Apple: 'Windows 7 is antiquated technology'

[Subject Delta]

Microsoft put fancy names all over Vista and it worked really well. :rolleyes: Superfetch, Readyboost etc.

Those are actually features, and they work pretty well. They are still in Windows 7 and they still work pretty well

Sure, all software are equal. :pinch: You don't even have OS X so how would you know?

I have used it on several occasions, so actually I do know.

Decent like WMP12 that still doesn't play a VOB-file but after renaming to MPG it plays fine. It's so antiqueted to only look file extensions. I won't even mention FLAC. :shifty:

With that one post you have highlighted your laughable lack of knowledge about how Windows actually works. FLAC will only play with third party codecs. That isn't a design flaw that is due to the fact that Microsoft haven't provided any support for it, because it isn't really commonly used enough to justify that, they provide support for the most commonly used formats. As for playback, Windows doesn't associate the playback of VOB files to any application because they aren't meant to be opened individually, they are meant to be played as a DVD.

You really need to go and get a clue, you are starting to make yourself look stupid.

[Joel]

Test yourself, drag&drop VOB file to WMP and then change its extension to MPG and to the same. I'm not gonna change my default player to WMP. FLAC doesn't even play out of the box.

You completely misunderstood what he wrote. Go back and read it again, more slowly this time.

[hdood]

Test yourself, drag&drop VOB file to WMP and then change its extension to MPG and to the same. I'm not gonna change my default player to WMP. FLAC doesn't even play out of the box.

Test what myself? I use WMP to play VOBs the way I described to you. I also know for a fact that FLACs will play the same way if you have a FLAC codec installed, as will MKV.

You're right that it would be more user-friendly if Windows shipped with built-in codecs for every random format out there, but it's simply unrealistic because of the work that would have to go into it and the potential for legal problems. More out of the box functionality is a nice thing about OS X, so if that's all you care about, definitely go for it.

I never used WMP before v11, but now is is my primary video player, while Winamp does my audio. WMP12 has a nice clean interface and hardware-accelerated codecs for all the MPEG4-based formats (DivX, XVid, H.264, QT, etc). I've yet to find something that matches it for my needs.

[BajiRav]

Decent like WMP12 that still doesn't play a VOB-file but after renaming to MPG it plays fine. It's so antiqueted to only look file extensions. I won't even mention FLAC. :shifty:

So OS X plays FLAC ootb? that's news to me! And I remember reading that starting with SL, OS X will also use extensions to determine file type. Apple must be crazy, eh?

[CuCumber]

I have used it on several occasions, so actually I do know.

Two times?

because it isn't really commonly used enough to justify that

Lol. Name some lossless format that is more widely used.

they aren't meant to be opened individually, they are meant to be played as a DVD.

DVD is quite antiquated format. Why would I use disks when I can have a TB class HD.

You really need to go and get a clue, you are starting to make yourself look stupid.

LMAO look at your post and say that again.

@hdood:

"Right-click on a VOB file, open with, Windows Media Player, make sure always open with this program is checked. Now VOBs will always open in WMP"

How does that fix that drag&drop issue? For me it doesn't. Maybe I'm (again) doing something wrong. :shifty:

@dhan:

"So OS X plays FLAC ootb? that's news to me!"

OS X is equally antiquated what comes to FLAC. Does it make Windows better?

[FloatingFatMan]

Decent like WMP12 that still doesn't play a VOB-file but after renaming to MPG it plays fine. It's so antiqueted to only look file extensions. I won't even mention FLAC. :shifty:

WMP plays all of those quite effortlessly, as long as you have the codecs installed. FLAC isn't exactly a common codec, so isn't provided by Microsoft for that reason. Same for MKV and 100's of other ways of encoding audio and video data. Plus, there are licensing issues to consider too. FLAC, iirc, uses an open source license. There's no way Microsoft are going to ship ANYthing in their OS that uses an open source license they have no say in, it could leave them open to all kinds of problems, not the least would be profiting from not-for-profit software.

As for WMP itself, I don't actually tend to use it. I prefer to use Media Player Classic as it offers greater control over the aspect ratio and playback codecs used.

Why would you play an individual VOB file anyway? :huh: It's a DVD file, you should be playing it as a DVD, not individual files...

How does that fix that drag&drop issue? For me it doesn't. Maybe I'm (again) doing something wrong. :shifty:

PEBCAK ;)

[Madoshi]

i used to bash Mac users. all the time. then i got an old G3 Blue & White for free. put Tiger on it, and used it for several months as a 2nd machine. i loved it. but i found my Windows PC to be better for what i did daily.

now i don't bash Mac users.

i tried Vista and i was an early supporter of it. some very bad experiences led me to hate it. one of my mates at school loved it. then we both upgraded our workstations to the RC of Win 7. we finally agreed on something! it was awesome.

now i tell people to upgrade their Vista boxes to Windows 7

from then on, i always try something for myself, not just for a minute or an hour, but for several weeks, before i start talking **** about it, or promoting it. i don't like to talk out of my ass, like a lot of people here do

[CuCumber]

FLAC isn't exactly a common codec, so isn't provided by Microsoft for that reason.

