Slashdot Mirror
Windows Expert Jumps Ship
An anonymous reader writes to let us know that Scott Finnie, Computerworld's Windows expert, has given the final verdict to Windows after 3 months of using a Mac. And the verdict is: "Sayonara." Finnie is known to readers here for his many reviews of Vista as it progressed to release. Quoting: "If you give the Mac three months, as I did, you won't go back either. The hardest part is paying for it — everything after that gets easier and easier. Perhaps fittingly, it took me the full three-month trial period to pay off my expensive MacBook Pro. But the darn thing is worth every penny."
I'm confused by this. You can run Windows on a Mac with Bootcamp, right?
I suppose what he or the summary meant to say is "PC versus Mac" or, probably, "Windows versus MacOS on a Mac." It's really fallacious to compare an operating system to a computing architecture. You Linux users out there should be angry, since it tacitly implies that the only thing a PC ever runs is Windows.
Personally, I'm a computer gamer. Much of my computer time is spent gaming, with the rest being internet browsing and completion of homework/programming/etc. I use a PC because I want the level of control this architecture provides over my components. I use Windows because, well, for most games I pretty much have to.
(Yes, techincally "PC" means a lot of things. I use the term PC out of convenience, which is probably ironic of me to say given what half of my post is complaining about.)
Change if you want, stay if you want. I work on a Mac at home, an MS-Windows based PC at work and Linux my website. I like my Mac, but in a properly managed environment Windows does a good job too. I don't like the "I'm better than you attitude" coming from either side, use what you like and recognise each has its issue - like a significant other, you need decide what attracts you and which issues you can live with.
If I had to choose a new computer tomorrow it would be a Mac, but that's my preference and my choice.
--
If you use the Mac, my choice of apps: Adium, Delicious Library, Disco, TextWrangler, Transmit, Darwin Ports, Handbrake
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
I'd call myself pro-Apple - I've been a Mac owner since '92 (and a user prior to that), I like and enjoy their products, and I'm happy to give them my hard-earned in exchange for new kit. Similarly, I'm 'pro-Nikon' since picking up my Dad's Nikonos fifteen years ago; even to the extent I'm willing to pay more for one than a comparable Canon. Just because you don't 'get' it doesn't mean loyalty to a company is irrational or misplaced. It's kind of like having a favourite sports team - there doesn't have to be a philosophical reason behind it.
Regarding the Slashdot coverage, I don't think it's necessarily all pro-Apple as much as pro-not-Microsoft. One day we'll reach a point where OS choice in the average school/home/work environment is not predestined. IMO, that's a good outcome for everyone (except MS stockholders & employees).
This sig is false.
People have different preferences. That's what makes the free market work.
Exactly, and this is why a lot less people should be using Windows. As long as Windows is shipped with computers and people have to pay the Microsoft tax, there isn't a free market to speak of.
Most Windows users didn't choose a Microsoft operating system, so their preferences weren't a factor.
"You can pay $1300 for a mac"
I see the $1300-$1500 figure quoted a lot, but it's just plain wrong -- the actual cost is about half of what people think it is. I can get a Mac Mini for $579 (since I work at a university) and the general-public cost is around $600 or a little more. That's actually less than what I've been quoting people lately who ask me to put a decent gaming PC together for them on newegg (I build wishlists and email them to the "clients" who ask for my recommendations).
While it is true that a Mac Mini is not a good choice for running games as it's not upgradable and doesn't have a great video card, it is also true that it's great for what most people use a computer for -- web, email, and sometimes organizing photos, music, and videos.
$600-700ish for a brand new shiny Mac that won't have all the security problems of Windows is not a bad deal. Not at all.
Besides, didn't Slashdot complain once that Apple didn't have a $500-$700 system available? Now that they do, people STILL complain. You just can't make anyone happy around here.
i am a soviet space shuttle
The "cool" one.
You can pay $1300 for a mac...or you can spend $700 for a PC. Which do you THINK parents are going to buy? Parents aside, what do you think MOST people are going to go with.
