Slashdot Mirror
Why Microsoft Should Fear Apple
jcatcw writes "Computerworld's Scot Finnie says that Microsoft should be afraid because Apple has gotten smarter about how it competes. He says that it's the Parallels Desktop software that has been truly transformational for the Mac. Finnie did a simple three-month trial of the Mac last in the fall and realized four months later that he wasn't going back. Since then he's received hundreds of messages from readers who've also made the switch. 'In the end, this is about perception. It isn't about Apple's market share or even its quarterly sales numbers. (Apple's notebook computer sales for the fourth quarter were 4.1% of all portable computer sales, according to DisplaySearch.) What this is about is that Apple is reaching the right people with its product, winning new converts, Windows user by Windows user -- and creating buzz. How do you measure buzz? You don't. It's something that experienced people in this industry can just feel. And that's the condition Microsoft should fear. Because buzz can turn into something much harder to combat than sheer numbers.'"
Microsoft shouldn't be too worried until Apple begins to sell OS X for installation on hardware besides theirs. When OS X can be put on all kinds of hardware, I will gladly purchase it and I'm sure many others will as well.
People are talking about the Mac throughout the industry. Admit it: Whether you love it or hate it, you're talking about the Mac at the water cooler.
Apple certainly does have a great public image. They are in a great place right now - they get huge amounts of publicity for free. This just didn't happen by accident though, they've done a good job creating their image, and creating products that people want to get excited about. Actually, some Mac ads are so good, that I enjoy watching them. (I love those "I'm a PC" and "I'm a mac" ads!). Apple has the momentum.
I store my recipes online (the way nature intended)
How do you measure buzz? You don't. It's something that experienced people in this industry can just feel.
Sounds like the "reasons" I'm given to believe in Jesus. I really wonder if people believe in this "exists but not quantifiable in any form" business?
Since then he's received hundreds of messages from readers who've also made the switch.
The problem is, he hasn't received millions of emails from people who haven't made the switch. This is why "buzz" is misleading instead of using real data. Maybe the "buzz" leads to more people switching to Apple, but if you don't actually measure it, how would you know??
Speaking as a certified Macintosh fanboy who bought his first Mac in February, 1984... gimme a break. If there's anything more boring than an Apple-is-doomed story, it's a Microsoft-is-doomed story.
(Yes, I know he says Microsoft is not going to die... then at the end he says "Nothing lasts forever. The bloom is coming off the rose on Microsoft. I would never put it past the software giant to come up with a way to remake itself in a better light. But the current course doesn't appear to me to lead in that direction. As much as Apple is doing things right, Microsoft is doing things wrong." How is that anything but a weasel-worded version of "Microsoft is doomed?")
Speaking as a certified Macintosh fanboy, Microsoft copies the Apple OS a lot... and, you know what? Apple has, for a long time, been returning the favor. The two companies borrow ideas from each other promiscuously, and only the blinkered view of the fans of each camp prevents them from seeing it. Of course, one idea Mac OS 9 borrowed from Windows was making windows resizable by dragging at all four edges. I just wish Mac OS X had borrow that from Mac OS 9!
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
I'm with you on this one. There are some real easy things to look at when it comes to computers. If a ordinary user is going to switch from Windows, one of the reasons is typically DRM/updates/cost. The other is having to learn something new. If you have to learn something new, but you can do the learning on a FREE OS, then most average people are willing to try the FREE one first, especially if it can run that cherished 6 year old windows program that they just can't live without at the moment.
Even technical people are tired of MS for many reasons. One of my coworkers was going to buy a Mac laptop recently. That is until he found he can get a non-Mac laptop with support for Linux on it. (Thank you Dell, Lenovo et al)
MS should be more worried about the court case against the Russian school teacher than they are of Apple.
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
to run parallels. microsoft could give a flying fark where you run their os, as long as you buy one.
DELL or other pc manufactureres should be scared of macs.
