Steamd

My wife and I had a discussion about my latest blog post. My take was that Ann supported John McCain and yet when he lost completely bashed the hell out of him. My wife responded by saying that that wasn’t completely true, that Ann didn’t like John McCain from the beginning. Really? 

Now, I haven’t paid too much attention to Ann outside of her blog posts so I don’t know if there have been any moments where Ann has said “I don’t like John McCain”. Hell, I don’t think there’s been any moments when Ann Coulter has said “I’m voting for John McCain”.

Out of all the blog posts she made this year (approximately 48) only 4 show signs of criticism towards McCain (here, here, here, and here). A few of them do have some sharp criticism on McCain but none of them outright say “I’m not voting for him”. Most of them just say “McCain is too moderate” and that he’s not right-wing enough.

I’m very curious as to who she voted for because if she did vote for John McCain then she absolutely has no right to bitch. After all, why on Earth would you vote for someone you have little confidence in? Why would you vote Republican just because you’re a Republican even though you don’t like the candidate? Doesn’t make sense.

Honestly, if Barack Obama turned out to be a complete douche I would not have voted for him. In fact, I probably would not have voted for anyone this year.

I take that back, I would have done a write in and would have voted for Stephen Colbert. Hell, Ann could have done the same thing and put in a vote for her best buddy, Rush Limbaugh!  ;)

I figure since Ann tries so hard to be controversial with the subjects of her blog posts, might as well get just as outlandish with mine. Consider her latest rant, entitled The Reign of Lame Falls Mainly on McCain. I mean, this woman is such a sore loser. Not only does she continue to bash Obama, but bashes the hell out of McCain too? Wouldn’t surprise me the least if Ann Coulter never gets laid. In fact, if that was the case then it would explain her rants. 

Last night was truly a historic occasion: For only the second time in her adult life, Michelle Obama was proud of her country!

This much contention can only mean one thing: a low self esteem. Face it, you’re just jealous, Ann.

The big loser of this election is Colin Powell, whose last-minute endorsement of Obama put the Illinois senator over the top. Powell was probably at home last night, yelling at his TV, “Are you KIDDING me? That endorsement was sarcastic!”

So what you’re saying is that had Colin Powell not have endorsed Obama then McCain would have won? That Powell put him so over the top that it caused a ridiculous win of over two-thirds of the electoral college? Did we watch the same election? You’re just pissed because a well-respected Republican didn’t vote for your guy. Speaking of which…

The winner, of course, is Obama, who must be excited because now he can start hanging out in public with Bill Ayers and Rev. Jeremiah Wright again. John McCain is a winner because he can resume buying more houses.

And we’re all winners because we will never again have to hear McCain say, “my friends.” 

Smooth move, ex-lax. You just managed to tear down both the candidates at the same time. Who the hell did you vote for? So your guy loses and you say, “Oh well! I didn’t like him anyways!”? Right.

After Bill Clinton won the 1992 presidential election, Hillary Clinton immediately announced that, henceforth, she would be known as “Hillary Rodham Clinton.” So maybe Obama can now become B. Hussein Obama, his rightful name.

Say it with me, Ann: President Barack Hussein Obama. Not B. Hussein Obama but President Barack Hussein Obama. Get used to it cause he’ll probably be your President for the next eight years. Notice that I said your President. Like it or not but he is your President just as much as he is mine. Last I checked, we’re both Americans and, as such, regardless on whether you agree with Obama or don’t particularly like the guy he still deserves your respect and be given the benefit of the doubt. I don’t particularly like G. “Dub-yah” Bush, in fact I pretty much hate the guy. Not because he’s a Republican and/or conservative, rather I feel that his actions over the last eight years made him one of the worst Presidents this country has ever seen. Obama hasn’t even made it into the White House yet and you’re already disrespecting him. Don’t be such a bitch, Ann.

This was such an enormous Democratic year that even John Murtha won his congressional seat in Pennsylvania after calling his constituents racists. It turns out they’re not racists — they’re retards. Question: What exactly would one have to say to alienate Pennsylvanians? That Joe Paterno should retire?

Tell me, Ann, have you ever been to Pennsylvania? How the hell do you know that Pennsylvania is full of retards let alone racists? For all we know 10% of the population in Pennsylvania could have down syndrome. I have no clue because I haven’t been to Pennsylvania. Murtha looks like an old fart so, to be honest, it wouldn’t surprise me at all if he thought Pennsylvania was full of racists. It’s not really all that different from you calling all Liberal “Godless”, right?

Apparently Florida voters didn’t mind Obama’s palling around with Palestinian activist Rashid Khalidi and Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, either. There must be a whole bunch of retired Pennsylvania Jews down there.

What are you insinuating, Ann? Are you implying that there’s something wrong with Americans who are of the Islamic faith? Who’s the racist here? And what the hell do Jews have to do with a couple of folks of Islamic faith? Doesn’t make sense.

Have you ever noticed that whenever Democrats lose presidential elections, they always blame it on the personal qualities of their candidate? Kerry was a dork, Gore was a stiff, Dukakis was a bloodless android, Mondale was a sad sack.

