Steamd

As reported by Electronista and a few other sites, Microsoft has launched a ‘PC versus Mac’ portion on their Windows 7 site. After reading all the details on the site, I can tell you without any doubt whatsoever…Microsoft is completely full of shit. The way they go about comparing PCs to Macs on their site is comparable to the way Tea Partiers go about comparing themselves to Democrats. Microsoft seems content to use FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) and outright lies as a method of marketing Windows to the masses.

Before I go into a blow by blow review of their site, let me just add that I’m not your run of the mill Apple fanboy. Yes, I do love Apple’s products but I was a Microsoft fanboy long before I took any of Apple’s products seriously. In fact, I learned everything I could know about every Microsoft OS since Windows 95 came out. I lived and breathed Microsoft and swore by their products…that is, until Vista came out. Since then, I quit my job as an IT Supervisor, bought my first Mac, became a web developer, and haven’t looked back since. With that in mind, let’s move onto talking about Microsoft’s ‘PC vs. Mac’ site…

Having Fun

Apparently, Macs just aren’t fun. You can’t play Blu-ray movies. You can’t watch or record TV content like a DVR. And there just aren’t really any games available for the Mac…well, none that are popular! That’s what Microsoft wants you believe…which is far from the truth.

Ok, ok, I’ll admit…they did get one thing right. Yes, it’s true, you can’t play Blu-ray movies on your Mac. Question is though: how many people really need this? If you’re someone who’s always on the go and likes to play movies on their laptop, that I can sort of understand. If that’s the case then one workaround would be to purchase an external Blu-ray drive and rip your movies to your hard drive. That way you don’t have to carry around a bunch of Blu-ray discs with you. Other than that, I just don’t see the point.

As for not being able to hook a Mac to a TV, that’s false. The new Mac mini has a built-in HDMI port, making it easy as hell to hook it up to a TV with a HDMI input.

Granted, there isn’t any built-in support for DVR capabilities in Macs but there are plenty of solutions out there for that. Besides, most people already use the DVR’s provided by their cable providers, which makes having DVR capabilities on your PC a moot point.

Gaming on the Mac has started booming just in the last year. Valve has rolled out support for Steam on the Mac with an impressive list of games available including Half-Life 2, Eve Online, Portal, and more. Also, one of the most popular MMOG’s is available for the Mac: World of Warcraft. Take a look at Apple’s Games site and you’ll see there’s plenty of other popular games to choose from. So to say there are no popular games available is ridiculous. Granted, none of the DirectX only games are available but, then again, if you really wanted to play a DirectX game then all you would need to do is install a copy of Windows via BootCamp and you’re good to go.

Simplicity

According to Microsoft, Macs take time to learn and, as they put it, “the computer that’s easiest to use is typically the one you already know how to use“. In other words, continue to use the same ole’ thing you’ve been using and don’t try anything new. Basically, Microsoft is using a typical FUD tactic of scaring customers into believing that switching to a Mac is difficult and that learning how to use Macs is as equally difficult. They’re not.

Sure, there are a few things here and there that work differently on a Mac than they do on a PC but not so crazily different that you can’t figure it out. If there’s one thing Apple is known for it’s for designing well thought-out, user friendly interfaces.

No, the mouse doesn’t work differently on a Mac. It works exactly the same as it does on a PC. However, newer Apple mouses like the Magic Mouse can do more, like gestures and multi-touch scrolling. Can your PC mouse do that?

Shortcuts don’t work the same on a Mac because, um, there’s no such thing as “shortcuts” on a Mac. No need for them really when you have the flexibility and functionality that’s provided by the Dock.

Microsoft claims that Windows 7 has features that Macs don’t have. Well, the same could be said about Windows 7. For instance, Windows 7 doesn’t have Stacks, which gives you direct access to files and folders in a variety of ways. Nor does Windows 7 have a highly user-friendly backup program that’s the equivalent to Time Machine.

As for the lack of a feature like Snap, there are plenty of solutions available for the Mac that not only provide the same features as Snap but provide even more functionality. A program called Cinch comes to mind but I prefer to use it’s bigger brother, SizeUp. Both provide features that are very, very similar to Snap but give you much, much more control over how it works.

