1 Million Windows to Mac Converts So Far in 2005

UltimaGuy writes to tell us AppleInsider is reporting that according to one Wall Street analyst over one million Windows users have switched to Mac in the first three quarters of 2005. It is speculated that these numbers are a direct result of the popularity gained through the iPod and related technologies in addition to security concerns from Microsoft. From the article: "According to checks with Apple Store Specialists, Wolf also said a larger than expected percentage of Windows to Mac converts appear to be purchasing Apple's higher-end systems and that their transition is fueled by the epidemic of viruses and malware on the Windows platform."

Comments

Analyze this!

[Paska]

While I am sure this is probably random guesses and whohar from this one analyst, I actually somewhat believe him from my observations from down-under (Australia).

As a young man that works for a family owned and quite large computer business I've over the years seen people generally not ask very many questions, to now every day hearing people wanting details on Macs, and how they compare to standard white boxes.

Now bundle this in with the fact that our local, and only Apple store is constantly flourishing with business as compared to a few years ago when it was rare to see more then 1 person at a time in there, you'll understand why it's possible Apple have converted so many users.

Just in my direct experience over the last few years, it's converted myself, my brother, my mother and a few friends of mine - (2 to be exact).

It's also at the point, and while I am growing up and establishing my future that me owning and operating a Apple franchise is highly possible.

I've also seen the websites I manage, which are local to our area, sky rocket from 5-10 hits per week from Mac users, to now over 250-300 unique Mac users per week and raising.

Apple are on to something here, and Steve Jobs knows it!

Re:Analyze this!

[CRC'99]

While this isn't the only reason...

My personal situation is that I have bought 2 Mac machines in the past 6 months (does that make me 2 'converts'?) because the underlying system suits my needs better.

I spend ~45% of my time using PuTTY on a Windows machine connected to a linux server doing things that I can't do on a windows laptop without a net connection. When you have this capability locally via the OSX terminal, I can do whatever I need to on the move and not be tied to an internet connection and SSH session.

The other benefits I get is that the OS is very solid, I get all the unix tools I need, and it 'just works'.

Re:Analyze this!

[hackstraw]

I will also say that OS X has converted many UNIX/Linux people as well. With me being one of them. I still love UNIX and Linux for server "headless" lets get work done here stuff, but as far as I'm concerned, OS X is the best UNIX workstation and general desktop that has ever been around. Just about everybody I work with has switched from either Linux or other UNIX-like desktop or MS Windows to Macs. The only people that haven't switched were already Mac users.

I also think that current Apple software is very top notch. Apple Mail, Preview, Terminal, Soundtrack, and Keynote are all excellent. And there are others that I'm interested in trying Logic Pro. I've heard good stuff about Final Cut, and Aperture really looks nice.

Apple hardware is pretty top notch as well. Just about any notebook or desktop system looks dated or junky compared to a comparable Apple product. The same goes with software. When I see a Windows desktop or Linux one or UNIX one, it looks dated like a picture of people from the 50s or 60s with those funny glasses or a picture of a parking lot from the 70s.

I don't have too much insightful or informative to say, I don't think, but I think Apple has done wonders for computers in the past 5 years. I know they did innovate before that timeframe, but I simply did not like the pre-OS X operating system. I liked my Apple //c, but that was it until now.

I guess I could be considered a "fanboy" or whatever, but in my opinion, they have earned it. Apple is not perfect, but for many things they are the leader of how computing should be.

Re:Analyze this!

[CRC'99]

Out of curiousity, what is it that you are doing via an SSH session to a Linux box and can be done on an OS X terminal but cannot be done with cygwin on Windows?

Most of this is working on CVS stuff (do a checkout when you have a net connection, edit away, then commit when you get back). I know it can be done on Windows, but it's damn ugly.

I personally don't see the point of running cygwin when you can have it native to the OS.

All the apps I used on Windows I found replacements for OSX.

Windows -> OSX
MS Office -> MS Office
Outlook Calendar -> iCal
Trillian -> AdiumX
Outlook Express -> Mail
Firefox -> Safari (yes I know you can run Firefox on OSX, but it's DAMN slow)
ActiveSync -> Missing Sync (to sync my Windows Mobile devices)
Canon photo capture -> Image Capture (to bring photos of my digital camera)

Then of course there's all the unix tools, which are mostly there (the only one I had to source and install was wget and ncftp from memory). It takes a while to find all the replacements, but when you do, it's pretty easy to not look back.

Re:Analyze this!

[killjoe]

"The other benefits I get is that the OS is very solid, I get all the unix tools I need, and it 'just works'."

It only "just works" when you use hardware that is compatible. When I got my mac I had many devices hooked up my windows machine that didn't "just work" because the Mac did not support them. For example my hp-3100 printer won't work at all, not even a little bit. I had to go and buy another printer to hook up to the Mac. Of course the reason for that is that it's a windows only printer and CUPS has no support for it.

Macs (just like linux) "just work" when you stick with supported hardware.

Re:Analyze this!