And what exactly are you blaming McCain for? Ah, right! Buying too many houses and saying “my friends” too much! 

This blame-the-messenger thesis allows Democrats to conclude that their message was fine — nothing should be changed! The American people are clamoring for higher taxes, big government, a defeatist foreign policy, gay marriage, the whole magilla. It was just this particular candidate’s personality.

Umm…not really. The American people really wanted change and have spoken. But what you speak of is lies. Obama isn’t going raise everyone’s taxes, isn’t looking to make government bigger, isn’t aiming for a foreign policy that is defeatist in nature, and isn’t going to make gay marriage legal nation wide. What you speak of is the same old FUD you’ve been preaching about for years and, quite frankly, you’re completely full of shit.

Republicans lost this presidential election, and I don’t blame the messenger; I blame the message. How could Republicans go after B. Hussein Obama (as he is now known) on planning to bankrupt the coal companies when McCain supports the exact same cap and trade policies and earnestly believes in global warming?

Republican’s lost this presidential election because McCain’s message sucked and, like you, was completely full of shit. His campaign was managed very poorly and his message wasn’t consistent at all. McCain and other Republican’s went after Obama using tactics and various messages that went over the line. And you’re criticizing them for it? Umm…seems to me that you agreed with these tactics and agreed with the message when they happened. But now that your candidate lost you disagree with them? Isn’t that a little two-faced?

Oh, and cut the B. Hussein Obama crap. He’s only know by that name by you. Again, his name is President Barack Hussein Obama. Period.

How could we go after Obama for his illegal alien aunt and for supporting driver’s licenses for illegal aliens when McCain fanatically pushed amnesty along with his good friend Teddy Kennedy?

Because doing so would be an instant loss in a ton of Hispanic voters. Use your brain.

How could we go after Obama for Jeremiah Wright when McCain denounced any Republicans who did so?

Because the Jeremiah Wright debate was already debated enough and nobody cared. Continuing to debate the issue would be like beating a dead horse. Again, use your brain.

How could we go after Obama for planning to hike taxes on the “rich,” when McCain was the only Republican to vote against both of Bush’s tax cuts on the grounds that they were tax cuts for the rich?

Again, because McCain tried to debate this issue and people didn’t buy it. Besides, Obama has said time and time again that his tax plans don’t necessarily involve a tax hike on the “rich”. Rather he simply wants taxes to be adjusted to match the rates that existed for people in the 1990’s for those making over $250,000. Chances are, most people making a little over $250,000 won’t even see an increase in their taxes at all. Those making under though will definitely see a reduction in their taxes. For many people, a vote for McCain would be a tax cut for everyone. Trickle down economics hasn’t worked, Ann. Again, use your brain.

And why should Republican activists slave away working for McCain when he has personally, viciously attacked: John O’Neill and the Swift Boat Veterans, National Right to Life director Doug Johnson, evangelical pastors Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and John Hagee, various conservative talk radio hosts, the Tennessee Republican Party and on and on and on?

As Palin might say, “Oh, Ann, there you go again!” I’ve read many of your blog posts over the course of this campaign and I haven’t heard you criticize McCain for attacking any of the said persons you describe. Seems kind of convenient for you to quickly dismiss McCain when he no longer serves your purpose.

As liberal Democrat E.J. Dionne Jr. exuded about McCain in The Washington Post during the Republican primaries, “John McCain is feared by Democrats and liked by independents.” Dionne proclaimed that McCain “may be the one Republican who can rescue his party from the undertow of the Bush years.”

Similarly, after unelectable, ultraconservative Reagan won two landslide victories, James Reston of The New York Times gave the same advice to Vice President George H.W. Bush: Stop being conservative! Bush was “a good man,” Reston said in 1988, “and might run a strong campaign if liberated from Mr. Reagan’s coattails.”

Roll that phrase around a bit — “liberated from Mr. Reagan’s coattails.” This is why it takes so long to read the Times — you have to keep reading the same paragraph over again to see if you missed a word.

Bush, of course, rode Reagan’s ultraconservative coattails to victory, then snipped those coattails by raising taxes and was soundly defeated four years later.

Err…what the hell are you saying? Are you trying to say that Republican’s haven’t been Republican enough? Umm…duh? The Republican party hasn’t been the same for years. If anything, it took the Bush administration and this election for folks to realize that the Republican party is morphing into an institution made up by right-wing nutjobs like yourself. 

I keep trying to get Democrats to take my advice (stop being so crazy), but they never listen to me. Why do Republicans take the advice of their enemies?

Obama isn’t crazy though. He’s extremely smart (smarter than you!). He ran a very clean campaign and said all the right things. Why on Earth would someone like Obama take advice from you?

Oh, and why do you insist on using the word “enemy” to describe Democrats and Liberals? Last I checked we’re all Americans here. Seems to me that the only one here trying to divide this nation is you!

How many times do we have to run this experiment before Republican primary voters learn that “moderate,” “independent,” “maverick” Republicans never win, and right-wing Republicans never lose?

