eWeek writer: Apple’s claim that Leopard represents ‘Vista 2.0’ is excessive

“When Apple CEO and co-founder Steve Jobs the week of Aug. 7 showed features of the forthcoming OS X 10.5, code-named (and most likely also to be trade-named) Leopard, he showed no sign of lowering the strength of the reality distortion field that he’s famous for generating around his product and technology announcements,” Peter Coffee writes for eWeek.

“If anything, Jobs actually turned the knob up to 11 by claiming that next spring’s general release of Leopard would steal a march on Microsoft, delivering to Apple users the equivalent of ‘Vista 2.0.’ That kind of claim, now that Apple and Microsoft have become direct rivals on essentially identical hardware platforms, represents a challenge that eWEEK Labs will not hesitate to take up,” Coffee writes.

Coffee writes, “We feel obligated to ask: What should enterprise and other mainstream system buyers expect to get from Vista 1.0 when it ships at about the same time as Leopard, and is it remotely plausible for Jobs to suggest that Leopard will be a left-of-decimal jump ahead within the same quarter of next year?”

Coffee writes, “Whether Jobs has gone over the top or not, we have to begin by saying that Microsoft has seriously drained (and perhaps even poisoned) the once-overflowing well of good will that it has long enjoyed among application developers. To look back at past Microsoft Professional Developers Conference presentations, and to ruminate on the bent or broken promises of the so-called ‘three pillars of Longhorn,’ is to marvel at how far short of those goals the company has now reconfigured its aims.”

Coffee writes, “Vista was formerly envisioned as a sophisticated reinvention of associative storage, coupled to networked resources with powerful communication frameworks and made accessible to users with dramatic new data and multimedia visualizations.”

Coffee writes, “What’s now promised for 2007 is a radically de-featured Windows XP upgrade… Better security? With User Account Control, Microsoft finally gets to a point that Apple reached years ago… Microsoft also promises that Vista will offer dramatically more convenient backup tools, a prospective play that’s been somewhat trumped by Apple’s elegant and apparently well-conceived Time Machine… Vista’s speech recognition options, along with its Sidebar and Gadgets, likewise aim at targets that Apple has already hit… ervasive and largely automatic search, dubbed Spotlight by Apple and Instant Search (with Search Folders) by Microsoft, has likewise failed to transform our manner of using our machines…”

MacDailyNews Note: It has for some Mac users who can let go of years of ingrained thought processes and embrace a new way of working.

“Microsoft, meanwhile, is thoroughly annoying its users with badly implemented and clumsily presented anti-piracy measures and an exhausting pace of security patches. Being a conscientious Windows user, putting it simply, just isn’t very much fun, while being an OS X user seems much less onerous… Apple is certainly setting the pace in security, usability and visual attractiveness of the desktop and mobile computing experience; it is also continuing to set the bar high for industrial design and aesthetic appeal in hardware,” Coffee writes. “To claim, though, that Leopard represents ‘Vista 2.0’ is excessive.”

Full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Coffee says that Apple’s claim that Leopard represents ‘Vista 2.0’ is excessive? Did Peter Coffee read his own piece? Windows Vista is a “radically de-featured Windows XP upgrade” that plays catch up to Apple’s Mac OS X Tiger (released April 2005) in every way. Plus, Coffee knows nothing of Apple’s Mac OS X Leopard beyond a few carefully selected features that Steve Jobs decided to divulge at WWDC. There is no way Coffee can know if Apple is being “excessive” or not, but his need to claim it anyway is quite telling. Does Coffee hope against hope (and against his very own characterizations of the two OSes) that Apple’s claims are “excessive?” He must, otherwise, why would he have written it when all other evidence, including his own, says that, no, Apple is not being “excessive?” Face it, Peter, Microsoft is years behind, as usual. You know it. We know it. Readers of your piece know it, despite your unfounded conclusion. And anyone else who’s being honest with themselves knows it, too.

