August 23, 2008 at 12:04Windows 95 vs MacOS 7.5. How was it then? And what has something changed?
I came across an interesting article (under the Habrokat) dated December 1995. Now it’s funny to read, maybe you’ll smile :). But the article fully describes the current situation, nothing has changed, all the same questions, all the same answers :)
Get acquainted with ten facts about Mac OS and Windows 95 that every Mac user needs to know.
The smoke from the fireworks cleared, the dust lifted by the crowd abated, and the brass band gathered and left. The Windows 95 gala reception is over, and we Mac followers, like anyone not on the guest list, may experience a strange, mixed feeling of regret and relief: have we missed something important? Wasn't anyone somewhere more fun than us? Or were we just fortunate enough to evade an advertised boring event?
The answers to these three questions are yes, no, and maybe. Although not becoming a Mac grave digger (which is exactly what Microsoft would like to make us think), Windows 95 is an important product that affects all users of personal computers, including us, the Mac family. And, despite the fact that we managed to avoid installing it on our machines, it would be naive on our part to stubbornly remain ignorant of its importance.
Windows 95 threatens stupid neophytes with the belief that a Wintel computer (Windows operating system plus Intel microprocessor) is "as good as a Mac." It strengthens the position of those information system (IP) managers who are only looking for an excuse to remove Macs from their jobs.
But the user experience with Windows 95 (Applespeak - for the user interface) is by no means "as great as the experience with the Mac. Just do not take our words like this: read, they say, that the press writing about PC is forced to admit. And, as a Mac user, although you don’t have to worry about renaming your WINSOCK.DLL file (see fact 6), you should still know some basic facts about Windows 95, since only in this case you will have something to answer to the statement “As good as the Mac.”
FACT 1. Windows 95 will be a great success
Do not doubt it for a minute. Forget all the hints in the popular press. Ignore Microsoft's numerous technical support complaints. Do not pay attention to the empty emails of disgruntled fools and the restrained pessimism of many corporate IP managers - Windows 95 will sell like hot cakes and will become the main operating system for PC-compatible desktop computers.
In the first 4 days of sales of Windows 95, up to 1 million copies were sold, which is surprising even taking into account the frenzied excitement of the August week of Windows. It is estimated that by the end of 1995, 30 million desktop PCs will be equipped with Windows 95. We can talk about tremendous success, and it was caused by one very simple reason - the need. 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 firmly binds the user to itself.
FACT 2. Windows 95 is an advance over 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 hard to use. An irreversible failure often occurs with them. Installing new hardware for them is fraught with great torment.
For all its flaws, Windows 95 is a boon to the Wintel family. However, as Apple’s ad justly noted, the most important innovations of Windows 95 are old news for Mac users: long file names, trash can (called Recycle Bin), aliases (called shortcuts - shortcuts ), a truly clear desktop organization, ease of switching between running programs, and the promised simplicity of plug-and-play (plug-and-play) technology - as soon as the peripheral device industry implements Microsoft standards.
FACT 3. Windows 95 Tru her work than with the Mac OS.
You might think, “This is Mac magazine. That is what they should say. ” Well, we don’t dispute this, but here’s a comparative analysis of one of our related magazines - PC / Computing: when they tested Windows 95 in their Usability Lab, novice users rated the system as bad for file management and unsuitable for working with programs (on in fact, they even preferred Windows for Workgroups 3.11). One comment: “Testers were confused when they performed even the simplest tasks in Windows 95.” In addition, PC / Computing writes: “The Macintosh's beautifully managed environment is still the standard for usability.” Thank you, guys.
For many different reasons, users find that working with a Mac is easier than working with Windows 95. Take, for example, the much-praised Start button and Task Bar. Sorry, but they didn’t delight us - the menu bar, program menu and Apple menu of the Mac computer perform the same functions much more elegantly.
A more specific (but quite typical) example is the sequence of actions in Windows 95 to add an item to the Startmenu start menu. Place the cursor on the taskbar and right-click. When the pop-up menu appears, enter R from the keyboard (no, this is not indicated in the menu, but let this trifle not bother you). Now click+and then enter A. You will be prompted with a sequence of dialog boxes where you will be asked to first enter the element that you want to add to the Start menu, then choose where you want to place it, then enter its name and finally select 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 “Add Alias to Apple Menu” from the list of Automated Tasks on the Apple menu. Performed.