Microsoft also claims that, unlike the Mac OS, Windows 7 supports Touch and thus allows you to browse online newspapers, flick through photo albums, and shuffle files and folders—using nothing but your fingers. Great, but where are these Touch-compatible PC’s? Last I heard, the HP Slate was one of the few being developed but HP decided to pull the plug and not release it with Windows 7. It’s great that Windows 7 supports this kind of functionality but, really, how can Microsoft tout a feature that hasn’t even been proven yet? Makes no sense.

Working Hard

Considering the sheer high number of college freshmen entering school with Macs, I find it amusing that Microsoft can make the claim that Macs don’t work as well at work or at school. Just because Windows is still the majority doesn’t mean that Mac’s can’t play nice with them. It’s a ridiculous notion.

While its true that if you use Apple’s iWork suite you may have issues opening certain Word or Excel documents, there are always workarounds. I rarely have issues opening up most Word and Excel documents with Pages and Numbers respectively. The only times I run into trouble is if the original document uses some sort of funky formatting, uses fonts I don’t have, or Excel macros that don’t exist in Numbers. But here’s the funny thing…if it’s really that important to you, you can always get Microsoft Office for the Mac. Seriously.

Yes, it’s true, with all new MacBooks you have to buy a separate hardware dongle to hook it up to a standard VGA projector. This is nothing new and isn’t a big deal at all. One of the primary reasons Apple choose not to include a VGA output is because VGA is an outdated standard. Consider the fact that most monitors support DVI and you’ll quickly realize that the omission of a VGA port is a bogus thing to complain about. Apple’s Mini DisplayPort technology allows for easy conversion to DVI, VGA, and even HDMI with just a simple dongle. Why is this such a big deal?  It’s not.

As for encrypting an entire hard drive, what’s the point in that? Exactly why would you want to encrypt not only your personal files but the whole operating system as well? That makes absolutely no sense. One of the reasons why I think Apple chose to allow encryption of just the home folder is for performance reasons. Can you imagine what kind of performance hit your system will take if it constantly has to decrypt anything and everything on your hard drive? Drive encryption is a rather dangerous thing to play with as it is. Why run the risk of really screwing something up by encrypting everything? Best to keep it focused on just the stuff that matters.

Sharing

When I read the phrase “Macs don’t like to share” I laughed almost immediately. No, it’s not hard to share your files, photos, music, movies, and printers on a Mac. In fact, I would almost bet that it’s easier on a Mac. No, there’s isn’t some sort of automated “wizard” with a funny name that does it for you but it’s incredibly easy to do regardless. With just a quick visit to my System Preferences I can share out a folder, a printer, a CD or DVD, my screen, and more. Beyond that, iTunes gives you even more capabilities of sharing your media (music, movies, photos, etc.) using its Home Sharing feature. So to say that sharing stuff between other Mac and Windows users is more difficult on a Mac than Windows is complete bullshit. Different, sure, but difficult? I think not.

Compatibility

Oh noes! Macs might not like your PC stuff!

Ok, so PCs still outnumber Macs.  So what? Still doesn’t change the fact that most file types that people use on a daily basis are ubiquitous on just about all computer operating systems. So unless you’re using programs that are only available to Windows and use a highly proprietary file type, chances are that just about every file you have can be opened on a Mac with little or no issues.

Like I mentioned above, in most cases you can open a Microsoft Office document in iWork. Yes, there are some compatibility cases but if that’s a major concern for you then you can always purchase a copy of Microsoft Office for the Mac (something that Microsoft failed to mention).

As for repurchasing and relearning Mac versions of a certain program, that’s just a sheer fact of switching to any platform. Most of the programs you already know are available for the Mac. If not, more often than not you’ll find a similar program that’s just as easy if not easier to use than the PC equivalent.

Yes, you will have to sit down and learn what’s different on a Mac and how each program works different. But, let’s be honest, the same applies to different programs on Windows up to and including Windows itself. Folks who are just now switching from Windows XP to Windows 7 will have to spend time learning what’s new and how to use it. Folks switching from Office 2003 to Office 2007 or 2010 will have to learn how to use the new Office ribbon interface. These examples aren’t all that different from the experience of switching from Windows to Mac.

