Steamd

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.

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.

I recently spoke with a co-worker who has a friend who works for Microsoft. We talked a bit about the problems associated with Windows Vista. The problem, according to my co-worker’s friend, is drivers; manufacturers simply have not written good, solid drivers for Windows Vista. Which brings to mind a quote that the Macalope made on a recent blog post:

Hey, the Macalope doesn’t do it often, but he will give Microsoft credit for one thing: what it does to get Windows running on all those different machines is a pain in the ass. It’s no wonder Apple doesn’t want to get into that.

Indeed, getting Windows to run right on every machine is indeed a pain in the ass. So I wonder…how much access do developers have to the innards of Windows that allow them to make all these device drivers work? Do they get any source code of Windows itself? Microsoft does make a Windows Driver Kit available to developers, but there is no mention of any source code available. My guess is that developers are given all the documentation about hooks, API’s, and such into the OS and are given tools to test the integrity of the code written for a driver but none of the actual source code within Windows that would allow developers an insight into how their drivers will interact with Windows.

Take a video card driver for Vista, for instance. Given the complexity of the new Windows Display Driver Model in Vista, DirectX 10, the requirement for some drivers to be digitally signed, as well as the DRM placed on the video subsystem, a lot can go wrong very quickly. Multiply that complexity out to how many different models of Vista certified video cards there are and you’ll realize very quickly what the problem is.

The debate on whether an open platform is better than a closed platform is a subject that will forever be debated. And it’s not just a Mac vs. PC thing. On the PC front, you have Windows and you have Linux…both very distinct OS’s with different philosophies as well. Your choice of Windows, Linux, or Mac is entirely dependent on your needs and what you want to get out of it. I’ve dabbled in all of them with most of my experience being on Windows. But over the years I’ve learned what the benefits are to each OS.

The difference between Windows and Linux is that Windows is a closed system whereas Linux is an open one. The benefit of Linux here is that you have the opportunity to tweak any part of the OS that is causing you problems by rebuilding and compiling the source code, which in turn leads to more stability. That’s not something you can do so easily with Windows.

The difference in a Mac versus Windows and Linux is that the Mac is a platform, a combination of software and hardware, and one that is semi-open. I say semi-open because the Mac OS does have a lot of open-source components under the hood. It is based on Unix and does have things like Samba, Apache, and other popular open-source software driving part if its functionality. Apple has chosen to retain control of the hardware in an effort to provide the greatest degree of stability for their OS. The downside to this is that you don’t have as much choice in the way of hardware, which for some is a deal breaker.

So depending on what you want to do will depend on what OS you choose…

There are plenty of other reasons to use Windows, both for personal and business use. Windows has captured about 90% of the desktop market and continues to be the most used operating system. Familiarity and availability of software have continued to make it the number one operating system in the world. Because of that most people consider it the default and thus other operating systems are not even considered.

Many people consider Windows the defacto standard for enterprise use. However, the gap is narrowing and the use of other alternative operating systems are being explored. So this particular point could very well be moot in short order.

If you’re a gamer, of course Windows will be your platform of choice. DirectX-based games pretty much rule the roost in the gaming world and thus neither a Mac or a Linux-based PC can supplant this.

Someone who has a really old PC and simply doesn’t want to spend any money on it might try the Ubuntu flavor of Linux. It’s a great way to breath new life into an old PC and at least get basic internet access, e-mail, and office applications. Other PC hobbyists might enjoy the level of customization and freedom that other Linux distributions provide.

By far the greatest use of Linux is for server purposes. Many small businesses who wish to have a server but don’t want to spend a whole lot of money on both hardware and software licenses can choose to buy a cheap server and throw a copy of Linux on it. It’s cheap, stable, and does the job. As a web server, Linux is a great OS to host a PHP/MySQL-based website using Apache.

Apple’s Macintosh platform is as much as a hardware platform as it is an operating system platform. The two really go hand in hand and thus it’s hard to draw on comparisons with PC’s. With new Macs being Intel-based, technically speaking you could say that a Mac is a PC…especially if you consider the fact that you can install Windows on an Intel-based Mac. Right now, the Mac is probably the best alternative solution to a PC and Windows and is most targeted towards the home user. That doesn’t mean that a Mac couldn’t be used for business use though. In fact, Apple’s servers are as robust as their desktops and are great for the small business who wants to adopt Mac’s and doesn’t want to pay for any in-house IT staff.