Another area where Windows 95 lags behind Mac OS is the management of 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 disk icon and you will get an alarm message: “A: \ is not accessible. The device is not ready. " (Disk A: \ is not available. The device is not ready.) Be sure guys, it is ready. It is simply empty. But if you insert a diskette or 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”.
And finally, there are very frequent reminders that right under the smooth surface of Windows 95 lies the soul of a meager DOS. 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 dynamic link call from ATR (01) + 00000AA3 to device“ 3155 “, service E ". Microsoft Technical Support is at a standstill - and we are with it.
FACT 4. Windows 95 has several advantages over Mac OS.
But enough to kick Windows. If you are going to convincingly prove that the Mac is still out of competition, you should give in a little and admit that in some ways Windows 95 is ahead of Mac OS.
For example, system administration is more developed. Network administrators will definitely be delighted with the two new Windows 95 system programs: Registry (System Registry) and System Policy Editor. The registry allows administrators to view and adjust information about the system configurations of individual users, and the System Policy Editor allows you to enter standard settings for each PC on the network (or parts of it), from the parameters that define available printers and servers, to the “wallpaper” templates for “ desktop. " These features may look Orwellian utopian, but for corporate IP managers they are like a gift from God and many Mac administrators would like it.
On paper, the networking features of Windows 95 look impressive. These include compatibility with NetWare (which has become an industry standard), Microsoft's network operating systems, and with as many network protocols that would satisfy the wildest dreams of a network administrator. The picture is even better when you add here means of reliable remote connection and simultaneous work with several networks using multiple protocols - the same multihoming feature that Apple recently introduced through the Open Transport system extension.
However, as might be expected, the utopian picture contradicts reality. The first reports show that the Windows 95 network “sweets” are poisoned by incompatibility issues, which can take a long time to overcome.
FACT 5. Windows 95 has a more developed architecture than Mac OS.
The most powerful advantage of Windows 95 over Mac OS does not lie on the surface. This is undoubtedly preemptive multitasking. This, without the slightest exaggeration, is a real blessing. In a system with preemptive multitasking, the OS takes care of CPU time distribution: background processes can coexist peacefully and efficiently, file transfer 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 in the case of using 32-bit programs, designed with pre-emptive multitasking; current 16-bit programs are not designed for this.
Mac OS does not provide for preemptive multitasking. And, even worse, the next version of Mac OS - Copland - will only correspond to its limited version, applicable only to processes that do not require interaction with the user interface (for example, file transfers and image rendering). Thus, for the foreseeable future, preemptive multitasking will remain unavailable to Mac users.
Architecturally, Mac OS has one major advantage over Windows 95 - the possibility of multiprocessing. Specifications created by DayStar Digital engineers and distributed by Apple now allow developers to create Mac programs that take advantage of multiple processors in the same task. Windows 95 does not provide multiprocessing.
FACT 6. Windows 95 is not fully compatible with existing software.
Optionally, you can compare Apple’s transition to a Power Macintosh computer with the Wintel world’s transition to Windows 95 - Apple has released a rock-solid emulator that allows Mac users to migrate their software with minimal hassle. Microsoft Corporation, through its own efforts, has created hundreds of applications, utilities and tools for users, many incompatibility problems when working in the Windows 95 environment. But rather about the painless porting of old programs.
In addition, there is still the problem of the missing WINSOCK file: Internet users who switch from previous versions of Windows and access the Internet through the Microsoft Network or use Windows 95 remote access tools find that Windows 95 has skillfully deprived them of access to the Internet through their previous service provider. If you cite the technical details, Windows 95 simply spoils the important WINSOCK.DLL file, which tells the computer where to find Internet access. What is it - a harmless technical problem or dishonest blocking of all Internet gateways, 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 make significant investments in companies specializing in developing programs for Windows 95. Windows 95 users, as well as Mac users before them, will have to update their software, to take full advantage of their new systems. Faster 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 - it all looks like a good year work for floppy disk manufacturers.
FACT 8. Windows 95 may require significant hardware upgrades.