[timeOday]

Macs (just like linux) "just work" when you stick with supported hardware.

I'm a dyed-in-the-wool "linux guy," but unfortunately hardware support remains my one major complaint with Linux, even when you go our of your way and pay extra for something that's claimed to work. Just skip to the last paragraph if you get bored reading my laundry list of supporting examples:

• My WG511 wifi card is supposedly supported by the prism54 driver. In fact it locks up the machine in minutes.
• My All-In-Wonder card was supported by GATOS, but the drivers weren't good enough to be usable so I ditched it for the best linux-supported TV tuner card there is, the Hauppauge. Lucky me, I got one with a new chip revision so it didn't work.
• OpenGL 3d acceleration on my T40 laptop works, but the machine locks up if you suspend to ram while hardware acceleration is enabled.
• My webcam is supposedly supported by the ov511 driver, but the images are heavily tinged with red, and the compression module that enables decent framerates doesn't seem to be supported anymore. It works OK under Windows.
• My Lego Mindstorms kit has a driver through Lejos, but oops! it doesn't work because the usb lego tower is only compatible with one of the usb driver modules (I forget which), which isn't compatible with the usb ports on my laptop.
• My Epson 1250 scanner, purchased specifically due to Linux support, has horizontal artifacts under Linux but works fine under Windows. (And descreening works.)
• My Pinnacle IR receiver is supported by Lirc, but the lircd exits randomly and without warning causing the remote to stop working.

I could go on, but the point is there's a big difference between a green X in a linux hardware compatibility list, and actually having a stable, working driver that supports all the features. And you never really know until *after* you shell out the cash. Macs have limited hardware support too, but from what I've seen if it is supported, it actually works. I stick with Linux because I like its principles, and after you get stuff going it's great. But when my parents asked what to buy for my grandpa it was a no-brainer: iMac.

Onlly reason I haven't...

[trib]

... is the prohibitive cost here in Australia. The 15.2" Powerbook I want (with a spare battery and 2Gb RAM as the only upgrades) will set me back in excess of AU$4200.
I get to play with a Mac a little at work for some of my app testing, and I have serious envy of the guy whose desk it sits on...

Mac mini

[dots and loops]

Actually, it was the Mac mini which caused me to use the Mac as my primary home computer, not the iPod.

Re:Mac mini

[jsebrech]

Actually, it was the Mac mini which caused me to use the Mac as my primary home computer, not the iPod.

For me it was the ipod that made me seriously consider the switch, and the mac mini that drove my decision. The mini was priced at a point where I could try it out and abandon it if it didn't work for me. The plan was that if I didn't like a mac as my main desktop machine, I would use it as a server, running linux, and buy a cheapo windows system. I never did end up buying that cheapo windows system.

I'm just mad at myself for not having made the switch sooner.

Re:Mac mini

[booch]

I second that. I bought a Mac mini the day they were released. I'd said since OS X came out that I'd buy a Mac if the prices were reasonable. And to me, the $500 starting price was quite reasonable for a computer to hook up to my HDTV. (I spent nearly $800, including the upgrades.) I'd used Macs frequently before, but never thought they were worth the extra cost.

Just last week, I recommended a Mac mini to a small business owner whose PC got infected by viruses and spyware. I told them that it would be a lot easier to support a Mac, and wouldn't require all the anti-malware software. The owner ended up buying one for his receptionist as well.

I wasn't really interested in the iPods at all. In fact, I'm more interested in an iPod nano now, BECAUSE of my Mac. I'm more interested in the NeXT-based OS, because I used NeXTs in college; and the ease of use combined with UNIX underpinnings. For other people, I recommend the Mac mini because of the ease of use, reduced maintenance requirements, and lack of security issues that Windows has.

Startup School

[pHatidic]

A few weeks ago I went to Startup School, a conference for hackers with entrepreneurial interests that was hosted by Paul Graham. I'd say 80% of the people there with laptops had macs. It was one of the most amazing things I'd ever seen, to look back from the front of the room and see an entire roomful of Apple computers. I think Paul is right that most of the new Apple users aren't switchers, but rather are switch-backers. I for one am extremely happy with my powerbook that I bought two years ago, switching back from XP, so I don't think I will ever become a switch-back-backer. The amazing thing is that even though this computer 22 months old it feels brand new, rechargable battery issues aside. I have never had to reformat the hard drive, remove a virus, or uninstall any adware. I know that it is theoretically possible to get viruses on an Apple and there have been proof of concepts, but personally I don't give a damn about theory. All I care about is my last two years of "just works" computing.

Re:"switched" or "also bought"?

[dave-tx]

Excellent point. I added OSX to my arsenal this past year, but did not "switch" from Windows or Linux, both of which still get daily use by me.

Ah, but how many Linux to MacOS converts?

[Bazzalisk]

Me for one ... my new machine will be the first I've had since 1997 for which Linux is not the main OS.

I'm a statistic.