For the average home user, I think a Mac is the best solution. With all the hassles associated with viruses, spyware, and maintenance on a Windows-based PC, I feel that a lot of home users would benefit greatly from a Mac because virtually none of those hassles exist on a Mac. Plus, most of the software that people typically use is available for the Mac so there is some familiarity there that people can latch on to. With the sheer easy of use and availability of software tools for managing and editing photos, videos, and music, the Mac is a great computer for the average Joe.

I used to be a Windows guy…still am because of my job. But at home I’m more of a Mac guy. I also use Linux quite a bit for web development purposes. The main takeaway from this is that there isn’t a one size fits all solution. As much as I would like to say that the Mac is the perfect solution for everyone and everything, it just ain’t. Same applies to Windows and Linux. But I do recommend that you take a serious look at each solution and weigh your options. The default may no longer be the best option for you. Think about what you do when you buy a car. A little research goes a long way in determining what will work the best for you and, in the long run, allows you to make the best, most educated decision. Why should your computer be any different?

There are people in the world who think they are right and no matter how many times you tell them, no matter how much evidence you put in front of them, they are never wrong. Kind of like the people who think the holocaust never happened. Or that dinosaurs never existed. Or that global warming is a hoax. Even with all evidence pointing to the contrary, some people won’t budge and will point blank tell you that you’re wrong.

Yesterday I posted a rebuttal to a blog post made on Calloftheday.net. His reaction, shall we say, was expected and only proves my point…that no matter how you point out to someone they are wrong, they still insist they are right:

Now, as some of you already know, I screen all comments before they’re posted. This is mainly because about 30% of the comments I get in are just people trying to advertise their own sites. About 69% is dedicated to porn spam. (69, geddit? I’ll get my coat). About 1% are actually comments.

I have no doubt that you get spam and that a lot of the comments you receive are complete shit. However, I have no doubt in my mind that my initial comment was within the 1% you claim are actually comments…which goes back to my initial question on why it wasn’t posted in the first place.

What your original post actually contained was along the lines of “HAI GUISE, WHATS GOIN ON IN THIS THREAD!”?, and then threw a link back to your own website.

No, my original post was along the lines of “GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT!!”. I didn’t throw a link to my site until after the fact. I took some time to write a solid, well thought out response to your post and, well, it didn’t get posted. What did you think my response would be? If you were screening posts and saw
my first initial post, why didn’t you go ahead and post it? What was it
about my initial post you didn’t like?

Like I said, your “response”? was simply a direct link back to your own website. If you want to argue, feel free to do it directly. Now, I’m only going to say this once - to all further mac hatemail, please examine the following closely;

Otherwise, your comment wont get posted. And the Almighty Jeff will hate me. And the whole world will come to a fucking standstill.

Umm…right…so stupid is as stupid does, right?

Look, I don’t care whether you agree or disagree with my opinions or anyone else’s for that matter. Whether you’re a Mac user, a PC user, a gamer, you hate Macs, you think Microsoft is the devil, or whatever the
hell you believe…it doesn’t matter one iota! However, what does matter is that you get the facts straight. I’m not a MacIdiot, a Mac fanboy, or any like that. This is not a PC vs. Mac thing. This is a “Get your facts straight”? thing. If you’re going to argue and create a flame war, you better have your facts straight.

So I saw this Digg post yesterday that linked to a blog post of a system comparison between a Mac Pro and a high-end gaming PC. Here’s the specs of the PC he was talking about:

Asus P5E3 Deluxe Socket-775 Motherboard
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6850 @ 3GHz
2GB DDR3 Ram @ 1333mhz
2x 1TB Hard Drives @ 7200rpm
EVGA GeForce 8800Ultra (768MB) Graphics Card
Samsung 24″ LCD Syncmaster Display
Creative SB X-Fi Elite Pro sound card
D-Link draft-802.11n Wireless Adapter
Windows Vista Premium
700W Power supply & NorthQ 2500 Chasis
Subtotal: $6019.18

Not bad, right? Looks like a pretty solid configuration for any gaming PC. Now, let’s look at the specs he presented for the Mac Pro:

“Bundled”? iLife software
Dual-Core Intel Xeon Processor @ 3.0ghz
2GB DDR2 Ram
500GB 7200rpm Hard Drive
Nvidia Quatro FX 4500 (512meg) Graphics Card
20″ LCD Display
16x CD/DVD-RW Drive
AirPort Wireless Card
Mac OSX Leopard
Standard Chassis
Subtotal: $6,102.00

The author went on to say this:

There, you still save just over $80, and the Windows PC is now about three times more powerful than the Macintosh. Thus leading back to my original point, iThings cost 300% more than normal things. Or are 300% less powerful than normal things. Take your pick.