Microsoft claims that the minimum platform for Windows 95 to function is a 386DX PC with 4 MB of RAM. Make no mistake, and System 7.5 works great on the 4 MB Macintosh Classic. But let's get closer to reality: PC WEEK Labs tests proved that no reasonable person could call Windows 95 performance “good” unless it runs at least 33-MHz 486DX4 PCs with 8 MB of RAM.
One last thing: according to testing conducted by PC Magazine Labs, to really improve the performance of Windows 95 you would need 16 MB of RAM and a Pentium processor that would take better advantage of the increased memory than the 486. You 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 range from $ 500 to $ 1,000 (per PC). Add to this the cost of training personnel, which, according to usability tests, should remain significantly higher than for Mac OS. Taking all this into account, it is possible, and not being seven spans in the forehead, to doubt the rationality of immediately switching to Windows 95.
FACT 9. Windows 95 does not improve performance.
Windows 95 is an improvement to some features, but not performance. Testing showed that the performance of 16-bit applications running on a PC with a Pentium processor essentially does not change when replacing the Windows for Workgroups 3.11 operating system with Windows 95.
But what about the future? What will happen when the latest Intel microprocessor - Pentium Pro - becomes widely available? There is news that is not very encouraging for Windows 95 users: although the arrival of 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 remainder of 16- bit code. Testing of PC Magazine shows that the current 16-bit programs running on a Windows 95-equipped PC with a Pentium Pro processor will not gain much in performance and may even work 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.
At the same time, one should expect a significant increase in Mac OS performance after the release of its Copland version. Unlike the current Mac OS, which contains decent pieces of code that must be executed in emulation mode on Macintosh or Mac-compatible computers with a PowerPC processor, the Copland system will consist of 95% of the "native code". The native code plus PowerPC processor add up to a fast operating system.
FACT 10. Mac will not give way.
Windows 95 is a much-needed improvement over its predecessors. Nevertheless, it has significant compatibility problems, it does not increase the speed and sensitivity to user actions, requires significant investments in new hardware and software, and, finally, it is simply difficult to work with.
However, quality alone does not guarantee success. (Otherwise, we would all record quad audio tracks on Betamax cassettes with the composition “My so-called life.”) Numbers are what are of primary importance in business, and the PC industry is no exception.
But even if only numbers are considered a barometer of success, here, I assure you, the Mac is fine - more than 20 million Macs have been sold. Every tenth desktop computer is a Mac. Mac sales in the United States are expected to exceed well over ten billion dollars in 1995, a jump of more than 30% from 1994.
And there’s another number - less well-known, although perhaps even more important: in 1995, the Apple Worldwide Developers Conference was the most visited in history and gathered more than 4,100 people - 30% more than a year ago . Advanced software will continue to be available for Macs and compatibles.
Mac lives and lives.
What they say
"The Windows 95 interface has been carefully torn from the Mac OS system, but it hasn’t gone beyond purely external resemblance."
Herb Betoni and Peter Kofi, PC WEEK
"... If Microsoft really were an innovative company, as it calls itself, it would take the opportunity to abruptly bypass the Mac, and not create a frail design like" me too. "
Douglas Adams, author of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.
“The Macintosh System 7.5.2 is the lightest, most reliable, and most convenient operating system.”
Paul Somerson, PC / Computing
"... [On Windows 95] an irreversible crash can be relatively easy, [and she] retains significant chunks of old DOS code ..."
Linley Guanap, Microprocessor Report
Who has the advantage?
Messages from the battlefield of operating systems
Many critical arrows were fired at the creators of Windows 95 for borrowing Macintosh interface features, but many components of Windows 95 give a new sound to the famous Mac features - or offer their own completely new features. Conversely, Mac OS has many features that Windows 95 still hasn't come close to (can't get closer?). So which operating system is better - and for what tasks? Here is our summary of features indicating the benefits of a particular OS.
Get acquainted with ten facts about Mac OS and Windows 95 that every Mac user needs to know.
The smoke from the fireworks cleared, the dust lifted by the crowd abated, and the brass band gathered and left. The Windows 95 gala reception is over, and we Mac followers, like anyone not on the guest list, may experience a strange, mixed feeling of regret and relief: have we missed something important? Wasn't anyone somewhere more fun than us? Or were we just fortunate enough to evade an advertised boring event?
