Slashdot Mirror
Apple Wants Your Input
Johnny Mnemonic writes "Apple is asking for feedback specifically from PC users about why you might be considering a Mac purchase, or if you recently purchased a Mac for the first time, why you made the switch. A good opportunity to sound off about your Apple peeves, but also a chance to let Apple know what you think they're doing right. The Mac OS X feedback page, originally from the Public Beta, is still up and accepting feedback, also."
MAC OSX..
simply the best Unix version for the desktop, the power of unix with the commercial support of windows without the excess baggage. That is one big reason.
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
Here's my question: Why are we still double-clicking?
MacOS required double-clicking because it originally only supported one mouse button.
Microsoft ripped off MacOS, warts and all, so Windows makes you double-click too.
Then the Linux desktops ripped off Windows, warts and all, and we have to double-click as well. (Sure, you can override it. I do. But it's certainly not something the average user, even the average Linux user, can do)
Wouldn't it make a lot more sense if your OS worked like your web browser? Left click to launch, left drag to move, right click for more options. No double clicking. Ever.
Remember when you first taught your mom to double click and how much trouble she had? Then she started double-clicking everything: buttons in Word, links in Netscape, you name it. She was confused because it was inconsistent and a stupid UI decision.
So i say Apple should lead the way again and get people off the stupid double-clicking habit.
--
Mod up a post Rob doesn't like and you'll never mod again
The one thing that Apple has done best (at least during some years) is to try out new designs, new ideas. They've shown a willingness to take risks. Whether it's the GUI, Human Interface Guidelines, the Newton, the iMac, or just little touches that make the computing experience a little bit friendlier. They showed us that there was a viable alternative. Sometimes they fail (eMate, CyberDog, eWorld). But in the process, they teach the whole industry a lesson.
With a behmoth like M$ around, we can use more friendly ideas.
Because they already know all the reasons people give for not buying a Mac. You give two favourites yourself.
There are two main things stopping Apple from gaining greater market share: Price and Applications. They cost too damn much (for what you get) and don't have all the apps that Windows (or even Linux, these days) has.
Now lets look at it: First off, price. The bottom line iMac is actually very cheap and when you compare it to a packaged PC deal with 3 year warranty, you'll actually find the prices are roughly the same and the Mac has more features. For the average user speed is not an issue, that's why Celerons sell so well.
Next up, applications. There are more Windows applications out there, given. However, there are *far* more Mac OS X applications out there than there are Linux applications, despite your statement. This is mostly because most Linux applications happily run on OS X (and more and more are coming precompiled in a double-clickable installer). Secondly, most of the applications on Windows are absolute crap that you don't want to use. Think about it - how many applications do you have installed on your PC? How many do you use? What do you need to do that can't be done on the Mac? While there are some things that are better done on a Windows box, and some things that can't be done on a Mac at all, for most people all the apps you'll ever need are available for Mac.
The other thing to note is that Apple is asking people who are considering Mac what they think because they are potential customers, people who have ruled out Macintosh (or are so narrow minded that they won't even consider it) are a lost cause for Apple. Take the easy money first then slowly expand into the harder markets if you need to. Don't beat your head against a brick wall for no reason.
I hear this arguement constantly and I find it frustrating to no end. Basically, I believe (and this is not a flame) that you get what you pay for, especially when it comes to computers. Sure a Windows system will cost you less (and a Linux system even less, still) but you're losing quality in the deal.
This would be like going to a dealership and saying "Why should I spend $40,000 on this BMW when I can go across the street and get a Geo Metro for $9,000? It'll take me to work just as well as the BMW won't it?"
I believe that a lot of people who bring up this "flaw" about Macs are people who've never used one. Having used both extensively, I believe that the Macintosh is an amazing bit of engineering. But hey, that's just me. Use whatever works best for you.
Last night I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got in my pajamas I'll never know.
"If I was in Apple's marketing department I'd be asking 'what would it take to get you to switch to Macs?' not 'why are you thinking about buying a Mac?'"
The thing is, by asking the question, "why are you thinking about buying a Mac?," Apple taps into the opinions of those who are on the fence, those whose could be within Apple's target market, but aren't quite yet there yet.
So don't ask us why they didn't ask us. Simply give them your feedback.
Here's what I sent:
I've been seriously contemplating getting a Mac as my next machine. I work at an Ad Agency in Central New York, where the designers are all Mac users and I'm the senior interactive developer, and use both a Mac and PC side-by-side most of the day. I find the Mac (specifically OS X) a much more geek friendly environment than Windows.