Choice

I’m kind of on the fence about this. To say that Macs don’t let you choose is a bit of a loaded statement. On one hand, yes, it’s true that you don’t really have much choice in terms of what color your Mac is or whether it has a Blu-ray drive, TV tuner, Memory Stick reader, or 3G wireless built-in. But on the other hand, why would you want a bunch of stuff on your Mac that you likely won’t even use? Why would you want the added expense of features that don’t accurately reflect how you will be using your Mac?

Apple chooses to take a minimalist approach and embrace certain standards by including only features they believe that most users will use. The end result allows them to concentrate on hardware that is of the highest quality and allows for the highest degree of system stability. Why include a TV tuner and run the risk of affecting system stability if not many users will use it?

In my experience, one of the downsides of the PC market is that manufacturers have a tendency to concentrate more on features than on the integrity of the hardware. End result is that its hard to find a PC with a minimal number of features these days. Just about every PC is loaded with a glutenous amount of hardware features many of which will never be used. By comparison, virtually ever feature on a Mac is used and no real estate is wasted for the hardware.

Just about every missing feature you might want is available at an affordable price for the Mac: Blu-ray drives, TV tuners, Memory Stick readers, 3G wireless, multi-format card readers, touch interfaces, mobile broadband. They’re all available. More often than not, you’ll find that there is more than one solution thus giving you more options to choose the one that fits your needs the best. To me, that’s a whole lot better than getting something “built-in” that may or may not suit your needs.

As for being able to play your videos and music stored on your home computer, I’m not exactly sure what the hell Microsoft is talking about here. If Microsoft is referring to MobileMe then, yes, it does cost $99 a year. But what Microsoft doesn’t tell you is that MobileMe does a lot more than just giving you the ability to play videos and music stored on your computer. MobileMe allows you to keep your mail, calendar, and contacts synced online and between MobileMe compatible devices like the iPhone and iPad. It also allows you to share multiple photo galleries as well as synchronize files with iDisk. But if you don’t want to spend $99 to do all of this, there are plenty of other solutions, a lot of which don’t cost a dime.

Over the course of the past few years, it seems that Microsoft is on a crash course towards losing a good chunk of their market share to Apple. As such, it seems that Microsoft is content to spend more money on bad PR rather than spending it on the thing that matters most: creating great software. I believe that much of Microsoft’s problems started when Microsoft was developing Windows Vista. They took their eye off the ball and spent way too much time developing an operating system that caused a huge PR problem for them. As far as competition is concerned, I feel like they’re a good two or three years behind where they need to be. Apple is not only dominating the desktop but is eating Microsoft for lunch when it comes to portable audio/video players, smart phones, and tablet computing devices, all devices that require tight integration with desktop/laptop computers.

It’s one thing to claim that your products are so much more superior to your competition, it’s another to actually develop it and make them reality. Right now, Microsoft is in la-la land. Windows 7 may be their best operating system to date, but in a world where so many people want smart phones and tablet devices, it’s hard to see exactly where Microsoft and Windows 7 fits in with all that. As such, this whole PC versus Mac debate Microsoft is having with themselves is bullshit.

A co-worker/associate recently posted a blog post entitled What I had when working on Mac. After reading it, it struck me as mildly amusing. Some of the writer’s points are legitimate gripes…but not the kind of gripes that I feel are show stoppers. But the other gripes just don’t make any sense because the writer failed to offer enough information to get a clear view of why they’re legitimate gripes.

Now, before I go any further, let me just say that I am not a stranger to PC’s. In fact, before switching to Mac’s, I was a longtime PC user who worked within the IT industry as an IT Supervisor for nearly 6 years. I’ve used every single version of Windows since Windows 95 first came out. I’ve setup numerous Windows servers and have a lot of experience supporting multiple Windows workstations for small businesses up to 100 employees. Yes, I do know quite a bit about Windows.

Windows has plenty of strengths and weaknesses, as does the Mac OS. I understand that some people will simply prefer Windows over the Mac OS, and that’s just fine. However, if you’re going to complain about why one OS sucks more over the other, be prepared to backup your arguments.

Let’s take a look at some of the arguments presented by Ken, the writer of the blog post. It’s a short post; too short in my opinion to make any legit complaint.