No, I think this is way over-simplified. You can't just reduce everything down to the price of computer A and the price of computer B. There are a lot of different kinds of people out there, shopping in different markets:
IMO, the Apples are priced VERY competitively - they're clearly high-quality machines, and they compete in the Sony Vaio and Lenovo Thinkpad market. THAT'S how the computers need to be evaluated.
The people who are out shopping for the $450 laptops on sale at Fry's aren't going to even consider the Vaio's either.
Funny, when configuring a Mac I don't see an option to select an O/S other than Mac OS X, how do I avoid the Apple tax?
Wax-Museum Fire Results In Hundreds Of New Danny DeVito Statues
You stopped using Windows because they forced you to install a web browser?
If so then my question is what do you do now that the only OS that doesn't come with a web browser built-in is Abacus 1.0?
Seriously, MS has done a lot of crap things over the years, and it was harsh of them to make IE uninstallable, but bundling the browser with the OS? If you can bundle worthless stuff like solitaire with an OS and no one complains, I don't see how anyone can be upset about an OS coming packaged with the single most important piece of software for a modern computer. Seriously. I'm a proud Mac user, but I'll go to the mat for MS on this one: Bundling a web browser was the right thing to do. While strong arming OEMs into not including Netscape was evil, including IE was completely justified.
People are pro ---- because they found a product/company that they are happy with. They found something that makes their life better and are publicly stating this fact so that others may also benefit from the product/company. It doesn't matter what product or service they are talking about, the reasons are generally the same. The same applies when people are anti ----, just for different reasons. They got screwed over by a product/service and they are spreading the word so that others can avoid making the same mistakes that they made. It's basic human nature. Come to think of it, ants do the same thing. ;)
I agree with you completely and don't think anyone wants Apple to dominate the desktop market. But wouldn't it be great if they had a 20% market share? Now developers will think more about cross-platform compatibility. This would benefit everyone (Mac, Linux, Solaris, FreeBSD, - but not Microsoft).
Nobody is trying to make you buy a Mac - well, except maybe Apple. If you're happy then that's great. Personally, I'm hesitant recommending a Mac to most people for fear there is an application they can no longer run. But for certain people a Mac makes a lot of sense.
What people are trying to tell you is that, if you have the opportunity, you should give MacOS a try. And it takes more then a day so give it a couple of months. You will either think it is a waste of money and stick with Windows or you will have found a better way to get your work done. Either way, you would come out knowing more then when you started. People might not agree with your choice, but they will respect it.
WillySorry, but the average Windows user does not purchase a full copy of Norton in my experience. They let the it expire and wonder why 4 month later their PC is running slower.
Yes but your $300.00 PC does NOT come with a copy of Windows Vista Ultimate and the Mac Mini does come with a full version of OSX.
If it were profitable you would find just that. It's called free market. Start your own company and start selling computers without windows installed. If there is a demand you'll make a boatload of money ;) I think you'll find as most retailers have, the demand is exactly 0.
I expect to go to any computer retailer and be able to buy a computer without Windows pre-installed. That's all I want -- I don't dispute anything you wrote.
I just don't understand this argument. I've been buying whitebox PCs for years. I even bought a whitebox laptop. No one forces anyone to buy an OS with a PC, except for Apple. (BTW, I own an iMac.) Sure, the large vendors may make it tricky to buy a system without Windows, but there is a simple answer: Buy from a whitebox vendor, usually a local PC store.
If you don't like burgers, go to a sushi joint. There may be more burger places than sushi restaurants, but don't claim everyone is forced to eat burgers.
Imagine how much harder physics would be if electrons had feelings! -Feynman, maybe
With "Sure, the large vendors may make it tricky to buy a system without Windows...," you made the parent's point.
If I want to buy a name-brand box (so I can get the benefit of support for hardware issues, or so I can keep a consistent hardware platform across my company), it's very, very hard to do this. There are channels, but Microsoft has made sure that they are not well publicized, and has slapped the hands of vendors who have not played according to the rules (by bumping up the license fees, or put clauses in the license agreements to the same effect).
When you say "No one forces anyone to buy an OS with a PC...," the answer is what about the major PC manufacturers? For all intents and purposes, they do exactly that.
Tim