Yeah, because, let’s face it, anyone who doesn’t agree with you or isn’t a right-wing Republican is evil. Again, funny how you haven’t really criticized McCain for being right-wing enough till now.

Indeed, the only good thing about McCain is that he gave us a genuine conservative, Sarah Palin. He’s like one of those insects that lives just long enough to reproduce so that the species can survive. That’s why a lot of us are referring to Sarah as “The One” these days.

Sarah Palin is indeed a right-wing nutjob and is definitely one of you. Problem is that she’s also a complete idiot (just like you!) who doesn’t understand the meaning of our rights given to us by the Constitution (just like you!). Man, she just might be your twin!

Like Sarah Connor in “The Terminator,” Sarah Palin is destined to give birth to a new movement. That’s why the Democrats are trying to kill her. And Arnold Schwarzenegger is involved somehow, too. Good Lord, I’m tired.

I like it! Senator: The Sarah Palin Chronicles! This week, Sarah learns that she’s actually a robot sent back from the future to ruin John McCain’s election. 

After showing nearly superhuman restraint throughout this campaign, which was lost the night McCain won the California primary, I am now liberated to announce that all I care about is hunting down and punishing every Republican who voted for McCain in the primaries. I have a list and am prepared to produce the names of every person who told me he was voting for McCain to the proper authorities.

We’ll start with former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Florida Gov. Charlie Crist. Then we shall march through the states of New Hampshire and South Carolina — states that must never, ever be allowed to hold early Republican primaries again.

You gonna do this Robert DeNiro style as he did in The Untouchables? A Louisville Slugger would be a healthy choice. How about Joe Peschi style like he did in Casino. After all, the pen is mightier than the sword. 

While you’re at it, punish yourself. All you have to do is look in a mirror and see yourself for what you truly are. Once you do that then you can truly move on to bigger and better things.

For now, we have a new president-elect. In the spirit of reaching across the aisle, we owe it to the Democrats to show their president the exact same kind of respect and loyalty that they have shown our recent Republican president.

Starting tomorrow, if not sooner.

If that means showing Obama some real respect rather than bashing him with your “I hate all Democrats and Liberal” trash, then good for you. It would be nice for once to see a right-wing nutjob like yourself actually reach across the aisle, shake Obama’s hand and say, “I don’t always agree with you but I’m willing to give you the benefit of the doubt”. If you can’t even do that then, please, for the sake of the Republican party, just shut up! And, yeah, you can start tomorrow if not sooner. Good idea!

CNET News writes about how Microsoft Chief Executive Steve Ballmer believes that Google Android is financially unsound for Google:

They can hire smart guys, hire a lot of people, blah dee blah dee blah, but you know they start out way behind, in a certain sense.

If memory serves, Apple also started out way behind, Steve. But just one software revision later and they are way ahead. Smart designers make smart products. Even if Google is a bit hit and miss on the first go-round, further revisions of their software can likely push them ahead. Where the hell is Windows Mobile in all this? Where’s the same level of innovation? I used a Treo 750w for quite some time. I don’t see it. Do you not have smart guys over at Microsoft, Steve? What’s your point?

I don’t really understand their strategy. Maybe somebody else does. If I went to my shareholder meeting, my analyst meeting, and said, ‘hey, we’ve just launched a new product that has no revenue model!’…I’m not sure that my investors would take that very well. But that’s kind of what Google’s telling their investors about Android.

That’s because Microsoft’s entire business model is completely different. Microsoft has not ventured out into the kind of business models as Google has. Thus, Microsoft has no clue how these business models actually work. Steve, I’m sorry but you just don’t get it. Until you get it you’re never going to be able to explain to your investors how such a revenue model would work. 

Google doesn’t exactly bubble to the top of the list of the top competitors we’ve got going in mobile. They might someday. But right now…

…Apple is at the top of the list of top competitors. Remember them, Steve? Remember what you said about the iPhone?

How’s that strategy working for ya? Steve, what you don’t understand is that design matters. It matters a whole lot. Apple gets it. Google gets it. It’s one of the main reasons why their business strategies are working right. They’re solving problems. They’re letting their products speak for themselves. What is Microsoft doing? 

I’m on the Windows Mobile site right now and I don’t see anything really revolutionary compared to what Windows Mobile was when I was using a Treo. Internet Explorer looks to be the same craptastic browser, incapable of browsing and rendering any site on the web like Safari on the iPhone or the Android Mobile Browser. You mean to tell me that a feature like that doesn’t matter? Plus, with ActiveSync available on the iPhone and reports of some solid enterprise solutions available for Google Android, the other benefits of Windows Mobile over other solutions is a bit moot. Granted, Windows Mobile 7 is supposed to address much this but…where is it? Just like Vista, delay after delay after delay.

Who’s way out behind now, Steve? Microsoft is. Sorry, Steve, you just don’t get it. Probably never will. Your best strategy is to retire now and put Microsoft in the hands of someone who does get it and is capable of taking your company in a better direction. Otherwise, just like Captain Ahab, you’ll end up sinking the good ship Microsoft in your quest to spear a great whale. Best of luck, Steve.