Look around at any codefest, hack day or industry conference and you'll see a great many macbooks. This is the leading wedge in a sea change for Apple that could translate into market share in the enterprise over time. The real question is - can Apple master the enterprise sales challenge toe-to-toe with Microsoft.
Pure baloney, Scot Finnie.
How do you measure buzz? You don't. It's something that experienced people in this industry can just feel.
Would you buy stock in a company based on "buzz"? Doubt it. At least these days, in the post dot-bomb world anyways.
What Apple does currently have is momentum. They keep making good decisions and carving out markets. And that's why MS should fear them. MS is already losing in the junior leagues (Zune vs. iPod). Enough of that, and maybe MS will start losing in the big leagues (OS and Office).
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Okay! So you bought a Mac!
You bought something MacOS. Yay for you! YOU REBEL!
Now you use Parallels and buy a copy of Windows to put in there.
GAME OVER.
*MICROSOFT* doesn't care what HARDWARE you run their OS on. Running Parallels on a Mac doesn't hurt MICROSOFT in the slightest.
Both Apple AND Microsoft pull a profit off this. Microsoft even moreso, since Mac heads are likely to buy a RETAIL copy of the OS, meaning higher margins for Redmond than they'd get from a traditional OEM copy.
Who it's a mark against? The other PC vendors.
Seriously. Why does everyone turn stupid non-issues like this into a zip-gun fight between Redmond and Cupertino?
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
What?? They separate out "Mac OS" and "MacIntel", and include Wii and PSP as operating systems? I don't understand that graph at all.
Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
Apples has a much better marketing department and Microsoft has a much better business model for its shareholders. Both make the companies money in different ways and both companies are different in how they approach making money, but Microsoft's model has been proved to work. Apples great image is dependent how the mass market views its marketing campaign. Marketing can get you into the industry as a competitor, but it can only do so much for so long.
This is not to say that Apple does not make quality products though, both companies do. I just feel that Microsoft has something that will outlast the fad Apples marketing department has created. As Apple branches off into new markets where specs are more important, we may see a new take on Apple advertising. If not, then we will see iPod type ads for the iPhone, which will not resonate well at all to people looking for smart phones where, of course, specs are the name of the game.
Invexi - a Phoenix, AZ based web design and web development company.
I (and quite a few others) have said it before, and I'll say it again. I have Age of Empires (the first, through AOE3), Rise of Nations (the base game and the add-ons), Rise of Legends, City of Heroes/Villains, etc. Not one of these games (and hundres of others) works in OSX (without emulation -- that doesn't count).
Yes, this is changing, but not fast enough for me or thousands (millions?) of others. Yes, WoW is available, but most games aren't. Until game studios start porting their software to the Apple platform, MS really has little to worry about.
Add to games, the fact that everyone and their sister seems to be glued firmly to MS Office, and MS is sitting in a pretty good position.
As a side note, I'd happily purchase a copy of OSX so I could poke around, try things, run it as a main desktop for a while to see how I like it. But I'm not going to purchase *another* PC (I have too many in my house as it is) just for the "privilage". I'm not the only one. Until such is possible, I'll just have to deal with the limited amount of exposure to OSX that I receive while at work (we have a few iMac "workstations" students can use, but mostly they sit empty (the original ones, before the silly white rounded base with "floating" LCD)).
Man, I'm tired of seeing these "MS should be worried about Apple!" articles. Do everyone a favor. Write one up when MS's quarterly/yearly profits are FLAT or NEGATIVE. Untill then, I won't even read your articles (so that you don't get paid for the ad views).
Bleh.
bork bork bork!
After skimming TFA, it seems like the #1 reason the author claims Microsoft should fear Apple is due to Parallels on OS X. I don't quite get why this should make Microsoft shake in their boots. Parallels does not somehow allow Windows apps to run without a Windows installation (i.e. what WINE is attempting to accomplish). Therefore a license for XP/Vista/whatever is still required. If anything Microsoft should be happy that Mac users still need to own a Windows license to run apps in Parallels. It may mean that more people will buy Macs because they like the hardware and OS X, but simply owning a Mac with Parallels does not remove the user's need to run Windows apps, and therefore pay Microsoft for a license.
