Report Offensive Message
Windows vs. Mac OS
I agree that people who don't know anything about computers
would be as well off - better! - with a Mac. But most people get
their introduction to computers at work, and most businesses
outside of the graphics field use PCs, so that's what people learn
and buy because they follow the path of least resistance.
Apple's marketing leaves something to be desired. They've made
a bit too much out of the "Macintosh - the computer for the rest
of us!" point of view. Microsoft advertising doesn't really say
much, but Apple's tends to be very stylish and without a point.
I've always felt they lacked "relevance," i.e., what does it do for
ME? Why should I go to the trouble of learning something new?
Windows PCs are cheaper than Macs - out of the box. Once they
have a problem, especially the current crop of viruses and
spyware, the savings disappear in a flash. This is how I make
(too much of) my living: spending 2-3 hours trying to clean up a
PC, then advising the client that they need to back up their data,
followed by either a reformat and reinstall of their current
computer, or a new box with the OS and standard software
preinstalled.
Not to mention the loss of time. Nor the time spent on a weekly
basis trying to keep Windows alive (Windows updates, virus and
spyware scans).
I've seen one significant virus on a Mac (Autostart worm), and
that was around 1996-97, and it didn't do any lasting harm. The
last virus I had to remove from a client's system was a Word
macro virus last summer. She didn't have any anti-virus
protection at all on her system. Spyware? Non-existent!
The Mac OS pre-OS X had some serious flaws, including a near-
total lack of security and a poor multi-tasking environment. It
tended to crash too much. But, to be honest, so did Windows.
That's one reason it didn't sell well to corporate America. OS X is
a different critter altogether, and the move to Intel opens up a
whole new (you should pardon the pun) vista for multi-OS usage
on the same box.
jdclyde's comment about Apple's proprietary hardware raises
some interesting points. Apple tried licensing clone
manufacturers, and they almost put Apple out of business
because they ate into Apple's market instead of creating new
ones. OK, so computers can't be marketed like soft drinks.
Another aspect is quality control. PCs can be made cheaper
because you can buy the components cheaply and you can cut
corners in the process. Apple sits on top of the quality of the
entire system, including components.
It's been argued that Apple thinks of itself as a hardware
company, and that that's a mistake, they should think of
themselves as a software company. I think that mindset
sometimes works for them - think of their design innovations -
and sometimes works against them. As their prior experience
with clone makers showed, licensing the Mac OS to other
manufacturers carries risks, but just imagine if doing so could
double or triple their market penetration in the short run. And
imagine what it would do for them to sell systems that booted
into the Mac OS and hosted Windows, with Windows accessible
with a keyboard command, a la Virtual PC.
As to certification, it's interesting that anyone can buy and use a
computer, but you need a major education and regular
recertification to deal with it when it gets a tummy ache. Is that
the model we want for a successful product that we live with?
Would it be tolerable with any other product? What's the
equivalent of opening the refrigerator only to be presented with
the ice blue screen of death?
As Deejay54 put it: "Windows, popular and easy. Popular
because of marketing and most third party software will work on
it. Easy because most anyone can use it with little instruction.
The best? Not by a long shot. That is what keeps people like us
in business."
My problem is that people like us should be earning an honest
living providing training, helping to install new hardware and
software, and developing new stuff. The care-and-feeding
trough should be shut down in favor of robust software with
self-healing capabilities. I sometimes feel guilty handing clients
their bills. But it's not my fault they can't pass the cost on to the
real culprits.
would be as well off - better! - with a Mac. But most people get
their introduction to computers at work, and most businesses
outside of the graphics field use PCs, so that's what people learn
and buy because they follow the path of least resistance.
Apple's marketing leaves something to be desired. They've made
a bit too much out of the "Macintosh - the computer for the rest
of us!" point of view. Microsoft advertising doesn't really say
much, but Apple's tends to be very stylish and without a point.
I've always felt they lacked "relevance," i.e., what does it do for
ME? Why should I go to the trouble of learning something new?
Windows PCs are cheaper than Macs - out of the box. Once they
have a problem, especially the current crop of viruses and
spyware, the savings disappear in a flash. This is how I make
(too much of) my living: spending 2-3 hours trying to clean up a
PC, then advising the client that they need to back up their data,
followed by either a reformat and reinstall of their current
computer, or a new box with the OS and standard software
preinstalled.
Not to mention the loss of time. Nor the time spent on a weekly
basis trying to keep Windows alive (Windows updates, virus and
spyware scans).
I've seen one significant virus on a Mac (Autostart worm), and
that was around 1996-97, and it didn't do any lasting harm. The
last virus I had to remove from a client's system was a Word
macro virus last summer. She didn't have any anti-virus
protection at all on her system. Spyware? Non-existent!
The Mac OS pre-OS X had some serious flaws, including a near-
total lack of security and a poor multi-tasking environment. It
tended to crash too much. But, to be honest, so did Windows.
That's one reason it didn't sell well to corporate America. OS X is
a different critter altogether, and the move to Intel opens up a
whole new (you should pardon the pun) vista for multi-OS usage
on the same box.
jdclyde's comment about Apple's proprietary hardware raises
some interesting points. Apple tried licensing clone
manufacturers, and they almost put Apple out of business
because they ate into Apple's market instead of creating new
ones. OK, so computers can't be marketed like soft drinks.
Another aspect is quality control. PCs can be made cheaper
because you can buy the components cheaply and you can cut
corners in the process. Apple sits on top of the quality of the
entire system, including components.
It's been argued that Apple thinks of itself as a hardware
company, and that that's a mistake, they should think of
themselves as a software company. I think that mindset
sometimes works for them - think of their design innovations -
and sometimes works against them. As their prior experience
with clone makers showed, licensing the Mac OS to other
manufacturers carries risks, but just imagine if doing so could
double or triple their market penetration in the short run. And
imagine what it would do for them to sell systems that booted
into the Mac OS and hosted Windows, with Windows accessible
with a keyboard command, a la Virtual PC.
As to certification, it's interesting that anyone can buy and use a
computer, but you need a major education and regular
recertification to deal with it when it gets a tummy ache. Is that
the model we want for a successful product that we live with?
Would it be tolerable with any other product? What's the
equivalent of opening the refrigerator only to be presented with
the ice blue screen of death?
As Deejay54 put it: "Windows, popular and easy. Popular
because of marketing and most third party software will work on
it. Easy because most anyone can use it with little instruction.
The best? Not by a long shot. That is what keeps people like us
in business."
My problem is that people like us should be earning an honest
living providing training, helping to install new hardware and
software, and developing new stuff. The care-and-feeding
trough should be shut down in favor of robust software with
self-healing capabilities. I sometimes feel guilty handing clients
their bills. But it's not my fault they can't pass the cost on to the
real culprits.
Posted by rm3mpc
28th Jul 2005