1. the size in KB is really messy. It’s showing me 2KB for dozens of file but when uploading on ftp the real size varies quite largely.

Err…I’m not sure how this is a legitimate complaint. I mean, I use the Finder everyday and don’t have a problem at all with how it reports the size of really small files. You have to look at it from Apple’s point of view. They designed the Finder to be very, very simple; something that the average user could understand. Most people only care about the approximate size. Thus, they probably opted to have the file sizes of files smaller than 1KB or 2KB rounded up. How often does any user really need to know the actual size of a file less than 2KB? It’s a small freakin’ file! Who cares?

Now, if you really care about the reporting of accurate file sizes, you might look into a Finder alternative like Path Finder. The beauty part about the Mac is that there’s an app, utility, or script that solves just about every gripe you could have about the OS. Not every gripe can be fixed…but a lot of them can.

2. the active window doesn’t have a specific color, everything is gray, hard to make a distinction between the active window and others, especially when you have opened a couple.

Funny…I could say the same thing about Windows 7 (and Vista before it):

The two windows look almost identical except for the difference in the minimize, maximize, and close buttons in the top-right corner of each window…which is, ironically,exactly how the Mac does it!

Now, here’s the thing that has always annoyed me about Windows Vista and still with Window 7…Aero! Looking at the screenshot above, you’ll notice that all the windows and even the taskbar is semi-transparent with the wallpaper showing through. This to me is highly distracting. Granted, you can turn it off but I still wonder why Microsoft concentrated so much on eye candy rather than concentrating on improving the design of the windows themselves. For instance, take a look at the following window:

Now, compare this window with a typical Mac window:

The Mac window is much sleeker, more refined with less chrome; whereas the Windows window has more chrome, especially at the top, and feels more busy. Sure, the Mac window has a lot of grey…but after staring at your computer screen for hours, viewing a bunch of sleeker grey windows is much easier on the eyes than a bunch of semi-transparent busy windows in my opinion.

3. the resizing of the window is possible from only one point which is the right – bottom corner. Regularly I am working on my 24′ LCD with two windows opened (left plus right) all the time, Dreamweaver and Firefox usually. Just imagine how is to align everyday these windows to occupy the maximum space of my desktop.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. We all know this is different than Windows and, yes, we know a lot of people don’t like it. But after you spend months using a Mac you get used to it. To get around this gripe, I use a simple little app called SizeUp. It basically allows me to maximize a window to full screen, fill just half the screen, and even a quarter screen with just a simple keyboard shortcut. The result is that I can align one or more windows very quickly without fussing about with resizing a bunch of windows.

4. there is no cut file (CTRL+X) in MacOS which is a shame, such a shortcut should be cross operating systems without any doubt as it is one of the most used keyboard commands on a computer. To do the job done on a Mac you have to either open two windows and drag and drop which is actually the easy way or to drag the file on the desktop and then to drag it again where you want to move it! Grrrr!

Yeah, that’s another little thing that some people have a problem with. Many have asked why Apple has failed to offer this feature in the Finder. Honestly, I don’t know exactly what Apple’s full explanation is but it’s clear that they did it as a matter of some kind of design principle. Maybe offering just one way (copy) instead of two ways (copy and cut) to move a file and/or folder was better to them when it came to more novice users. Who knows. Personally, I complained about it for a while when I first got a Mac but now I don’t really complain about it much. You learn to live without it. But if you must have it, use Path Finder.

5. Apple Mighty Mouse is a piece of crap, the scroll ball is not working at all and for the regular scroll on web I have to click or to move the browser vertical slider. Awful!

Now, here is an issue that has absolutely nothing to do with the decision to use a Mac or not use a Mac. There are plenty of other mouses to choose from other than the Apple Mighty Mouse. If you don’t like the damn mouse then just go get another one. I personally use a Logitech mouse and keyboard on my Mac. Why, oh, why anyone would choose to not use a Mac just because of a shitty mouse is beyond me. Next gripe!

6. The computer speed is not that good as you might read on Mac reviews. Until you will use a Mac at its full performance parameters, at what point, I guess a Mac will beat a PC, it’s hard to believe that using a Mac instead a PC will make any difference.