Worse than a pro-Apple buzz, is the Anti-Microsoft Buzz. As another Switcher appears at the watercooler, smiling like Smilin' Bob, the DIS-satisfaction of Microsoft will grow. What will happen is that Windows users will become increasingly frustrated with their inabilities, the road blocks, the busted drivers, the paths out into the 'Net they now FEAR to tread. Every "Cancel or Allow" will toll in an image of the Apple commercial's sunglassed security monger. The "Sad Realization" will grow.
Like one who looked into the Palantir, the emotional illness will sink in. And they will be trapped. Every mouse click will make them sicker, sink them deeper. Their happy, released Mac User associates will shine like a white wizard among the Orcs.
And every trick that Microsoft will try to rejuvenate their relationship will be transparent to them. Zune the iTune killer will make them laugh sadly. Every promise of liberation and innovation will fall flat before it is delivered. Every
The numbers will lie, like the percentage of marriages that last longer than 7 years... it belies the number of dead marriages still lingering. Microsoft will retain 90%+ of the market, but those will be wretched zombies, entombed in their own fear and loathing.
Microsoft's "WOW" will become "woe", from which they are unable to escape. And like Gandalf, betrayed by a friend and mentor, they are marooned atop a tower which promised great vision, but a broad horizon of darkness, gloom and malevolence is their only vista.
I am writing this in Firefox in Vista on my MacBook Pro. One year ago (almost to this day) I made the switch because I had bought into the hype. I told myself I'd give it three months to make my decision. When the time came I was struggling to be as productive as when I was in Windows. However, I realized that I had not yet learned everything I needed in the Mac to give it a fair shake. So I extended the test. Finally after 10 months I made the Switch-back.
What about all of us that gave it a try and end up switching back? We just get modded down because of the anti-M$ sentiment. I'm no M$ lover -- I run all Linux servers and refuse to deploy Active Directory in my organization because I believe it is a gateway to "everything M$". However, many people like me may find that they are actually more productive in Windows.
In my experience, only elitist techno snobs have the audacity to group all the millions of Mac users into the "too cool for you" market segment.
Were we to have an honest, reasonable discussion, I'd ask you to provide evidence that the majority of those who use Apple products are obsessed with image. I'd present dozens of product reviews in mainstream publications which praised the usability and practicality of various Apple products. But this is Slashdot, so as long as you state something as if it were an objective fact, somebody will mod you up.
I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
My kids are college students and always prefer Mac laptops to Windows machines every single time.
1) They don't care about the internals at all. Makes zero difference
2) They see Macs as an integrated whole without having to dick around with things
3) They see the hardware itself as being more solid
4) They see the integrated whole as being more compatible with their iPods, cameras and whatnot
5) When or if something breaks they walk it in to the Apple store, where that is the ONLY thing they fix and drop it off for repair or upgrade
6) Most college courses are online not installed so it makes little if any difference what the machine runs on its own
7) They look cooler
Don't argue with me about this. This is what people who look at a PC as an appliance like a microwave or a TV see when they see a Mac.
I am a laggard. When my XP Home machines eventually become worthless I will replace them either with miniMacs or whatever is what those are at the time, and/or Ubuntu or equivalent machines at that time. I expect this to happen in the next 3-4 years if not sooner. I have no intention of moving to Vista. Not for ideological reasons but because there will be cheaper better alternatives by then.
With the ability to boot into Windows, or run Windows in Parallels, Apple has eliminated the biggest barrier for people to try a Mac. If someone doesn't like it, or a vital app won't run, they aren't stuck with an expensive brick - they can switch to running Windows. Less risk means a lower barrier to entry which means more people buying a Mac.