Related articles:
Microsoft Windows Vista: If you can’t innovate… try to impersonate Apple’s Mac OS X – August 10, 2006
Analyst: Apple’s new Mac OS X Leopard sets new bar, leaves Microsoft’s Vista in the dust – August 08, 2006
Apple WWDC banner: ‘Mac OS X Leopard. Introducing Vista 2.0’ – August 07, 2006
Leopard attack on Vista: Apple taunts Microsoft with much faster operating system launches – July 05, 2006
What Microsoft has chopped from Windows Vista, and when – June 27, 2006
Microsoft botches another copy job: Windows Vista Flip3D vs. Apple Mac OS X Exposé – June 26, 2006
Windows Vista rips-off Mac OS X at great hardware cost (and Apple gains in the end) – June 13, 2006
Computerworld: Microsoft Windows Vista a distant second-best to Apple Mac OS X – June 02, 2006
Thurrott: Microsoft collapsing under its own weight, Gates has driven Windows Vista into the ground – April 20, 2006
Thurrott: Microsoft going to get eaten alive over Windows Vista’s resemblance to Apple’s Mac OS X – March 09, 2006
NY Times’ Pogue on Gates’ CES demo: Most of Vista features unadulterated ripoffs from Apple Mac OS X – January 05, 2006
Analyst: Windows Vista may still impress many consumers because they have not seen Apple’s Mac OS X – January 05, 2006
Gartner: Ignore Microsoft Windows Vista until 2008 (why not just get Apple Mac OS X Tiger today?) – November 12, 2005
Microsoft’s Windows Vista strives to deliver what Apple’s Mac OS X already offers – October 10, 2005
Thurrott: many of Windows Vista’s upcoming features appeared first in Apple’s Mac OS X – September 26, 2005
Microsoft’s Ballmer: It’s true, some of Windows Vista’s features are ‘kissing cousins’ to Mac OS X – September 18, 2005
Windows tech writer Thurrott: ‘In many ways, Mac OS X Tiger is simply better than Windows’ – May 07, 2005
Thurrott: Longhorn demos ‘unimpressive, fall short of graphical excellence found today in Mac OS X’ – April 26, 2005
eWEEK Editor Coursey: Longhorn so far ‘looks shockingly like a Macintosh’ – April 25, 2005
Due in late 2006, many of Windows Longhorn’s features have been in Mac OS X since 2001 – April 25, 2005
Microsoft’s new mantra: ‘It Just Works’ ripped straight from Apple’s ‘Switch’ campaign – April 22, 2005
Apple CEO Steve Jobs on Microsoft’s Longhorn: ‘They are shamelessly copying us’ – April 21, 2005
Microsoft’s Windows Longhorn will bear more than just a passing resemblance to Apple’s Mac OS X – April 15, 2005
Steve Jobs: Microsoft copied original Apple Mac with Windows 95, now they’re copying us again – February 08, 2005
The Age: ‘Apple’s Mac OS X at least a generation ahead of Windows XP, iMac G5 clearly the best’ – December 15, 2004
Silicon Valley: Apple CEO Steve Jobs previews ‘Longhorn’ – June 29, 2004
Apple CEO Steve Jobs: Mac OS X Tiger ‘is going to drive the copycats crazy – June 28, 2004
PC Magazine: Microsoft ‘Longhorn’ preview shows ‘an Apple look’ – May 06, 2004
Windows ‘Longhorn’ to add translucent windows that ripple and shrink by 2005 – May 19, 2003
Apple leads; Wintel follows as usual – November 11, 2002


  1. MDN,
    Sometimes you get a little over the top when it comes to talking about Apple. But here, I think you were right on the money. When eWeek tries to speak out of both sides of the mouth, they just dribble. ” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />

    It seems to be happening more and more lately, too. Writers complaining about Apple but having nothing to show vs Microsoft.

    — Hey, have a nice weekend. ” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />


    You are too touchy (That’s why I believe others on this site are correct when they have said that they suspect the editors here to be right leaning).
    Which is fine, but I have always observed that the farther right the lean, the more and louder the bluster, to cover up the insecurity, which is exponentially greater.

    He meant, I believe, the choice of terminoligy to be not of his liking?

    Perhaps he himself could have chosen better words to convey his thought.

  3. Apple’s claim that Leopard represents ‘Vista 2.0’ is excessive

    Excessive indeed, there is no way Vista 2 can be anything like Mac OS X Lepoard.

    Vista 2.0 will be issued as a service pack 5 minutes after Vista 1.0 will be released, if ever.

  4. “we have to begin by saying that Microsoft has seriously drained (and perhaps even poisoned) the once-overflowing well of good will that it has long enjoyed among application developers.”

    I like to have fun as much as the next guy, and so I comment on lots of stuff here on MDN. A lot of it does not matter much, and a lot of what we Macheads think and feel don’t amount to much at all.

    But what is seriously going on in the computer industry re Microsoft is summed up in the above quote from our friendly author. Microsoft has seriously drained and poisoned the good will they once enjoyed.

    Fact is, things are changing, have changed – it’s a new day. Long live Apple, long live Macintosh.

  5. We shall see. These arguments are stupid, though, until they’re both out in the wild. This is like arguing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. ” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”rolleyes” style=”border:0;” />

    I say eight.

  6. Apple’s claim that Leopard represents ‘Vista 2.0’ is excessive

    First off, Vista 1.0 has to ship.

    And second, it’ll take until Vista 3.0 for MS to catch Leopard. By then it’ll be 2018.

    So saying Leopard represents Vista 2.0 is excessive. MS can only dream to catch up that soon.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.