The answers to these three questions are yes, no, and maybe. Although not becoming a Mac grave digger (which is exactly what Microsoft would like to make us think), Windows 95 is an important product that affects all users of personal computers, including us, the Mac family. And, despite the fact that we managed to avoid installing it on our machines, it would be naive on our part to stubbornly remain ignorant of its importance.
Windows 95 threatens stupid neophytes with the belief that a Wintel computer (Windows operating system plus Intel microprocessor) is "as good as a Mac." It strengthens the position of those information system (IP) managers who are only looking for an excuse to remove Macs from their jobs.
But the user experience with Windows 95 (Applespeak - for the user interface) is by no means "as great as the experience with the Mac. Just do not take our words like this: read, they say, that the press writing about PC is forced to admit. And, as a Mac user, although you don’t have to worry about renaming your WINSOCK.DLL file (see fact 6), you should still know some basic facts about Windows 95, since only in this case you will have something to answer to the statement “As good as the Mac.”
FACT 1. Windows 95 will be a great success
Do not doubt it for a minute. Forget all the hints in the popular press. Ignore Microsoft's numerous technical support complaints. Do not pay attention to the empty emails of disgruntled fools and the restrained pessimism of many corporate IP managers - Windows 95 will sell like hot cakes and will become the main operating system for PC-compatible desktop computers.
In the first 4 days of sales of Windows 95, up to 1 million copies were sold, which is surprising even taking into account the frenzied excitement of the August week of Windows. It is estimated that by the end of 1995, 30 million desktop PCs will be equipped with Windows 95. We can talk about tremendous success, and it was caused by one very simple reason - the need. 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 firmly binds the user to itself.
FACT 2. Windows 95 is an advance over 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 hard to use. An irreversible failure often occurs with them. Installing new hardware for them is fraught with great torment.
For all its flaws, Windows 95 is a boon to the Wintel family. However, as Apple’s ad justly noted, the most important innovations of Windows 95 are old news for Mac users: long file names, trash can (called Recycle Bin), aliases (called shortcuts - shortcuts ), a truly clear desktop organization, ease of switching between running programs, and the promised simplicity of plug-and-play (plug-and-play) technology - as soon as the peripheral device industry implements Microsoft standards.
FACT 3. Windows 95 Tru her work than with the Mac OS.
You might think, “This is Mac magazine. That is what they should say. ” Well, we don’t dispute this, but here’s a comparative analysis of one of our related magazines - PC / Computing: when they tested Windows 95 in their Usability Lab, novice users rated the system as bad for file management and unsuitable for working with programs (on in fact, they even preferred Windows for Workgroups 3.11). One comment: “Testers were confused when they performed even the simplest tasks in Windows 95.” In addition, PC / Computing writes: “The Macintosh's beautifully managed environment is still the standard for usability.” Thank you, guys.
For many different reasons, users find that working with a Mac is easier than working with Windows 95. Take, for example, the much-praised Start button and Task Bar. Sorry, but they didn’t delight us - the menu bar, program menu and Apple menu of the Mac computer perform the same functions much more elegantly.
A more specific (but quite typical) example is the sequence of actions in Windows 95 to add an item to the Startmenu start menu. Place the cursor on the taskbar and right-click. When the pop-up menu appears, enter R from the keyboard (no, this is not indicated in the menu, but let this trifle not bother you). Now click
Another area where Windows 95 lags behind Mac OS is the management of 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 disk icon and you will get an alarm message: “A: \ is not accessible. The device is not ready. " (Disk A: \ is not available. The device is not ready.) Be sure guys, it is ready. It is simply empty. But if you insert a diskette or 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”.
And finally, there are very frequent reminders that right under the smooth surface of Windows 95 lies the soul of a meager DOS. 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 dynamic link call from ATR (01) + 00000AA3 to device“ 3155 “, service E ". Microsoft Technical Support is at a standstill - and we are with it.
FACT 4. Windows 95 has several advantages over Mac OS.
But enough to kick Windows. If you are going to convincingly prove that the Mac is still out of competition, you should give in a little and admit that in some ways Windows 95 is ahead of Mac OS.