My primary concerns about purchasing a Mac for my personal use (and leaving the PC) are
1. Price/performance ratio.
I can currently configure a dual Athlon system @ 1.8GHz with 1GB RAM, 160GB RAID 5 array and a 21" CRT for approximately $2000.
However, I cannot get anywhere near that level of performance with a Macintosh for that type of money.
2. Availability of native Carbon and/or Cocoa versions of applications from Macromedia and Adobe.
This concern is primarily time-dependent, however, I could not consider moving forward with a Mac purchase until all the major software comes over to OS X.
I would not use a Macintosh with OS 9.2.2+, it's too unstable for the type of work I do, so OS X compatibility (without using Classic) is a big issue.
So hopefully, by the time Macromedia and Adobe finish up their product lines, newer G4 (or G5) processors will be out, and costs can be driven down.
Bottom line: Not yet. Mainstream application support needs to be stronger (no shareware or freeware for me) and the price needs to come down.
Sincerely,
llamalicious
p.s. Keep up the good work, I would LOVE to get away from an MS-centric household.
p.p.s. While I love Mach, and BSD; you've GOT to do something about all these Kernel Panics with SCSI CD-R/RW's installed in the machine.
windows puts the shutdown command under a menu called "start". unix leaves the "n" out of umount and has recursive as -r for rm but -R for cp. who's confusing here?
2 - One Button Mouse
you can buy other mice if your a button fetishist. remember tho' that the mouse's primary job is to apply focus. everything else is just feature creep
3 - Customization and configuration is hard to grasp
like what? if you can't figure out netinfo...
4 - Expensive Hardware
you pay more money for slick. it's true. if you think a $5 bottle of wine tastes as good as a $20 bottle of wine then maybe you should stick with yr win xp rig too...
5 - Apple is unpredictable
uh, we like to call that "innovation".
6 - Proprietary platform
sure is. apple makes "widgets". self-contained systems designed to work out of the box. my mom likes it.
7 - OS X is kinda slow
i assume you're still running the public beta. 10.1.2 is snappier than kde on the same machine
8 - I don't like Steve Jobs (I gotta be honest).
fair enough. i don't like bill gates and i don't like rms. lotsa people don't like theo de raat. should i switch to sparc solaris?
9 - We've heard about Apple treatening many Open Source projects (ie. Themes.org OSX theme)
and yet they opened up the entire core of their os. gosh they're so anti-open source.
i don't think this is a list of reasons why you shouldn't buy an "apple" (there actually hasn't been a computer by that name since 1983) but the reasons why you shouldn't by a computer.
2 1337 4 u!
So, if I'm right, you'll switch to Linux when Linux behaves like OS X? Then why not stick with OS X?
Next, remove the goddamn video resolution lock on the consumer hardware. I've got an iMac here stuck sending 1024x768@75 video out the VGA port. The video hardware can do much better, but there's no way of saying "turn off the builtin display". iBooks are similarly crippled; PC laptops aren't.
Think very hard about adding a second trackpad button on the laptops. I can easily replace the USB mouse on a desktop box to get a second button, but there's no way to upgrade the trackpad without a bandsaw. Support for context menus in OS X is soooo nice; why make it harder for laptop users to take advantage of it on the go? (Yes, I know you can use modifier keys to get the same effect, but it's not the same.)
Make a really fast web browser. This Celeron 450 seems much faster than the iMac 450 for browsing; similarly with 800MHz machines at work.
Give me the source to Mail.app, so I can add support for certificates. It's not like your competition is going to steal anything useful out of that excellent, Cocoa-centric app.
Pay Valve Software to port the Half-Life engine to OS X. Geez, if the Mac doesn't run Counter-Strike, how are we going to AWP all the Windows weenies?
First, how long do you expect the Dell to be useable? The last time I checked, people tend to replace their PC every couple of years, especially power users (who will replace components as soon as the newest iteration comes out). If that iMac lasts you a year longer than the Dell, is it (the Dell) still a better deal? I am using a Blue-And-White G3, 450Mhz, and it plays RTCW like a PRO. The same cannot be said for a Pentium system that came out at the same time. The only modification to the B&W is a Radeon. The average PC power-user will want to replace their GeForce with a GeForce4, and probably get some new sound. Oh, and RAM, because you can't run WXP in less than 256MB (or so it advises, correct?). I'll admit thowing RAM at OSX (and OS9 FTM) helps but it is usable at 128MB.
/. population strongly hates them, if only for Apple's wrong-headed strongarming of the themes community, their odd inability to treat developers with any real respect, or merely becuse they're a monolithic proprietary vendor. Many would not accept anything less than the complete freeing of OSX before buying a Mac. That's their perogative.