This gives Apple a chance to compete on the merits of its OS instead of being hampered by the number of applications that don't support it. Users can easily switch to Windows, run their apps, and switch back; and switching isn't even needed if you use Parallels. I claim that after a few weeks on a Mac, users will get annoyed when they have to deal with a Windows machine, and somewhere in Cupertino a bell will ring as another Mac user is born.
Reading code is like reading the dictionary - you have to read half of it before you can go back and understand it.
I entirely agree with the article, the "buzz" or shift has begun to lean towards Apple. Don't believe me? I'm a student and over the last few years I've noticed Macs starting to pop-up more and more in class. My feeling is with all the problems people have had historically with Windows viruses and now Vista and its incompatability, people are just getting fedup with Microsoft. Eventually a person can only take so much before they think "There's got to be something better!!!" and... there is.
"Simplify, simplify, simplify!" Thoreau
When I worked as a programmer years ago, I had a 3270 terminal emulator I ran on my PC to get some work done. I don't have that emulator anymore...
If people start using the Mac as a primary system, and have to specifically load Windows/parallels on it - there may come a day when they are doing a new OS installation and realize, hey - I don't need to install parallels anymore.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Apple users want to gripe all of the time about flaws in Apple hardware and software. If you read the online discussions before buying a Mac, you might get scared. But the fact is that Mac users are an elite club of really obsessive people. That's not a slight against them. They have incredibly high standards. As a Windows and Linux user, however, my experiences with the Mac were a huge breath of fresh air. It's nice to finally use a computer that's clearly been well-engineered. From simple things like how the keyboards are made to the way MacOS X manages application-related files, you can tell that Apple wants to do things well and isn't afraid to do it.
/usr, /etc) and how config file are plain-text in a way that makes it impossible to do upgrades cleanly. That's annoying as hell. Linux architects need to get their heads out of their asses, group all files for a given app into one place, and use mini XML registries for config options. This is just simply good engineering!
I recently was in need of a notebook computer, so I did some investigation as to what my options were. I put notebooks from various manufacturers side by side and compared based on processor speed, FSB speed, memory (size, speed), graphics (GPU power, shared memory, etc.), display resolution, and numerous other factors. While things appear to have changed slightly in the recent past, at the time, the MacBook Pro was less expensive than any PC notebook with comparable capabilities. How's that for risk management? I was nervous about getting a Mac... what if I didn't like it? No problem. The hardware is great, and I can install Linux or Windows on it if I feel like it. Turns out that I really like MacOS too and run Windows and Linux using Parallels.
As a Free Software enthusiast, I am bothered by the fact that so much Apple software isn't Free. But I'm an activist in many ways. I'm an activist for Free Software. I'm also an activist for GOOD software. And my computer is my computer, and I'll run whatever apps make my life easiest. As such, I'm going to use commercial software when it's clearly superior in design and quality to the Free Software. (Notice how I'm implicitly dismissing Microsoft as anything worth talking about.) Then I tell people which apps are the best and why. This way, the Free Software enthusiasts can take notice and improve their designs
I think I won't be much interested in using Linux as a desktop OS until some Ubuntu comes with Beryl by default. And I'll NEVER like the fact that Linux applications have their files spread out across different sections of the file system (/bin,
First, I'll admit that I might be a bit of a Mac "fanboy". I don't think I'm irrational, but I do like Macintoshes quite a lot these days. To put it in perspective, I spent most of my life using Windows and thinks anyone who was a an of Apple in the '90s was an absolute head-case. However, these days they're basically the same hardware as the other guys, a form of Unix, and a nice GUI. They're hands-down the easiest desktop operating system to set up and maintain on a small/medium scale. (I've never managed a huge network by myself, so I won't speak to that)
Anyway, now that I've given a hint of a background, I'll state for the record that I don't think Microsoft needs to die. I hope they don't die. I'm not looking for more software monoculture and fewer choices, so we don't need to get rid of Microsoft. However, Microsoft does need some healthy competition. They need someone to keep them honest. Microsoft needs market pressures to force them to use open standards and open formats. They need to start playing well with others, and they need an economic incentive to put the needs of their customers at the forefront.