Ars Technica takes a peek at Windows 7 and what do they find? You guess it: more of the same. Rather than truly reinventing themselves and rebuilding Windows from the ground up, Microsoft just insists on beating the same ‘ole dead horse with candy colored plastic spoons. I mean, it’s just a mess. Every time I use Vista I’m constantly reminded of how much Windows is like an onion. Peel off a bunch of it’s layers and you’ll find some startling legacy cruft under the hood. I honestly doubt Windows 7 will be all that much different.

Right off the heels of Colin Powell’s endorsement of Barack Obama, many right-wing personalities and politicians who have greatly applauded Powell in the past are now slamming him. Why? Again, I’ll let Keith Olbermann take over on this one:

Trouble viewing the video? Read the transcript here.

Man, I hope this is the last of this series of posts!  Anyways…

My mom sent me this video by Sally Anthony. The song is really good and the video…well…watch it for yourself. I think it hits the nail on the head as to my feeling about George Bush and John McCain. The content of the video really brings home many of the reasons why McCain simply isn’t a call to change. Some of you may disagree when Obama proclaims John McCain as “more of the same”, but after watching this video do you still disagree? I think what the video attempts to do is to make people realize that there is a bigger world out there, to stop and look around, realize the bigger picture and the problems we have. Many of the problems could have been avoided or remedied very easily…but they weren’t. Why should John McCain not be President? Watch the video…

If you’re having trouble viewing the video, try the YouTube version.

For those who have an open mind and little bias towards any of the Presidential candidates and/or a specific political party, it’s pretty obvious that Obama won last nights debate. Now, I could go on and on about the why’s but I’d rather not. I could also go on and on about why both McCain and Palin are not the best choice. I could tell you that McCain is too old and too out of touch. I could also tell you that Palin is under-qualified and that she simply would not make for a good President were something to happen to McCain. I could list all the reasons why Obama’s judgment and plans are so much better than McCains. But to be honest, I simply don’t have the time nor the energy to go on about it. At this point, I think the point is very clear: Barack Obama will likely be the next President of the United States.

What I will mention though is one talking point that has erupted out of McCain’s campaign. It has to do with how McCain is handling some of the more radical supporters at his rallies. I agree whole-heartedly with Keith Olbermann’s views on this issue^[1]. So rather than just rant about what I think, I’ll let Keith do it for me:

1. Olbermann: McCain, suspend your campaign [↩]

As an addendum to yesterday’s “Apple Tax” blog post, I read today on Macworld where Steve Jobs is quoted as saying that there are no plans to deploy Blu-ray on Macs just yet: 

You know, Blu-ray is a bag of hurt. I don’t mean from a consumer point of view—it’s great to watch movies—but the licensing is so complex.

We’re waiting until things settle down and Blu-ray takes off in the marketplace before we burden our customers with the cost of the licensing and the cost of the drives.

Yesterday, I mentioned how Brad Brooks of Microsoft thinks that by Macs not having Blu-ray that customers are getting a further “technology tax” with the absence of this hardware. Personally, I agree with Steve Jobs on this one. Adoption rates alone make it not worth messing with right now. But I can also image that licensing is pretty complex if not expensive (thanks to Sony!). My guess is that Jobs simply doesn’t want to have to raise the cost of Apple’s computers. In order to maintain prices and add Blu-ray, Apple would have to let the quality of their products slip by using inferior components to make up for the added cost. Jobs simply isn’t going to do that. And if I were the CEO of Apple, neither would I. It’s just not a good business decision.

Ina Fried of CNET News did a recent interview with Brad Brooks, the corporate vice president for Windows Consumer Product Marketing at Microsoft, in which Brad explains that Mac buyers pay what he calls the ”Apple tax”. According to him, you pay more for a Mac in time and mone than you would a Windows-based PC. Is it me or does this sound a lot like what John McCain has been saying about Barack Obama. “Vote for ‘that one‘ and you’re sure to get higher taxes!”

The Choice Tax

There really is a tax around there for people that are evaluating their choices going into this holiday season and going forward. There’s a choice tax that we talked about, which is, hey, you want to buy a machine that’s other than black, white, or silver, and if you want to get it in multiple different configurations or price points, you’re going to be paying a tax if you go the Apple way.

I’ll admit it and say that Brad’s got a point…to an extent. There are choices when buying a Mac and each of them do allow for some limited configuration options. If you need a laptop then there are three different choices: MacBook, MacBook Pro, and MacBook Air. Need a desktop? You have three choices: Mac mini, iMac, and Mac Pro. Each of them are targeted towards different users with different needs. As far as design, yeah, you’re pretty much stuck with whatever Apple designs. But let’s face it, your typical Apple buyer isn’t concerned about what the computer looks like. Apple has already taken care of that by creating something that is simple and elegant. I rarely see anyone knock Apple for their designs. But for those who simply want something different then, yeah, they’ll have to look elsewhere. Apple is about providing a seamless experience; not about providing customers every option under the sun.

