a barometer of success, then here, I assure you, Mac is fine - more than 20 million Macintoshs are sold. Every tenth desktop computer is a Mac. It is expected that in 1995 Mac sales in the United States would significantly exceed ten billion dollars - a jump of more than 30% compared with 1994.
And there is one more number - less well-known, although perhaps even more important: in 1995, the Apple Worldwide Developers Conference was the most visited in history and gathered over 4,100 people - 30% more than a year ago. . Advanced software will continue to be available for Mac and compatible computers.
Mac lives and well.
What they're saying
"The Windows 95 interface has been rigorously torn from the Mac OS system, but the matter hasn’t gone further than pure external similarity."
Herb Betony and Peter Kofi, PC WEEK
"... If Microsoft really was an innovative company, as it names itself, it would use the opportunity to drastically circumvent the Mac, and not create a frail design like" me too. "
Douglas Adams, author of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.
"Macintosh System 7.5.2 is the easiest, most reliable and convenient operating system."
Paul Somerson, PC / Computing
"... [In Windows 95], irreversible failure can happen relatively easily, [and it] saves significant pieces of old DOS code ..."
Linley Guanap, Microprocessor Report
Who has the advantage?
Messages from the battlefield of operating systems
The creators of Windows 95 have released quite a few critical arrows for borrowing the features of the Macintosh interface, but many of the components of Windows 95 give new sound to well-known Mac features — or offer their own completely new features. Conversely, Mac OS has many features that Windows 95 is still not close at all (can't it come close?). So which operating system is better - and for what tasks? Here is our summary of features showing the advantages of one or another OS.
| Characteristic | Mac (System 7.5.2) | Advantage | Windows 95 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall ease of use | Consistently logical and intuitive interface remains unsurpassed | + | Huge advantage over Windows 3.1, but still confusing | |
| Customizability | Flexible, with significant improvements expected in the Copland version | + | + | Basic viewing functions are flexible and convenient. |
| Finder, | + | Windows Explorer | ||
| ; | + | plug-and-play — , | ||
| Copland | + | Find — «» | ||
| Trash - | + | + | Recycle Bin — «» | |
| Open Transport — , | + | — — | ||
| Apple Guide | + | - , , | ||
| Apple , | + | + | ||
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/37841/
All Articles