Regarding copying, you're right, and I've never understood the complaint. Microsoft copied from Apple, and Apple copied from Microsoft. Gnome and KDE copied both of them, and they both copied Xerox and any other company that came along with a good idea. Is that a problem?
I really don't know why people would complain about this sort of copying. Some implementations might be better than others, but if you think you can use an already-existing interface convention to make your interface better, use it! For the whole of human history, people have been taking the best ideas they could find and trying to put those ideas together in better ways. That's progress. That's what people should be doing.
Now, the concern is for the OEMs. I have been saying for a long time that by concentrating on price, they are playing the MS game, which is to maximize profit at MS and minimize profit on the hardware. For example, the Apple switch to Intel is not so interesting for Apple, but does indicate that Intel learned that MS has no interest in hardware profits, and that if Intel continued to focus on MS, it would continue to be has been chip maker.
So, MS is stemming the flow that will hurt it's business in the near term, namely there are no fully compatible OS products, and only allowing virtualization of premium priced products. In the long term, who knows. At some point there has to be a competitive compatible OS. Apple would do well to create the OS and run it as layer in the next Apple OS. But the only danger to MS is that the hardware vendors will wise up and stop cutting their own throats so that MS can make a profit.
Indeed, we have seen many OEMs go away as they can no longer make cheap enough boxen. We are really going to be down to Dell, HP, Lenova and Sony. The later two are more or less premium manufacturers. HP has the experience with HP/UX to rebrand it's PC as *nix workstations, but Dell will continue to be at the mercy of MS, and I feel sorry for them as Apple continues to earn 20% per machine, while squeezing Dell's margin to zero, especially now that the Intel kickbacks seem to be a thing of the past.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
Good points. I'll add some to this.
Many people switching to Apple are honeymooning. I happen to be a long time Apple user and MacOS (in any form) has its share of problems just like Windows, Linux, or whatever. It hangs, it crashes, some applications have awful interfaces, it's slow, etc. The problems are often different but it's really no better than any other OS. It does look slick though.
I haven't found the hardware to be better than anything else either. In fact my experience with Apple hardware has been that it breaks more often than other brands. My iBook has the only LCD display I own with dead pixels. Everyone I know with Macs has had it in the shop at one point or another (everyone in my company has a Mac, among other computers). They're like Ferrari's, nice to look at but a bitch to keep running.
On the technical side I don't like Apple either. I find it extremely hard to get anything done. I have no idea what the problem is but almost every time I try to do something with MacOS it seems I can't figure out how to. I don't understand the people that say the OS is user friendly because it seems to me it's the least friendly. I mean is there a single person on this planet that likes Finder?
I also hate developing for MacOS. Ugh, there are so many tacked on API's and just plain bizarre ways of doing things that it causes nothing but pain (and I know what I'm doing, I have worked for Apple doing software development). I'll compare the API's between Microsoft and Apple. Where Microsoft also has a lot of tacked-on API's, they tend to be extensions of existing systems or otherwise have the feel on something designed by a group of people. Buried in OS X in a ton of stuff just flying around every which direction like a whole bunch of developer's doing their own thing.
Now I'm not saying Microsoft or Linux is better or anything like that. I do happen to use Linux as my primary OS and run everything else in VMware. I'm just saying that I think many of the people switching to Apple will be looking for something else eventually.
The ratio of people to cake is too big
In the last year I've seen a number of blogs from former Microsofties, as well as the infamous Mini-Microsoft. Many of these talk about top-heavy management, unhappy staff, projects leading nowhere, ladder climbers and bleeding money through some product lines.
In isolation, individual blogs may be just some people blowing off a bit of steam, or may be representative of a few dissatisfied staffers.
Taken together, they paint a picture of a company that's in danger of losing its way.