I thought that Microsoft just tried to favor WMA lossless.

Why would you play an individual VOB file anyway? :huh: It's a DVD file, you should be playing it as a DVD, not individual files...

Well as you did ask so nicely I may answer.

There's no such thing as DVD file. VOB isn't tied to a physical disk in any way.

What if I have one dual layer DVD with two music videos and then some concert that I don't want to see. Should I rip the whole ~7GB just to watch two quite small videos?

[FloatingFatMan]

I thought that Microsoft just tried to favor WMA lossless.

Well as you did ask so nicely I may answer.

There's no such thing as DVD file. VOB isn't tied to a physical disk in any way.

What if I have one dual layer DVD with two music videos and then some concert that I don't want to see. Should I rip the whole ~7GB just to watch two quite small videos?

No. If you were sensible, you'd rip it to a format that uses far superior compression algorithms than mere MPEG2 can manage.

And you're absolutely right, VOB isn't specifically a DVD container, oh no. It's been used widely on other media as well, for many many years. LP's, audio tapes, video tapes, laser disc, Compact Disc, Blu-Ray, they ALL use the VOB container... :rolleyes:

[hdood]

Transcoding reduces the quality, and takes forever to do. My hard drives are big enough that it's just not worth the hassle to save a few megabytes.

[Mr. Gibs]

And you're absolutely right, VOB isn't specifically a DVD container, oh no. It's been used widely on other media as well, for many many years. LP's, audio tapes, video tapes, laser disc, Compact Disc, Blu-Ray, they ALL use the VOB container...

lmfao

[zagor]

some people just live to entertain others.

[FloatingFatMan]

Transcoding reduces the quality, and takes forever to do. My hard drives are big enough that it's just not worth the hassle to save a few megabytes.

Only if you use crappy bitrates and encode on a slow assed computer, such as a Mac. :rofl:

I can encode a 3 hour movie in less time that it takes to WATCH that movie, and you wouldn't be able to see or hear any difference between the original at all, and end up with a file size about 1/4 that of the ****ty MPEG2 original. You just need to know what you're doing.

[hdood]

Only if you use crappy bitrates and encode on a slow assed computer, such as a Mac. :rofl:

I can encode a 3 hour movie in less time that it takes to WATCH that movie, and you wouldn't be able to see or hear any difference between the original at all, and end up with a file size about 1/4 that of the ****ty MPEG2 original. You just need to know what you're doing.

That transcoding reduces the quality is an objective fact. It may not be very noticeable, especially at high bitrates, but why bother taking the time and effort to do it when I have plenty of disk space?

[mark85]

I think is unusual to have Apple bashing at Microsoft. Last time Apple was quite quiet on Microsoft product. But after Microsoft release Windows 7, Apple start to bash and bash at Microsoft. Is Apple feel threaten, or something else?

[hdood]

I think is unusual to have Apple bashing at Microsoft. Last time Apple was quite quiet on Microsoft product. But after Microsoft release Windows 7, Apple start to bash and bash at Microsoft. Is Apple feel threaten, or something else?

What? Apple has been bashing Microsoft every chance they get for years and years. That they'd increase the effort slightly when 7 launched is completely natural, and doesn't in itself mean that they feel "threatened" or "scared."

[Elliott]

I think is unusual to have Apple bashing at Microsoft. Last time Apple was quite quiet on Microsoft product. But after Microsoft release Windows 7, Apple start to bash and bash at Microsoft. Is Apple feel threaten, or something else?

No, they've been bashing Microsoft for a long, long time now. :p They've upped their attack recently because they see this transitional period as a chance to poach previous Windows XP/Vista users. Their logic, apparently, is that "If you're buying a new computer for Windows 7, why not just buy a Mac?" I don't know how well it's going to work, but the strategy is fairly sound in theory, and they're not spending that much money on it when you compare their marketing budget to companies like Dell.

[Growled Member]

What? Apple has been bashing Microsoft every chance they get for years and years. That they'd increase the effort slightly when 7 launched is completely natural, and doesn't in itself mean that they feel "threatened" or "scared."

Yes, they do but they are usually more subtle. It's not like them to bring it openly like this. They seem to be getting cocky now.

[Joel]

They seem to be getting cocky now.

Or ****-scared. MS already proved they can trounce Apple on price of hardware, now the new software is looking pretty damn good also.

[Elliott]

Or ****-scared. MS already proved they can trounce Apple on price of hardware, now the new software is looking pretty damn good also.

Well, Microsoft doesn't actually make the PCs. They only license the OS to go on them.

It's an interesting war they have going here: a software company (Microsoft) is trying to attack a hardware company (Apple) on the merits of their hardware, and a hardware company is trying to attack a software company on the merits of their software.