To make a comparison at a bigger scale is like using two cars, a regular car and a Mustang – the Mustang will really make a good score on a speed track but on a regular street, both will ride with the same speed.

Like I said, a Mac probably will make a (big) difference if you are a video gamer programmer and need a super-duper computer or working in other fields which required a lot of power. For the daily – regularly use I strongly believe a PC is the best fit.

Err…right. I have way too many questions about this gripe but I’ll try and touch on the obvious ones.

First, what Mac are you using? There’s a big difference between a Mac mini, an iMac, and a Macbook Pro when it comes to performance. The same applies to PC’s: there’s a big difference between a cheap ass $500 desktop PC and a $2000 Sony laptop, wouldn’t you say? No pun intended but I think you’re trying to compare apples with oranges. I would need to know what Mac you’re using and what the specs are before I can legitimize your gripe.

Second, if you’re a video game programmer, you’ll likely be using a PC anyways…that is, unless you’re programming for games on the Mac. What you should have said is that if you’re a video editor, a graphics designer, or a 3-D animator, a Mac will likely be a good fit for you. If all you’re doing is checking email, surfing the web, and writing the occasional document or spreadsheet then any computer will do. It’s a matter of personal preference at that point. But to say that a Mac isn’t good for everyday use is ridiculous. Again, it’s all about what you prefer.

It’s a shame that the writer of the blog post didn’t write a more lengthy explanation of his gripes. If he did his point of view would have been much clearer. My point of this blog post is to illustrate the importance of looking at things from different angles. You can’t just simply say “I hate this!” and expect people to take you at your word. You have to provide constructive criticism with examples. Doing so allows for a much more educated debate. Don’t you think?  :)

Just read an interesting post on TheAppleBlog^[1] about two different experiences when it comes to getting support for either a Dell PC or Apple computer. The writer illustrates two scenarios of how a typical support call works, both entailing a failed hard drive. The end result? According to the writer, Apple provides much better support than Dell.

I’ve worked within the IT industry for quite a few years. I worked as a computer technician at Best Buy for about a year and as an IT supervisor at an architectural firm for the better part of four years. I’ve dealt with a lot of issues with a lot of different computers. In my experience, the stories told by the writer at TheAppleBlog mirror my own, not just on a consumer level but even on an enterprise level.

One particular incident involved getting support for a Dell laptop that a co-worker owned. It was exhibiting a lot of issues: it ran extremely slow, the video was getting scrambled, and it sometimes wouldn’t boot. My diagnosis was that the video card on the motherboard was fried and had to be replaced. I told my co-worker to call Dell and tell them everything we did to diagnose the problem.

What proceeded was nothing short of typical for many PC companies: the blame game! Dell told him it was an operating system problem and that he had to call Microsoft. Microsoft told him it was an issue with the video card and that he had to call Nvidia. I then had to call Dell and explain to them in great detail that the issue is a hardware problem and that the motherboard needed to be replaced. It took over three phone calls and many wasted hours just to get Dell to acknowledge that there was a problem with their hardware.

Granted, no company is perfect nor does every PC company provide bad support. I’ve definitely had plenty of times when support from a computer company other than Apple was really good. However, I can say with most certainty that on average, Apple provides better support for their products. I have yet to have what I would call a really bad support experience that would make me think twice about buying another Apple product. Maybe that explains why Apple is ranked so high when it comes to customer satisfaction^[2].

It amazes me how little some people think about the support for a product. I have wasted a ton of time on support calls in my years as an IT supervisor. In fact, on many occasions the time and energy spent on support calls made a huge difference in the decision making of whether to buy from this company or that company. Even as a consumer, I find myself thinking about that because, when it comes right down to it, I want the knowledge of knowing that the company I buy stuff from is going to back their products. If they don’t then I’m wasting my time buying their products. If they do then I can save myself a ton of time, frustration, and even money by going with a product that is of great quality and well supported. Think about that the next time you go to buy a computer.