The Application Tax

There’s going to be an application tax, which is if you want choice around applications, or if you want the same type of application experience on your Mac versus Windows, you’re going to be purchasing a lot of software. And even at that you’re not going to get the same experience. You’re not going to get things like Microsoft Outlook, you’re not going to get the games that you’re used to playing.

Well, yes and no. Yes, you will likely have to purchase some software to replace versions that are comparable on the Mac. But it’s like that with any operating system. Hell, going from XP to Vista could require a customer to have to purchase software upgrades. What makes the Mac any different?

And, no, you’re not going to get Microsoft Outlook. But what you will get is a set of programs that come default on the operating system that will suffice for most users: Mail, iCal, and Address Book. For most people, these programs do enough to where Outlook isn’t really needed. Now, if you’re on an Exchange server then, yeah, you’re gonna need Office. 

And games? Last I check virtually all of the most popular games are available on the Mac: Spore, World of Warcraft, Call of Duty, The Sims, and many, many more. Not every game is accounted for but, again, most people buying Macs aren’t really buying them to play games.

The Technology Tax

There’s a technology tax–Apple still doesn’t have HDMI, doesn’t have Blu-ray offerings, doesn’t have e-SATA external disk drives that work at twice the speed of FireWire. And so you’ve got all of these things that are truly taxes.

Apple generally doesn’t adopt a technology unless they are sure that it will be standardized. HDMI may be a current standard for televisions, but a standard for computers? Umm, not really. Most people don’t really need HDMI ports on their computers. Blu-ray adoption rates are pretty slow right now and it’s entirely unclear as to whether there’s a market there yet for Blu-ray drives on computers right now, thus the reason why Apple has decided not to adopt it just yet. The same applies for e-SATA. Why spend money providing the technology for something that isn’t a proven standard and/or there isn’t a good market for? Doesn’t make sense.

The Upgrade Tax

You’ve also got an upgrade tax. The only machine, as far as I know, within the Apple lineup that’s actually upgradeable is the Mac Pro, the $2,800 version, which is (more expensive than) just about any PC configuration that you get from any one of our manufacturers.

The average user has no need for the Mac Pro. The Mac Pro is professionals and/or enthusiasts who really need a high-end workstation computer for gaming, audio/video production, 3D animation, graphics, and other resource intensive tasks. Most people will end up spending about the same as they would for any other quality PC depending on their needs. Every Mac allows for memory upgrades and some even allow for hard drive upgrades and potentially processor upgrades. But, let’s face it, the average computer user doesn’t really upgrade their video card, processor, audio card, or any other components. Most use the computer as-is for the life of the computer. They might upgrade the memory once but that’s about it.

The Windows Tax

If people want a Windows experience, then start with a machine that was built for the Windows experience. There’s no question, if you look at it, and go to Apple’s Web site today, their No. 1 selling feature that they’re telling students as to why buy a Mac is because it does run Windows, and that you can get Office when you’re running it in Boot Camp or Parallels. But, then you’re just paying that tax again. You’re paying for an upgrade to Windows, you’re paying for the full version of Office, where you could get all of that at one price, at a price point that with a Blu-ray disk drive you can get with an $800 range from an HP or Sony.

I just went to the Apple site and clicked the Mac link at the top. Although it is mentioned in the Get a Mac FAQ page, I wouldn’t say that Apple is touting it as the main selling feature. Same applies to the Education page for students. Mac’s can run Windows; that’s just a fact. For some people, the only reason they don’t buy a Mac is because they need Windows to run one stinkin’ program. If they already have a Windows license then they don’t need to buy anything else. They can just buy a Mac and install Windows with BootCamp. So, yeah, it’s a selling point but not the only one. Besides that, why the hell would anyone go and buy a Mac, buy a copy of Windows, and buy Office 2007? Why not just buy the Mac and a copy of Office 2008?

The “What am I getting into” Tax

I think the question is, though, do customers really know what they’re getting into? I don’t personally believe that customers really know that a copy of Parallels is going to cost them $80, or that when they really look at what they’re going to have to pay in terms of another $200 for a (full boxed copy of Windows), that they’re going to pay for another $149 for MobileMe to put on there, Internet services, which they can basically get all the same functionality when they have Windows and Windows Live working together.

Yes, customers know exactly what they are getting into when they buy a Mac. In fact, I think Mac users are perhaps some of the most educated computer users out there. Most Mac users don’t really need Windows so the argument about what is needed to run Windows is moot. The ones that do need Windows are well aware of what is required.  

As for MobileMe, most of the software that is needed already comes with a Mac. MobileMe allows you to sync your calendar, contacts, mail and more between your computer, the internet, and your iPhone. And it even works with Outlook. Can Windows Live do that? Can it sync with Windows Calendar and Address Book? How about syncing with Outlook? No? Then what’s the benefit of having Windows Live then?

The “False Security” Tax

That is a fallacy to think that Macs are somehow invulnerable, or impervious to virus, or phishing, or spyware. And we will tell you that based on our own data that you’re 60 percent less likely to get any type of virus…if you’re running Windows Vista versus Windows XP SP2. And also is that things like phishing scams are very real to the average consumer. And when you have Windows Vista running with IE7, we know that that capability together is blocking well over 11 million different phishing attacks a week. You’ve even got, No. 1, service providers like eBay out there on the Internet today that won’t even recommend you using the Safari browser because it is so compromised when it comes to phishing attacks. So there really is a security story here around Windows Vista running in connection with IE7 that really does create safety for our customers.