[heresyoftruth]

My hubby and I are two of those converts out there. After the zillionth windows disaster, we saved up and got a set of powerbooks. I can't say the iPods had anything to do with it because we didn't get a set of those until after we got the powerbooks. I always hated the overzealous mac lover, but it appears I just bought my way into the cult. I can't be happier to have switched, as I haven't had one problem since February. That's definitely longer than I went without having to tweak my PC box.

Mini

[squison]

I'm sure a lot of those 'converts' were due to the Mac Mini. I know, for me, the #1 reason why I never even tried owning a Mac was because I wasn't willing to spend $1-3k to try something out. $500 is a lot easier to spend than $2k for a PowerMac.

Then you have an ever-growing application support for OSX. Large games like World of Warcraft coming with a Mac client at release surely can't hurt.

Plus, damn if the iBooks don't look a lot nicer than my drab, boring Thinkpad.

Re:"switched" or "also bought"?

[njfuzzy]

You're not the right person to trust anecdotal evidence from, in this case. None of us here on Slashdot are. The average user doesn't have an arsenal of machines, he has one. So, from a macro-sales point of view, each Windows user who buys a Mac is switching. (Even if 100% of them aren't actually doing so.)

I bought one, but I'm no convert

[Jeff Molby]

I bought a Mac Mini because it was a cheap way to get a debugging machine for my web app. That was solely to see how it looks in a Mac browser. I still rely on Windows for everything else. I hope they didn't count me.

Mac Gaming

[Zobeid]

Blizzard have supported the Mac long before WoW, that hasn't changed. Game support for Mac is still crummy on the whole, that hasn't changed either. In fact, WoW is one of a remarkably small minority of MMOGs that run on the Mac. I can might near count them on one hand.

SWG? No. . . EQ2? No. . .

Does anyone remember when Bungie was first and foremost a Mac developer? We were all talking about how Halo was going to sell Macs. So much for that plan.

Does anyone remember when Connectix Virtual Gamestation was going to make the Mac an attractive gaming platform, because it could run most Playstation games? Then Sony bought CVGS from Connectix and buried it.

I understand Civilization 4 and Call of Duty 2 were recently released for the PC. How many months will it be before they appear on Macintosh? How many features (like editors) will be left out of the Mac version, while we still have to pay full price?

So . . . I really don't see any upswing in Mac game development, much as I might wish for it. Computer gaming still completely revolves around Microsoft (and DirectX), Macs aren't on the radar screen of most game companies -- and if the Mac platform does accidentally get something good, there are always entities like Microsoft and Sony standing ready to buy and/or bury it.

I'm really not trying to rip on the Mac here at all. I'm just being realistic and telling what experience has shown. Games are the one big area where the Mac is weak, and I don't see anything in the works to change it. Apple could do some things to change it, but gaming just isn't in their corporate DNA.

Re:As a Mac user

[AKAImBatman]

Oh, I don't think most Slashdot readers hate modern Macs. That'd be kind of dumb, after all.. most of us are pretty into Unix.

There are still quite a few, though. I'm thinking those are the people who haven't yet pulled their heads out and realized that OS X isn't the same thing as OS 9.

Being a Mac hater for most of my life, I can attest to the difficulty of pulling one's head out when it comes to the Mac. But with all the raving of fans (and $$$ pouring into the market) it became hard for me to ignore.

All I can say is, once you go Mac OS X, everything else seems inferior. And I mean EVERYTHING. :-)

Time Value of Money

[alexhmit01]

What was the cost different to get a comparable Apple laptop. What do you value your free time at... for me its a lot, because I don't have much... Given the choice between an extra $200 for the machine (and generally, Dell charges the same as Apple for the same machine, but Apple only has limited options, so you buy more machine... i.e. to upgrade the screen, you get a processor upgrade, that kinda thing), and a few hours of tinkering, I reach for my Amex...

It all depends if you'd rather have two-four hours for yourself or a little cash in your pocket...

My point on the Apple vs. Dell... any time I took an Apple machine, then went to Dell and priced an "equivalent" purchase, the price was +/- $50... however, if you start with the Dell, and then price out the equivalent Apple, it is usually a bit more... but you get stuff you may not need, but that is because Apple has limited models...

The Mac Mini is a GREAT office desktop (we have 8, probably going to get 4-5 more)... and its dirt cheap... Once you price out the equivalent Dell and add in XP Pro (home is worthless for a business workstation), and a few other minor upgrades, the mini tends to be $25-$50 less, which is a great deal.

Re:why don't you..

[TClevenger]

WiFi is a great example. When I open the lid on my Powerbook, it wakes up correctly EVERY time, and before I can even get my screensaver password entered, it has reconnected to my Netgear WiFi router, reestablished all my SSH connections to my Linux servers, checked my POP server for mail and reconnected my iChat to AIM.

I also can apply patches and updates without worrying about breaking anything, and I can continue to get fully supported OS and application updates for years (yes, even with the Intels coming.)

Don't get me wrong; I love Linux. It definitely has its place (i.e. my servers.) I just don't have the time to play Russian Roulette with compatibility.