1. A Tale of Two Hard Drives: Apple’s Secret Weapon? [↩]
2. Apple leads, Dell lags in customer satisfaction [↩]

Yesterdays blog post regarding the whole Windows 7 will crush Linux thing turned out to be something that got a bit of a response from Ron Barrett. I do appreciate the link…even if I’m an angry Mac person. I mean, after all, the site is called Steamd for a reason. Ron does make a couple of very valid points in his response though.

First, he admits that he does have a bit of a bias towards Microsoft products. After all, that’s what he makes his money on. However, he is quick to point out that that does not mean that he favors Microsoft as a company. 

I give Redmond’s software the thumbs-up when I think it deserves it.

Honestly, I’m the same way about Apple. Just because I use a Mac doesn’t mean that I’m automatically part of the Apple parthenon of holy Mac users. Sorry, no angry cult in my corner. I use products that I feel are well designed and meet my needs. Apple’s product just happen to fit my needs much better than others.

Secondly, Ron points out that he does have a good amount of experience with Linux desktops: Ubuntu 8.04, Fedora 8, and RHEL 5 specifically. That’s good to hear since it wouldn’t make much sense to argue about something one has no experience with.

To my way of thinking, this makes me operating-system agnostic, so when I say, “Wow” to Windows 7, it’s a response that comes from direct experience.

The problem is that your experience is from a much different perspective than your average user. My experience comes from using each of these operating systems in many different ways. I’ve used every version of Windows since Windows 95 came out. I’ve experience Linux early on and have kept an eye on it till about 4 years ago when I started actually using it for web production purposes. Since then I’ve used various versions of Ubuntu and SUSE for both work and home. I’ve administrated Windows server and desktop environments and spent the better part of five years doing that. I supported a total of about 80 employees in a virtually 100% Windows environment. The only computer that wasn’t Windows was one server running a desktop version of OpenSUSE for the company intranet.

In the end though, I switched to Macs. Why? Because I felt Microsoft has lost their way and found a combination of Linux and Macs to be a far better solution.

What I learned from my days of IT administration is that the point of view of your average user is much different than how folks like Ron and I view technology. Most users are not nearly as educated or as techie as us. As such, many users view a computer as an obstacle to getting what they want done. They don’t care about which OS is better than the other. They just want something that allows them to accomplish their tasks in the easiest way possible. 

What’s interesting is that Ron links over to a subsection of an article entitled 12 Reasons Why Windows is Better Than Linux For Non-Techies. Here’s the two items of that subsection:
 

“4) Configuring desktops and settings. Desktop,network,control panel and screen saver all the setting is little different as compare to windows so in the first look most of the non-techies get confused on how to configure their desktop.

“5) Installing Software. This is the most confusing and difficult thing for non-techie because software installation is totally different in linux as compare to windows.We have to install from sources rather than just running a setup files.”

I can argue both of these points quite easily. First though…

About a month ago, one of my wife’s best friends calls me and tells me that her parents computer is having problems. Her mom brings the computer by for me to look at. The moment I boot it up, I see the problem. It had Windows 98 on it and needed to be reinstalled. No way was I going to let her mom walk out with an OS that is no longer supported.

The only option she had was to buy another computer, which she honestly didn’t have a whole lot of money to do that with. I recommended that she get a Mac but she honestly couldn’t afford it and didn’t want to spend a whole lot of money on another computer. As it turns out though I did have a spare desktop computer I could sell her. Problem was that it was an older computer and didn’t have a Windows XP license associated with it. So it was either she pay an extra $150 for a Windows XP license or allow me to put Ubuntu on it. We chose the later option.

After setting the computer up, I spent the better part of an hour walking both her and her husband on getting around in Ubuntu. Keep in mind that these are folks that don’t know much about computers. They don’t know anything about keeping antivirus software up to date let alone what viruses actually are and how one can get them. All they do is surf the net, check their email, and do a little word processing now and then. Having a Windows computer would only cause problems for them because, unlike the techie that knows well enough not to do certain things, these are users who don’t know any better. As such, an OS like Ubuntu is a much safer bet. It’s clean, easy to operate, lets them do the stuff they want to do, and is safe and secure without them having to know a whole lot. 

The good news is that she hasn’t called me at all since I set the computer up for her. It’s a testament that Linux can indeed be a highly viable solution for those whose needs are simple and don’t require specific software. 