You’re right in that some Mac users have a false sense of security. But not all of them think that way. Any computer, regardless of the operating system, is vulnerable to viruses and such. But to say that somehow Windows Vista and Internet Explorer 7 are somehow more secure than OS X and Safari is a silly argument. Macs are more secure only in that it’s not as big of a target as Windows-based machines are. There just aren’t any real virus, phishing, and/or spyware threats out there for the Mac. Those that do get these threats usually get them because they did something stupid. Most Mac users are pretty well educated on what to do security wise so most threats aren’t much of a problem.

The “It’s really not about Apple” Tax

The question is, or the argument is, that understanding what the true value is of Windows and the choices that they make every day, really is not about Apple. It’s really about what is Windows, and understanding having customers understand the different things that Windows brings in terms of compatibility and choice to their everyday lives. And we have just not done an effective job of helping tell that story up until the last couple of months.

So the problem is that customers just aren’t as well educated about Windows as they should be? I take that as a back-handed compliment to Apple because, quite frankly, Apple has done a great job in educating their customers about their products. For the most part, Apple’s products speak for themselves as does OS X. So, honestly, as a business helping understand what the true value is of Windows has everything to do with Apple. Till you understand what makes OS X so great and the value it offers customers you’re never going to be able to truly relate to customers on what makes Windows so different.

Put it this way, I used Windows as my primary OS for the better part of ten years, starting with Windows 95 and used every OS that Microsoft has put out all the way up to Windows Vista. I have never been more confused and felt less educated that the time I spent with Vista. By comparison, the sheer experience of OS X was a breath of fresh air. Never once did I feel like I wasn’t able to do something, that Apple wasn’t able to educate me on what I needed to know about their OS.

The “You can’t do that on a Mac” Tax

But there’s also productivity value that you get on Windows Vista that you can’t get on a Mac. You can’t get Outlook, you can’t get Visio, you can’t get Project. And when you do get applications such as that, they’re usually stripped-down versions that don’t have nearly the amount of features, or the usability like the ribbon on Office. Those types of things just don’t come with a Mac. And that you don’t get the best in terms of hardware experiences, you don’t get high-definition playback on Blu-ray DVD on a Mac. You can’t do it, can’t get it, it’s just not there.

Virtually every application available for Windows has something comparable to it on the Mac. And, no, they aren’t stripped-down version, rather they are just more user-friendly and take a different approach to solving the same problem. Can’t use Outlook? Use Entourage instead (which comes with Office 2008). Visio? Use OmniGraffle. Project? Use OmniPlan or Merlin. Is every single feature accounted for? Not necessarily. But, then again, not every feature is needed. Features like the Office ribbon aren’t needed because OS X itself provides an API that allows for very robust user interfaces. These apps are still very, very powerful and do the job. The argument could be made that apps like these allow you to get your work done faster since they’re easier to use.

Seems that Brad’s argument always comes back to the same thing: Macs can’t play Blu-ray. Maybe not now, but someday they will. You mean to tell me that a good computer experience is predicated on the presence of Blu-ray playback? Who cares! So you can’t play Blu-ray movies. So what? Other than the average traveller who likes to play movies on his/her computer, who else really cares about Blu-ray? Again, adoption rates are slow as it is. Why waste money on an unknown market?

What’s interesting about this interview is that not once did Brad mention the word “design” as part of the description of Windows. The keywords I kept seeing were “features”, “choice”, and “experience” to describe what Windows is. The thing that folks like Brad Brooks, Steve Ballmer, and other at Microsoft simply don’t get is that design matters. It matters a lot. And it especially matters in the case of an OS. Design is more than just the sum of a product’s features. It’s not enough to simply have an array of choices if the majority of choices aren’t that good to begin with. And the user experience is entirely dependent on the design of your product. Good design is about communication, solving problems, and relaying the right information to the user. Without good design, all the features and choices in the world will only make your product come crashing down. 

Is there an “Apple Tax”? No, there is not. People buy Macs because they want a good user experience. They want a product that is well designed, speaks to them, and does what it’s supposed to do. As an ex-Windows users, I believe that a “Microsoft Tax” exists a lot more than an “Apple Tax” does simply due to the lack of user experience and design that exists in Vista.

Just like John McCain, Microsoft just keeps on lashing out at Apple with no real argument other than “Apple sucks!” When will they ever learn that a better strategy would be to simply make a better product.

The more and more I look at the differences between Microsoft and Apple, the more I notice how much they mirror politics. I’ve written about this before (The Presidential Election: Mac vs Windows) and the idea that Microsoft is very much like the Republican party still holds water. Take the recent interview Steve Ballmer did for PC Magazine (Steve Ballmer: Microsoft’s ‘Head Coach’). My bullshit detector went off like a bandit and I just kept asking myself, “Am I reading a John McCain interview?” As Obama might say, Ballmer “just doesn’t get it”.