It's hard to know just how representative the sum of these blogs is. They're all pretty self-selecting, after all. If they paint a relatively accurate picture, then Microsoft is missing some key things Apple's recently gotten right:
* Management who understand their products at every level and pitch them well. Anyone who's presented to a large crowd knows how hard this is, but Steve Jobs is a complete master at it.
* Getting the product's look and feel right first time. Pick up a new Apple product. Touch it. Look at the surfaces. They always look great. People react to this, equating professional finish with professional products.
* Focus on product lines, with no products bleeding more money with every unit sold. There's no Apple product I've heard of where each unit sold is a loss to the company. The units both R&D and then start to generate profit. Even iTunes with its razor thin profit pays for itself. This shows solid business planning, solid budgeting and is very well respected by the investors.
* Staff who keep pretty damn quiet about the internal stuff. Apple have a policy on communication, and very few staff feel they need to start some kind of Mini-Apple in response. Few companies allow staff to communicate, as it's just too easy for staff to send the wrong message. The company I work for is vast beyond the dreams of Apple or Microsoft, and we train all staff about external communications (in normal policy & procedure training). The impression Apple gives is that of a tightly run company.
Apple present as a company focused on a few core lines - home computing, professional media/art computing and entertainment. It's easy to see how just about everything they do fits those lines.
Microsoft are all over the place. Their core is clearly Windows and Office, but they've dipped metaphorical toes into media, gaming, tablet computing, robotics, handhelds, peripherals, mobile phones, web searching and more. Some non-core lines are very successful (XBox-360) but they all seem to be in the red, only able to be pursued due to the huge cash reserves brought in by the core lines. Few businesses would do this, even very rich businesses (such as GE) demand each product or division runs a profit and improves year on year. That's sustainable business practice, but Microsoft seems to believe deep pockets last forever.
Microsoft are looking tired, but they can pull things together. Cut some of the non-core lines loose - sell them off. Get out and understand how people want to use stuff before building a product (Zune wireless sharing is a notable failure here). Savage the management layers to shake out dead wood at *all* levels, review all current projects with a view to killing most of them and refocus the (smaller) company on the smaller range of product lines.
Microsoft can waste energy competing with Apple and Google, but they needn't bother. Neither is a threat and the market's easily big enough for everyone. The biggest enemy they seem to have is themselves and their existing products.
To recap a film metaphor - remember when Luke Skywalker went into that cave near Yoda's house on Dagobar? He met Darth Vader, then fought and killed him. The mask covering the head exploded, revealing Luke's own face. His greatest enemy at that point was his own nature.
I personally don't think it's the OS that makes you productive, but the software and how you use it.
:)
That, and the amount of time you don't spend on stuff you shouldn't have to spend time on.
If it adds up, then PC is for you. No biggie.
But for most people I know (that are below average technically able), they convert to Macs and rave about them afterwards
Stop the brainwash
Parallels has allowed our company to begin the migration away from Windows by providing support for specific, required applications on the platform of choice:
- Business users receive Macs, and use Parallels (and sometimes Boot Camp) for specific applications.
- Engineers have the choice between either Mac OS X or Ubuntu. They can also run Parallels or VMware for Windows applications, though they rarely do so.
- Artists run Windows, since their singular, primary application is 3d Studio Max -- Windows only 3d software.
Parallels has allowed us to make a long-term platform decision (Mac OS X and Linux) while continuing to support the short-term software requirements (Running Windows software). As more cross-platform software is made available, we will migrate away from the Windows-only solutions.
http://plausible.coop
- Microsoft Word was not fast enough on the Mac
- Microsoft Word was not 100% completely compatible with Microsoft Word on the PC
Let me tackle each of these in turn (put down your flamethrowers right now).The current version of Word on the Mac is compiled for the PPC and runs through Rosetta. While most people report that Word runs "just fine" through Rosetta, the fact is, it doesn't for people who work like my wife does. Fast. Demanding. Has a lot of work and isn't going to wait around patiently for her last action to complete. Yes, I did all of the tweaks to speed up her Mac (the best MacBook Pro money could buy (2.33GHz Core 2 Duo, 2GB RAM, 160GB disk)). Yes, I even allocated more RAM for Rosetta.