Now, with that in mind, let’s talk a bit about those two arguments…

When it comes to configuring desktops and settings, every operating system is indeed a little different. But that doesn’t matter much if the interface is well designed and obvious. I showed the folks above how to do things like change their background, screensaver, and such and they weren’t confused at all. In fact, they both said it looked very simple. And this is coming from two people who don’t know Jack about the difference between Windows and Linux.

As far as software installation goes, yes, it’s different between Windows and Linux. Two different approaches to the same problem. I could argue that the need to run setup files is more confusing. After all, it’s much simpler in Ubuntu to update software than it is in Windows. A novice user on Windows would have to understand the concepts of how to download a setup file, run it, install the software, and then delete the setup file. On Ubuntu, all they have to know is how to work one application that allows them to install and/or update the software on their computer. Again, I showed this very thing to the folks I talked about above. It’s all about how you approach it.

The argument that somehow Linux is harder to use, more confusing, and more difficult to use is moot at best. It just depends on what it is that you’re using the computer for. I’ve proven this several times, not just with the folks above. Not everyone is a good fit for Linux but for those who are it’s a great solution.

As Ron points out at the end of his post “diversity is what makes this industry awesome”. But to say that Windows 7 will put the Linux desktop to rest is a bold statement. I believe there’s room for both.

One thing I’ve learned though is that design matters. The true test is how the design of both operating systems will change in the future. I honestly believe that Microsoft is in a downward slope with the design of their OS. With Ubuntu and other Linux distros, I’m seeing steady improvements to both the Gnome and KDE interfaces. Linux likely won’t take over the world and definitely won’t put a serious dent in Microsoft’s desktop market share, it’ll still prove to be a viable alternative for some individuals and businesses. Guess we’ll see how it pans out.

Recently, I got an email in my inbox about a new The Bird and the Bee album coming out. Since I’m a fan of highly inventive electronic music, I like these guys. I bought their last album and will likely buy the new one if it’s good.  

What’s interesting is how I found out about these guys. The music was used for a music video created by director Dennis Liu. What’s awe inspiring is the use of the Mac desktop in this video. It’s kind of difficult to describe exactly what this video is so…just watch it and you’ll see how cool it is:

Great post on MacLife about one guy’s switch from Windows to Mac OS X. Sounds really familiar and practically mirrors my own experience in switching to Macs.

Read more…

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!

As the Presidential election continues, I’ve been thinking a lot about the two candidates, Barack Obama and John McCain. I’ve thought about the philosophies and points of view that are so different between them. Being that I’ve been an IT professional for over six years and a web developer for almost as long, it’s only fitting that I draw a comparison with the current Presidential election to the two operating systems I’ve used intimately for the past ten years or so: Apple’s Mac OS and Microsoft’s Windows.

If you’ve never used a Mac then you might not have a clue what I’m talking about in this post. And when I say used I mean more than just a few hours. Anyone who has spent more than a month using a Mac will know exactly where I’m coming from and why I draw the kind of comparison I’m talking about to the current Presidential election. Comparing Windows users to Mac users is very much like comparing devoted Republicans to Democrats.

I recently read a three-part series of articles entitled From Win32 to Cocoa: a Windows user’s conversion to Mac OS X (part 1, part 2, part 3). This series of articles does a great job of reinforcing my views and illustrates my own experiences that made me switch from Windows to Mac.

I’ve used Windows since Windows 95 and was a staunch supporter of Microsoft, defending them even when criticism was at an all time high during the late 90’s and into the turn of the century. But after spending three years as an IT Supervisor for a small architectural firm, dealing with day to day issues with the administration of Microsoft software, and beta testing Microsoft’s latest OS, Windows Vista, my philosophy started to change.

The first change came when I got sick of dealing with Microsoft’s .NET platform for doing web development. I felt that there had to be something easier and just as powerful to use. So I ended up switching to the use of Apache web servers, PHP, MySQL, and Linux/Unix-based servers as my platforms of choice for web development.

The final change came when I went out and bought a Mac Mini out of frustration. The tools I was using for web development just weren’t working right on my Windows-based PC and I really wanted a change. I was already highly familiar with Linux and Unix-based operating systems so a Mac wasn’t that much of a jump for me. Once I got up and running I haven’t looked back ever since. I even formatted my old PC and turned it into a Linux server.