Ballmer was asked if he was concerned that Microsoft could lose some their Windows market share (currently at 90%). Even though PC Magazine already stated that Apple has an 8% market share, he answers with the following:

Today, Apple has much less share than that. They have about 3 percent of the market—a little less than 3 percent of the total market is Mac. We do our job right—not just Microsoft, we and our partners. I mean, because in some senses, the thing that really competes are Windows PCs against Macs. And Windows PCs come in various flavors and sizes and forms and shapes and price points. And some are good and some are less good. I mean, they’re all over the map. But part of the way we have competed successfully with Apple is not just on the quality of our software versus theirs, but the variety of experiences and choice that we and our partners, hardware vendors, device driver vendors, application vendors provide. And I still think choice—choice on price, choice on capability, choice on applications—I think choice is a big deal. And if we do it right, I continue to think we’ll do very, very well. 

Umm…no Steve, Apple has more than just a 3% market share. Apple had a 3% market share two years ago. Where have you been? In fact, since the interview went to press, it has been reported that Apple’s market share will likely reach 10% by the end of the year.

As the Merovingian said in The Matrix, “Choice is an illusion created between those with power and those without”. Don’t get me wrong, choice is a good thing. However, when it comes to PCs, choice is an illusion because you’re still settling for the one thing that separates Microsoft from Apple: the OS! Microsoft isn’t doing it right with Vista. I’m not sure if Steve understands that yet or he’s just using the whole choice thing to bullshit us.

When asked to justify the $150 price tag for Microsoft Office, Steve had this to say:

In the U.S., without tax, that’s the price I’ll quote because in some countries, the retailers mark it up, in some cases there’s value-added tax, so I’ll just say—we have basically a $100 product. And most people will own that product before they would buy a new one for three years. If you tell me that for $33 a year I get a product that is more capable, that actually reads and writes documents that other people create, that is compatible with what I might use at work and, oh by the way, everybody’s got a set of features that they really do use extensively.

Problem is, Steve, Microsoft Office costs more than $150 if you’re not buying the Home & Student version. When you consider that the Standard version alone costs over $239, it’s more like $66 a year for most people. And you wonder why people don’t upgrade more often than three years? Make a better product and lower the price and more people will buy upgrades. It’s that simple, Steve. As it stands though, all you’re doing is gouging customers. Office documents are practically a standard and, as such, many people feel they have no choice but to buy Microsoft Office. So much for the argument of choice, huh!

When asked about how Microsoft relates to younger people, Steve mentioned this in his spiel: 

I think the world of social networking is sort of barely scratched, and certainly if you look at it today and say what is—on a global basis—it’s ironic—but on a global basis, what is the most popular social networking offering? It’s actually MSN Messenger.

MSN Messenger is the corner stone of Microsoft’s social networking? Really? Really? What about Twitter? Facebook? So, IM and MSN Messenger are the lynchpin of social networking throughout the world? Wow, Steve, you’re REALLY out of touch. 

Finally, the topic turns to the Apple’s “I’m a Mac” and Microsoft’s current “I’m a PC” commercials:

I think they need a little bit of correction, and you’ll see us be much more vigorous about stating the case for the PC. The truth of the matter is, this is ironic. The PC outsells the Mac 33 to 1—32 to 1. And despite the fact that we don’t sell PCs, we only sell Windows to people who make PCs. And the attack is actually on the PCs, interestingly enough. You’ll see us defend the PC. We’re going to talk about why—look, PCs are better than Macs. That is not something that can be debated. 32 out of every 33 times, somebody buys a PC instead of a Mac. I’m not saying that there are not some things that people like about Macs, apparently there are. But have you ever seen a cheap Mac? No.

Saying that PCs are better than Macs is debatable, Steve. If it weren’t then Microsoft wouldn’t feel the need to spend $300 million trying to convince people that the whole “I’m a PC” thing is just a stereotype. Seems pretty clear that you and Microsoft view Apple as a threat and with damn good reason: they’re making a better product and it’s selling! Regarding that cheap Mac, what about a Mac mini? Granted, there aren’t any cheap all-in-one Mac’s out there…but what if one came out that was priced around $800? Would you be worried then? Umm, yeah, you would.

You know, they like to act like Macs are lightweight, there are much lighter weight PC notebooks. Macs—do they have the best battery power? Of course they don’t have the best battery power. Macs tend to have nice screens, but can you get nicer screens for a PC? Of course. Do Macs work in business? No, they do not. Can you get Macs made in your own country? Because in some countries, there’s a lot of sort of, you know, what do you call them? Import duties? Taxes? You can’t get Macs made in those countries, they make them basically one place in the world, and therefore they get even more expensive.

Never ceases to amaze me the crap that Ballmer comes up with to try and make Macs look like a shabby deal. Apple doesn’t make that big deal about how lightweight their notebooks are. However, the Macbook Air is about as light as they come. And battery power? Nice screens? Come on. Have you even used a Mac notebook for longer than 10 minutes? And taxes? Come on. You can do better than that.