Umm…300% Right. Do you see any flaws in the comparison of these two systems? I do! And when I did, I tried to post a very honest, very open counter-point to his argument. One commenter felt that the author’s points are bastardized. So here’s what my response was:

Bastardized? Not just that, but irresponsible as well! Here’s the problem…your comparison is waaaaay off and not fair by a longshot.

Let’s take the processors for example. A dual-care Intel Xeon is a different processor from a Intel Core 2 Extreme, one is designed for servers and workstations and the other for gamers. Yeah, they cost the same…but here’s the catch…Apple gives you two dual-core Xeon processors for the price of your single Core 2 Extreme! In fact, you don’t have a choice…Apple won’t sell you a Mac Pro with just one Xeon processor! How’s that for value?

Next, the video cards. Another one that is waaay off! In no way can an nVidia GeForce 8800 Ultra compare to a Quadro FX 4500! The GeForce is a gaming card and the Quadro is a precision graphics card. Just like the processors, two video cards for two completely different applications. Hell, the Quadro card in and off itself is over $1600! Yeah, they’re expensive…and there’s a reason for it. You don’t want to use a card that is built for gaming and risk it screwing up a very important rendering job on a CAD project.

If you buy a Mac Pro without the Quadro card and stick with the default NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT 256MB card, you can get it for about $4400. At that price, I can go out and buy a 8800 Ultra off the shelf and still save over $1000!

Now, go to HP’s website and configure a xw6400 or xw8400 workstation with the same specs as a Mac Pro. Why the workstation? Because you can’t buy a consumer-line computer with a Xeon! What you’ll find is that Apple undercuts the competition a bit. Yeah…believe it or not, they are actually cheaper than the competition! Dell may or may not be more expensive but, even then, it won’t be by much.

The point is this isn’t a fair comparison and you need to get your facts straight. Can a Mac Pro be a good gaming computer? Absolutely…but you may have to customize it a bit to get what you want out of it. But that’s not why people buy Mac Pros. People buy Mac Pros because they want the fastest, most powerful Mac to do high- end stuff like video editing and graphics.

And on that note, the other thing is that with a Mac I can still run Windows. You can talk about the high points of Windows Vista all you want but I will still prefer Mac OS X Leopard over it any day. And the cool thing is that I have my own copy of Windows XP and can boot natively into it any time I want and play a game or two. With a PC, you’re stuck…you have no choice unless you use a Linux distro as your primary OS…which, ironically, isn’t so bad! I use both SuSE and Ubuntu on a few PC’s myself.

I’ve been a Windows user for the better part of 12 years since Windows 95 came out. For me to say I prefer a Mac over a Windows-based PC is saying a lot. I used to be an ASP/ASP.NET developer and got very frustrated with all the problems I was having. Switched to PHP and a Mac and am a lot happier.

To end my comments, just remember this…the Mac is a platform. You can’t compare it to a PC on hardware alone. What makes a Mac a Mac is the combination of the hardware AND the software. That’s a very important distinction and one that will give a much fairer comparison between the two.

Hope these comments are enlightening.

Jeff

My response was not posted at all. In fact, just about any opposing viewpoints were deleted from the comments as well. It seems that the author does not want to hear it which is foolish. The fact that the author does not allow for this proves that he is ignorant and stupid, the two very things I abhor.

The whole point I was trying to make is that before you go and make the kind of claims you are trying to make, do yourself a favor and make sure that you get your facts straight. If you’re going to make a bold statement about something like this, you better have the facts to back it up.

I’ve used every major operating system that is out there: Windows, Linux, and Mac. I’ve built a few of my own gaming PCs and I’m an IT Administrator. I do know a thing or two about hardware and the cost of it. I order workstations all the time for the architectural firm I work for. My opinion is a highly educated opinion based on real-world experience.

The gentleman who made this blog post is a moron. Until he has spent a significant amount of time using a Mac, he and any of the other visitors who have made bogus comments have no right to criticize something they know nothing about. If you are a gamer then great…stick to a gaming PC. But don’t try to make comparisons like this and then dismiss any hardcore facts…you only make yourself look like a f$%ing idiot!