Linux Journal Likes Mac OS X

sobchak writes "In an article from the latest issue of Linux Journal, Doc Searls and Brent Simmons review Mac OS X. It's a fair and balanced analysis, but is a definite thumbs up for Mac OS X from (yet another) respected Linux source. They stop just short of calling the new OS 'developer nirvana,' but did say, 'Last week we put Mac OS X on a Titanium laptop. It blew our minds.'"

Comments

The OS isn't the problem...

[OneFix]

As a former Amiga user, I can say that the single thing holding the Mac down is its hardware...not that the hardware is bad (far from it), but it's the closed architecture.

It's true that a closed architecture can have a signifigant advantage (I won't go over that argument), but the Mac is close enough to the PC in its price range and target audience that the comparison to PeeCee hardware is valid.

If a potential Mac user doesn't fit into a mold of what Apple has designed a system for, then that user will not find "value" in the Mac.

As well, hardware manufacturers (in general) have always treated non-PC hardware as an afterthought. I know there have been some advances here as well, but the fact still remains that support is generally less than stellar for anything not wintel.

There is also the problem of percieved cost with Mac vs. PC. Alot of ppl look at a cheap Mac and say, but this PC is so much cheaper. Apple has attempted to fix that with the iMac, but I don't see it happening...

Don't get me wrong, the Mac has a great OS, and I personally belive that the 68k and PPC processors are superior to x86 based processors, but this is the problem that Apple & the Mac community as a whole should be addressing.

Re:The OS isn't the problem...

[Spencerian]

I disagree, but understand your opinion.

By "closed architecture," I make the assumption that you mean that you can't go and build a Mac like one could do for a PC. True.

But then, you don't run out to your auto store to build a Jaguar. I know, the car analogy is cliched now, but it illustrates the point.

Apple doesn't expect every person to switch--only the people who consider the value of the Macintosh (both OS and hardware) worthwhile. Even if they get a fraction of Windows users to switch, they're successful.

Apple has been getting away from the "hardware proprietary" model since 1998 pretty well. Today, in their G4 towers, the only proprietary hardware (outside of the chassis) is the motherboard and perhaps the processor. Everything else can be bought and installed as you would a PC. I'm probably not telling you anything new.

I think Apple's computers meet a greater flexibility than a typical PC because they hold a tighter grip on the true standards. Some PCs offer the same standards but implement them strangely. The feel of the machine also is different from PC to PC. That's rare from a Mac perspective.

You're right on the cost--but people do seem to look a little more at looks now, too, as they would with cars. I think Apple needs to address how easy it would be to MOVE from Windows to Mac, and make it easy by making systems with Virtual PC bundled and a tool for moving data from the PC to the Mac.

I see one thing about the iMac that few have realized: Sales are through the roof and Apple is having a hard time with demand--for their HIGH END, MOST EXPENSIVE version!!! Imagine the sales numbers for the lower priced models once they work out the supply issue.

I guess baby steps is better than no progress at all in terms of turnover to Mac tech, however.

Re:The OS isn't the problem...

[Daniel Dvorkin]

Most ppl wouldn't touch their fuel injectors in their vehicle, but it is common for someone (even those that don't build their own system) to switch things such as printers, CD-ROMs, CD-RWs, and DVD-ROMs...even adding memory and harddrives.

Um ... no it's not. The vast majority of home computer users have never opened up their cases and never will. Businesses may be a little more likely to upgrade, but these days it seems they're more likely to buy new machines and sell the old ones to employees, or donate the old machines to local schools for a tax writeoff, or whatever.

The car analogy is a nearly exact one in this case. People who upgrade their own processor or replace a CD-ROM with a CD-RW at home are the "shadetree mechanics" of the computer world, equivalent to car owners who will put in a new exhaust system to get some extra horsepower. Far more common are those who will take their [cars / computers] into a dealer for [a new set of performance tires / installation of more RAM]. But both groups are vastly outnumbered by those who use the machine until it breaks down or is rendered obsolete, and then buy a new one.