Macs don’t work in business? Tell that to an enterprise shop that switched to Macs! I run my business on a Mac every day. Just because Steve Ballmer says it doesn’t make it so. Saying Macs don’t work for business is a myth and complete bullshit.

You know, there are so many—you know, can you find Macs in—I’m very sensitive to exactly what mouse I have on my laptop. Can you find a range of choices? Of course you can’t find a range of choices. You know, anyway—can you find the applications you want on the Mac? Well, you don’t really get full Microsoft Office. Everything from Apple is available, there are still tons of business applications and there’s games—anytime somebody does client software—over time they’ll do a Mac client. Maybe nowadays people do the Mac clients mostly to save time, but that’s only on the high-volume applications. So 32 out of 33 times people chose PCs, there must be something better about the PC, and that’s a story that deserves to be told. I think it’s a story of choice.

So, you mean to tell me that the mouse that Steve Ballmer is using right now won’t work on a Mac? I’m willing to bet that that simply isn’t true. I bet the mouse he’s using will work just fine if he plugged it into a Mac.

And you don’t really get a full version of Office? If that’s the case, then who’s fault is that? Oh yeah! Right! It’s Microsoft’s cause they’re the ones that created it in the first place!

And there are quite a few choices of software for the Mac. Pick any problem and I’ll guarantee you there will be at least two or three solutions to pick from. Granted, not everything is mainstream, off-the-shelf software but it doesn’t have to be. The developers who write software for the Mac would rather save the customer money and sell them online rather than charging more for boxed copies.

And yeah, there’s certainly a lot more choices for Windows software but that also means there is a lot of crap software too. More choice does not automatically mean better quality. And just because more people choose to buy a PC doesn’t mean that PCs are somehow better. If that were true then more people would be buying BMW’s and Porsche’s and such. People who care about quality, ease of use, and design buy Macs. For may others who simply don’t care or are too scared to go out of their comfort zone, they buy PCs.

It gets worse when he starts talking about Vista:

…market research says people who own Vista like it. People who don’t own Vista don’t like it as much. It’s interesting, it’s not the people who own it who don’t like it. The survey results are quite clear on this. Vista owners are happy with Vista, people who haven’t owned Vista yet wonder about it because it did get some early press and there were issues that we’ve worked through on compatibility.

Guess what, Steve? I’m a Vista owner and I don’t like it. And I’m not talking about early use here when these so-called “compatibility issues” existed. I ended up deleting the image off my hard drive and likely won’t start using it again till I absolutely have to. Who are the people in this market research? Are they people like me? What kind of users are represented in this research? If it’s anything like the Mohave experiment then your research is flawed. Only two-thirds of all businesses use Vista and there are plenty of people who don’t like Vista even after using it for some time.

When people are new to a product, they generally tend to like the interface of their old product. So the third thing people say is, gosh, I was used to XP, it was familiar to me, I’m not familiar—I think the user interface with Vista is a clear improvement, but I’m sure the publication you write for—if you guys change the front page, people don’t like it at first, right? So it takes some getting used to. But as people own it and use it, they like it. 

While that may be true most of the time, a lot of the changes made to Vista are so obtrusive and annoying that a lot of people aren’t “getting used to it”. People don’t want eye candy. They just want an operating system that is easy to use, easy to find things, and just works. While Vista is an improvement over XP in many areas it’s a failure in many others. Good product design is more than just eye candy. It’s about communication and solving people’s problems in an effective manner.

While Vista works for many people, others find it a hinderance compared to XP. I for one didn’t like the changes to the Control Panel. Compared to XP, it’s confusing and hard to find anything. I don’t like the organization and where Microsoft ultimately decided to put things. It’s a failure in usability because, even though I might get used to it, I still don’t like it and will still find it confusing now and then. And I’m a pretty smart guy. I can usually figure out things, others probably won’t. Other people might not be as observant as me. Your average computer illiterate Joe will likely have a hard time embracing and using the new control panel over the old one in XP. If I find it confusing you can be sure others who are less experienced than me will definitely find it to be confusing.

What I got out of this interview is that he probably hasn’t really sat down and used a Mac for any real length of time. If Ballmer and others at Microsoft were to force themselves to use a Mac for 3 months straight, they just might start to learn what it is that makes Macs such a good product compared to Windows-based PCs. Truth is that Apple is gaining ground because they are making a better product. Better design, better integration with the hardware, and a better overall user experience. If Microsoft could reinvent Windows to reflect a better user experience then they might just be able to turn themselves around. But until Ballmer and company starts using competitor products and starts understanding what makes them great then I don’t see that happening any time soon.

As evidenced in the current Presidential campaigns, leadership trickles down and effects everyone involved. It’s clear that Steve Ballmer doesn’t get it. He seems very out of touch with what’s going on with computer and the internet these days. Just like many Republicans, Ballmer and company tend to cover their ears and eyes and only hear and see what they want. One of these days maybe Ballmer will get it. Then again, maybe he won’t. And probably by that time, Apple will have gained a 20-30% share of the market.

Good luck, Ballmer!  You’re gonna need it!