Second, some of those facts are misleading. Have you ever sat an iMac on your desk? The 19" CRT is about the same size as the bleedin' iMac! Plus the PC, plus the cables, etc etc etc. Most PC users don't really care about things like design and form factor; I don't blame them. My point is, though, that things like that have a way of 'sneaking up' on you. I thought the 'Luxor, Jr.' was pretty god-awful, until I actually sat down and played with the neck thingee. I almost bought one right there. It's just an opinion thing; YMMV.
And I must disagree, strongly, that many posters here don't hate Apple. I'd say at least 25% of the
ZOMG I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR FEELINGS ON MACINTOSH VERSUS WINDOWS, VI VERSUS EMACS, AND HOW YOU'RE NOT A DORK
"PCs are NOT that hard to assemble."
Sure, so how do these jumpers on the Hard drive work? Do they go horizontal or vertical? All I want is a 80 gig Hard drive, does that mean I need IDE? ATA? Does my Motheboard support EIDE? Where on the motherboard does it go? Should I power it up first and leave the drives unplugged, so i can mess with the BIOS?
It's not that easy. My time is worth more than reading "Assembling PCs for Dummies." I'll gladly pay the $100 more to get a BTO system, with a superior OS to boot.
Apple uses pretty good hardware from what I've used. Plus, it's all durable. I've dropped laptops, gotten kicked desktops, and botched up SCSI termination, all without problems. Plus, they send replacement parts to me in 2 days, accross the US.
However I can make one suggestion to folks commenting on what it would take to get them to buy a Mac: Use one. Don't go on about how you disliked MacOS 7.6.1 on an LC II back whenever.
Try a modern Mac,
running MacOS X,
for one hour.
See how fast you can come up to speed on it. That it has all of the Unix lovin' ya dig with the ease of a great GUI right there for the using. How it ships with a set of developer tools, documentation, the works (mmm - Cocoa). The full range of standard applications available. That it is perfectly married to the hardware it runs on.
One hour. Try it. Don't read reviews, listen to gripe-sheets, how old-school Macolytes miss some features, the pissing & moaning that Apple paid for a specific codec and didn't give it away, whatever.
See for yourself what it is like.
Take a look at the hardware and price it out against any other top tier manufacturer with quality components, a three year warranty, full support. See if MHz really is the true and only measure of a computer's performance. Ask yourself if you could fall in love with an OS, would you be cheating on another?
That's all. Give it a fair shake and then decide if it's right for you or not. But at least drive it around the block, kick the tires, check out under the hood. Trust me, the brochures don't do it justice.
I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
I've done my fair share of tech support so let me assure you - these cheap PCs are total and utter crap. If that's all you ever buy, you have no idea how much hell you're putting yourself through. There is no way you can call Macs expensive these days because they clearly are not. They are quality machines that come with a 3 year extended warranty and more features than the competition. If you don't want to use Macs because you prefer Windows that's fine - but don't blame it on price.
My habit is to buy the cheapest computer available and use it for a year and a half and then buy another cheap one.
At the point that your discarding your PC, the Mac is only half way through it's warranty. You choose to pay $500 every 1.5 years, I pay $1000 every 3 years with full warranty coverage. Home users would keep the Mac much longer than that (5 years minimum). At your rate the computer is costing you $333/yr, my rate is $333/yr and for the typical home user of a Mac it's $200. Now which is cheaper? Factor in the fact that the Mac users are getting a new monitor each time and that eventually you will need to buy a new one as well and the Mac is cheaper in both cases.
Oh and that eMachines computer you mentioned, has no firewire, no ethernet card and no video memory (on-board video). The iMac has firewire, a 10/100 ethernet card and a Rage128 Pro with 16MB video RAM. So not only is it a lower overall price (long-term), the iMac has significantly more features. Oh and used Macs have excellent resale value so you won't save huge amounts by buying second hand.
Er, sorry? By that logic the number of Linux apps beats any OS out there by miles because any Windows app can be run under Wine (not true of course). It makes no sense:
Now don't get me wrong, I like OS X. But saying it has more apps than Linux or Windows is ridiculous. Actually you often can't even count Classic apps either, I know that the fact that you had to run Photoshop in classic has held back widespread OS X adoption by old-skool mac users for a long time, and my friend hates running Classic apps, would often rather wait until it's been ported in fact. So you can't really class Classic apps as OS X apps, it's just emulation of the hackiest sort (it boots the whole of OS 9 into a window).