So how does this translate to the current election?

When I was beta testing Vista, it became clear to me that Microsoft was giving me more of the same. They were more or less trying to candy coat everything in a slick package and attempting to solve all of the users problems with band-aids. What they ended up with was a bloated mess of an operating system that required twice the horse power that Windows XP required. As such, anyone who wanted to use Windows Vista would have to buy all new hardware….including businesses, who are Microsoft’s biggest customers. What’s worse is that there are so many similarities to Mac OS X. They practically ripped off ideas from Apple. Yep, there’s lots of pork in Vista.

From a developers point of view, writing applications for Windows is a trying experience. I certainly remember my time trying to get a .NET web application working. I felt like I spent more time dicking around with the configuration than I did actually writing code. As Peter Bright points out:

Windows is dying, Windows applications suck, and Microsoft is too blinkered to fix any of it–that’s the argument. The truth is that Windows is hampered by 25-year old design decisions. These decisions mean that it’s clunky to use and absolutely horrible to write applications for. The applications that people do write are almost universally terrible. They’re ugly, they’re inconsistent, they’re disorganized; there’s no finesse, no care lavished on them. Microsoft–surely the company with the greatest interest in making Windows and Windows applications exude quality–is, in fact, one of the worst perpetrators.

Microsoft has always been a company that would have you believe that Windows and other products like Microsoft Office are the only solutions to consider for your business and personal life. They pretty much invented the use of FUD: Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. Anytime a competitor has threatened their core business, they do what they can to either stomp it out or entice their users to keep using Windows with a little FUD (“Are you sure that’s wise?”).

The thing is that Microsoft doesn’t care about the conscientious developer or the home user. They only care about making their primary core customers happy: corporate enterprise customers. As such, Microsoft doesn’t really have to re-invent themselves if their corporate customers are happy. Corporate users are happy with “good enough”, which is exactly what Microsoft gives them.

Candy coating, band-aids, bloat, pork, inconsistent, disorganized, poorly managed, corporate loving, FUD, disillusioned user base, copycat design, more of the same, good enough. Gee…is this starting to sound like the Republican Presidential campaign?

Apple, on the other hand, is a company that is about forward, outside-of-the-box thinking. Their products speak for themselves. All you have to do is pick up an iPhone and realize just how much time and attention went into it. Apple is a company that attempts to solve problems by creating computers and gadgets that are well designed and highly usable. Much of their success has a lot to do with their leadership:

Apple is Apple. Apple, as a company, prides itself on being a leader, not a follower. As Steve Jobs famously quoted Wayne Gretzky, “I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been”. So the charismatic (some might say dictatorial) Apple leadership wants the company to be seen as one that looks forward, not backward.

Apple practices good, solid user-centric design in every product they create. I’ve read many books about application and product design for my web development practices and Apple is always used as an example of good design. Good design is about communication. A well thought-out, well designed product communicates to you by showing you how it will solve your problem. In times like this, the product speaks for itself. What makes Apple’s products so good is that they accomplish something that many other companies fail to do: to make a product that is easy and fun to use and addresses the needs of what most people need.

Apple’s products are honest and direct. For Apple, less is more. You don’t need every bell and whistle. You don’t need a bunch of useless features that you’ll never use. So they get rid of the fluff and bloat and leave behind only what is necessary to get the job done. What you’re left with is a clean, usable product that is a joy to use.

Granted, Apple isn’t perfect. They do make mistakes and they are flawed in areas, and Steve Jobs would be the first to admit it. Most users don’t really know what they want till they see it so Apple tries to anticipate what users will want to use in the future by asking questions and creating new products based on new ideas and innovation. Many times they succeed, but sometimes they fail. But they learn from their failures and move on. Part of their failures includes listening to their users and asking them why a product wasn’t good. That’s just good management and good business.

Leadership, forward, outside-of-the-box thinking, communication, well managed, honest, direct, clean, usable, fallible, innovative. I don’t expect perfection but I don’t want something that’s just “good enough”. I just want it to work and work well and solve my problems. Apple give me that. I think Barack Obama will give me that as well.