I can tell you right now that it doesn't have anything to do with Apple being **** scared. Losing a small percentage of market share doesn't mean much for them. They're still one of the most profitable companies around and haven't posted losses on any division for a long time. Let's not forget that while the Mac is profitable (last quarter, Apple sold 3.05 million Macs), it's not Apple's main source of revenue. Apple sold 7.4 million iPhones in Q4 2009.

Edited October 29, 2009 by Elliott

[Boz]

Well, I just gotta comment on this. :shifty:

I can tell you right now that it doesn't have anything to do with Apple being **** scared. Losing a small percentage of market share doesn't mean much for them. They're still one of the most profitable companies around and haven't posted losses for a long time. Let's not forget that while the Mac is profitable, it's not Apple's main source of revenue.

Of course they are scared and I'll tell you why. They are being attacked from all fronts and their closed system is under attack by more open systems.

For example, to me at least, Windows 7 is a lot better than OSX and offers huge diversity of software and hardware support. Zune HD is a lot better than iPod Touch (not counting software advantage at this moment) and iPhone is being attacked by Androids.

It may not seem obvious but they are under a huge attack and I'm not sure they'll be able to hold it off. There is about 18 more versions of Android phones coming out this and next year. HTC Hero for example is just one of the new phones that is up there with iPhone and some people already like it more than iPhone. Imagine what will happen when most mobile phone manufacturers offer Android versions. It's going to completely saturate the market and it will create an incredible base of applications and developers through Google's SDK. Now the best part is that all Android apps will work across all phones, which is basically iPhone apps multiplied many many times across different brands and phones.

Zune HD already features a lot of things iPod has plus it offers flawless integration with Zune store, Windows and Xbox 360 not to mention the ability to play HD videos. Apps will be there too but even if they are not Microsoft is determined to eat away Apple's marketshare and they've shown how serious they are with Zune HD.

And Windows 7, finally, an amazing OS that just works and is light, fast, security issues are now non-existant because of release of Microsoft Security Essentials and even Mac users are massively installing it. So software wise, Windows is no longer the black sheep.

Add to that, Apple's hardware is really behind the curve as they can't catch up with specifications and other manufacturers are offering slick, innovative computers and laptops at a much much lower price than anything Apple, you'll get it why they are scared.

Sure, they have money now, but what they are scared about is what this could mean to them a year from now which is fast approaching. If you look at their marketing strategy, it's nothing but very vague description and banter about how Microsoft makes false promises but they really have nothing tangible to even crap about.

If I was in their position I would definitely be a bit scared. The only momentum they might get is if they come out with the tablet that blows everyone away and people start buying it massively, otherwise I can only see it going downwards for Apple at this point. They've enjoyed a bump in money and market share while the big boys got their heads out of their asses, meaning Google and Microsoft and what's interesting is that Apple keeps crapping on both companies but both companies are such integral parts of their platforms that if they completely **** them off, it would spell trouble. What map or GPS would you use if there was no Google on iphone? Bing? :)

I think Apple needs to stop shi**ing where they eat because they are highly dependent on EVERYTHING that's major in PC world. Intel for chips, Microsoft for office stuff and even yes, Windows and Google for a bunch of their services.

Edited October 29, 2009 by Boz

[stereopixels]

I can tell you right now that it doesn't have anything to do with Apple being **** scared. Losing a small percentage of market share doesn't mean much for them. They're still one of the most profitable companies around and haven't posted losses on any division for a long time. Let's not forget that while the Mac is profitable (last quarter, Apple sold 3.05 million Macs), it's not Apple's main source of revenue. Apple sold 7.4 million iPhones in Q4 2009.

For a company to lose market share is a big thing, whether it's their major money maker or not. The fact Apple have a small market share in computer sales means it's even more important for them to not just maintain, but grow that market in their favour. If they didn't make a lot of money out of that market they wouldn't pursue it, so I can guarantee will mean a lot to them.

As for their other markets - the iPod remains a rock for them, but the iPhone won't stay as popular as it has done: it's expensive to start with, and once it has good competition, the sales will drop.

[WatchTheSoup]

And Windows 7, finally, an amazing OS that just works and is light, fast, security issues are now non-existant because of release of Microsoft Security Essentials

I wouldnt go far to say non-existant :D

[ABAFS]

Windows 7 isn't antique, it was released a few days ago!. What the hell is apple smoking?

[Elliott]

As for their other markets - the iPod remains a rock for them, but the iPhone won't stay as popular as it has done: it's expensive to start with, and once it has good competition, the sales will drop.

Well, it's been over 2 years and the iPhone has only shown growth, even in the face of the Palm Pre. Android 2.0 will probably cause sales to fluctuate slightly, but Apple do pretty well to keep a product either at the same point or on the rise through effective marketing and brand recognition, and that trend isn't looking like it'll change.

If Apple was scared ****less, then why was their advertising budget $500 million in 2009? Dell's ad budget was $811 million, and Microsoft was at $1.4 billion. For scared ****less, that's not much money being spent to counteract Microsoft's efforts, and I can't even recall a Dell ad in the past year other than web ads. Hell, from those numbers, I would assume Microsoft are the ones scared ****less by competition on all fronts.