For example, system administration is more developed. Network administrators will definitely be delighted with the two new Windows 95 system programs: Registry (System Registry) and System Policy Editor. The registry allows administrators to view and adjust information about the system configurations of individual users, and the System Policy Editor allows you to enter standard settings for each PC on the network (or parts of it), from the parameters that define available printers and servers, to the “wallpaper” templates for “ desktop. " These features may look Orwellian utopian, but for corporate IP managers they are like a gift from God and many Mac administrators would like it.
On paper, the networking features of Windows 95 look impressive. These include compatibility with NetWare (which has become an industry standard), Microsoft's network operating systems, and with as many network protocols that would satisfy the wildest dreams of a network administrator. The picture is even better when you add here means of reliable remote connection and simultaneous work with several networks using multiple protocols - the same multihoming feature that Apple recently introduced through the Open Transport system extension.
However, as might be expected, the utopian picture contradicts reality. The first reports show that the Windows 95 network “sweets” are poisoned by incompatibility issues, which can take a long time to overcome.
FACT 5. Windows 95 has a more developed architecture than Mac OS.
The most powerful advantage of Windows 95 over Mac OS does not lie on the surface. This is undoubtedly preemptive multitasking. This, without the slightest exaggeration, is a real blessing. In a system with preemptive multitasking, the OS takes care of CPU time distribution: background processes can coexist peacefully and efficiently, file transfer 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 in the case of using 32-bit programs, designed with pre-emptive multitasking; current 16-bit programs are not designed for this.
Mac OS does not provide for preemptive multitasking. And, even worse, the next version of Mac OS - Copland - will only correspond to its limited version, applicable only to processes that do not require interaction with the user interface (for example, file transfers and image rendering). Thus, for the foreseeable future, preemptive multitasking will remain unavailable to Mac users.
Architecturally, Mac OS has one major advantage over Windows 95 - the possibility of multiprocessing. Specifications created by DayStar Digital engineers and distributed by Apple now allow developers to create Mac programs that take advantage of multiple processors in the same task. Windows 95 does not provide multiprocessing.
FACT 6. Windows 95 is not fully compatible with existing software.
Optionally, you can compare Apple’s transition to a Power Macintosh computer with the Wintel world’s transition to Windows 95 - Apple has released a rock-solid emulator that allows Mac users to migrate their software with minimal hassle. Microsoft Corporation, through its own efforts, has created hundreds of applications, utilities and tools for users, many incompatibility problems when working in the Windows 95 environment. But rather about the painless porting of old programs.
In addition, there is still the problem of the missing WINSOCK file: Internet users who switch from previous versions of Windows and access the Internet through the Microsoft Network or use Windows 95 remote access tools find that Windows 95 has skillfully deprived them of access to the Internet through their previous service provider. If you cite the technical details, Windows 95 simply spoils the important WINSOCK.DLL file, which tells the computer where to find Internet access. What is it - a harmless technical problem or dishonest blocking of all Internet gateways, 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 make significant investments in companies specializing in developing programs for Windows 95. Windows 95 users, as well as Mac users before them, will have to update their software, to take full advantage of their new systems. Faster 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 - it all looks like a good year work for floppy disk manufacturers.
FACT 8. Windows 95 may require significant hardware upgrades.
Microsoft claims that the minimum platform for Windows 95 to function is a 386DX PC with 4 MB of RAM. Make no mistake, and System 7.5 works great on the 4 MB Macintosh Classic. But let's get closer to reality: PC WEEK Labs tests proved that no reasonable person could call Windows 95 performance “good” unless it runs at least 33-MHz 486DX4 PCs with 8 MB of RAM.
One last thing: according to testing conducted by PC Magazine Labs, to really improve the performance of Windows 95 you would need 16 MB of RAM and a Pentium processor that would take better advantage of the increased memory than the 486. You 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 range from $ 500 to $ 1,000 (per PC). Add to this the cost of training personnel, which, according to usability tests, should remain significantly higher than for Mac OS. Taking all this into account, it is possible, and not being seven spans in the forehead, to doubt the rationality of immediately switching to Windows 95.
FACT 9. Windows 95 does not improve performance.
Windows 95 is an improvement to some features, but not performance. Testing showed that the performance of 16-bit applications running on a PC with a Pentium processor essentially does not change when replacing the Windows for Workgroups 3.11 operating system with Windows 95.
But what about the future? What will happen when the latest Intel microprocessor - Pentium Pro - becomes widely available? There is news that is not very encouraging for Windows 95 users: although the arrival of 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 remainder of 16- bit code. Testing of PC Magazine shows that the current 16-bit programs running on a Windows 95-equipped PC with a Pentium Pro processor will not gain much in performance and may even work 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.
At the same time, one should expect a significant increase in Mac OS performance after the release of its Copland version. Unlike the current Mac OS, which contains decent pieces of code that must be executed in emulation mode on Macintosh or Mac-compatible computers with a PowerPC processor, the Copland system will consist of 95% of the "native code". The native code plus PowerPC processor add up to a fast operating system.
FACT 10. Mac will not give way.
Windows 95 is a much-needed improvement over its predecessors. Nevertheless, it has significant compatibility problems, it does not increase the speed and sensitivity to user actions, requires significant investments in new hardware and software, and, finally, it is simply difficult to work with.
However, quality alone does not guarantee success. (Otherwise, we would all record quad audio tracks on Betamax cassettes with the composition “My so-called life.”) Numbers are what are of primary importance in business, and the PC industry is no exception.
But even if only numbers are considered a barometer of success, here, I assure you, the Mac is fine - more than 20 million Macs have been sold. Every tenth desktop computer is a Mac. Mac sales in the United States are expected to exceed well over ten billion dollars in 1995, a jump of more than 30% from 1994.
And there’s another number - less well-known, although perhaps even more important: in 1995, the Apple Worldwide Developers Conference was the most visited in history and gathered more than 4,100 people - 30% more than a year ago . Advanced software will continue to be available for Macs and compatibles.
Mac lives and lives.
What they say
"The Windows 95 interface has been carefully torn from the Mac OS system, but it hasn’t gone beyond purely external resemblance."
Herb Betoni and Peter Kofi, PC WEEK
"... If Microsoft really were an innovative company, as it calls itself, it would take the opportunity to abruptly bypass the Mac, and not create a frail design like" me too. "
Douglas Adams, author of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.
“The Macintosh System 7.5.2 is the lightest, most reliable, and most convenient operating system.”
Paul Somerson, PC / Computing
"... [On Windows 95] an irreversible crash can be relatively easy, [and she] retains significant chunks of old DOS code ..."
Linley Guanap, Microprocessor Report
Who has the advantage?
Messages from the battlefield of operating systems
Many critical arrows were fired at the creators of Windows 95 for borrowing Macintosh interface features, but many components of Windows 95 give a new sound to the famous Mac features - or offer their own completely new features. Conversely, Mac OS has many features that Windows 95 still hasn't come close to (can't get closer?). So which operating system is better - and for what tasks? Here is our summary of features indicating the benefits of a particular OS.
| Characteristic | Mac (System 7.5.2) | Advantage | Windows 95 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| General ease of use | Consistently logical and intuitive interface remains unsurpassed | + | A huge advantage over Windows 3.1, but still confusing | |
| Customizability | Flexible, with significant improvements expected in the Copland version | + | + | The main viewing functions are flexible and convenient. |
| File management | The age of the Finder utility is felt, but it is still quite powerful and intuitive | + | Windows Explorer utility scares even experienced users | |
| Peripheral Interaction | Recognized Leader; connection without problems | + | Plug-and-play technology is a promising undertaking, especially if the industry supports it | |
| File search | Will be greatly improved in the Copland version | + | Powerful Find team is an urgent need for this “monumental” system | |
| Deleting Files | The venerable Trash still carries out its functions | + | + | Recycle Bin - the same “basket” with a fashionable name |
| Network features | Open Transport is an improvement, but the tools to help the administrator remain rudimentary | + | A rich - if not overly overloaded - network feature set with superb admin features | |
| Online help | Unrivaled Apple Guide | + | A text-based help system, carefully designed, albeit simple | |
| Remote connection | Apple Remote Access Tools are available for a fee, but they are worth it. | + | + | Superior interface delivers powerful features |