And before you ask, yes, I ran Word 2003 in Parallels. Yes, I ran it under VMware Fusion. And yes, I ran in under Crossover for Mac. The sad, but obvious fact is that Word runs fastest natively under Windows on a PC (in this case a brand new Vaio which I had to buy to replace the MacBook Pro). Both of these computers had exactly the same specs.
As for the second problem, it cannot be over-emphasized. You cannot submit a report back to a client which looks like trash in *their* version of Word. Word 2003 is *not* Word 2004. And the upcoming Word 2008 will *not* be Word 2007. Any alteration in a document which is advising investors to spend billions on a particular equity is not acceptable. No, she couldn't use Open Office. Or anything else. And yes, she also tried to save the document using compatibility mode.
RANT: ON
We both hated to go back. She loved the Mac. Anybody who thinks that Microsoft should be really worried about Apple is a little delusional. Microsoft doesn't make software, they make money (which explains why their software sucks - ask me about this sometime). They've also invested heavily in Apple (when Apple makes money, Microsoft makes money). And they are releasing and continuing to develop Office for the Mac, because it is profitable for them. And will continue to be. Sure, Microsoft would like to own every single aspect of the computing market, because that would make them the most money. But when they can't, they hedge their bets (Corel, Apple, most recently Novel).
RANT: OFF
By the way, moving from Microsoft Entourage to Microsoft Outlook is a total pain. You would think this would be straightforward, but no. And if you're one of those who think Micosoft tries to make it hard to move from the PC to Mac on purpose, just try moving back. It's even worse. Ultimately I just set her up with IMAP and had her re-create all her folders (she had hundreds) and copy her mail up to one of my mail servers. Mail is better that way anyway...
As for the MacBook Pro, I'm downloading FC6 right now :-)
I am not interested in articles about life extension advancements.
All these "Microsoft don't care where you run Windows" comments overlook the fact that a user switching already has a copy of Windows. One of the best parts of Parallels is that a user switching can simply run an application on their old system that will copy everyhing over to their Mac.
The OS
All the applications
All the settings
All the data
Everything.
Running the application to replicate the old environment is trivial. It's much easier than upgrading to Vista--or even another version of Windows XP. Think about it, how much time does it take for you to upgrade from one Windows system to another? How many hours spent re-installing the same crap over again, hoping that it works on the new system, that is, if you can even find the installation media anymore...
Parallels makes it trivial to switch without ever having to buy another Microsoft product.
That's what makes Parallels the killer app it is. That's why Microsoft should be scared of Macs.
Notes From Under *nix: blas.phemo.us
Looks like the newbie stick has been smacking SlashDot authors again.
First, "buzz" is a marketing issue, and it's been pretty well defined for several decades. Look up the phrase "AIDA" (attention, interest, desire and action). "Buzz" is roughly equivalent to "interest": people are interested in the product, but don't necessarily desire the project yet.
Second, measuring levels of attention, interest, desire and action is extremely EASY to do. In addition to decades of university-level research that contribute to our understanding, there are hundreds of marketing and polling firms that can monitor these levels of interest in commercial products fairly accurately.
(If you don't think Apple is employing marketing firms to generate and monitor AIDA, including "buzz", I'd like to sell you something too.)
...Microsoft should be afraid of all its competitors. Vista is so bad that they should be very afraid. Too many of its features go against what users want and slow the OS down in the process (http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/27/03 8227&from=rss).
Anyone who claims Vista is faster is either lying or barely using their computer's power. As a developer, I beat the hell out of machines, and Vista is terribly slow compared to XP. On a laptop, it is unbearable (much slower, lower battery life, crashes on suspend or hibernate).
If Microsoft tries to force users to upgrade to Vista, I will switch to anything else. I like XP, but I don't think I'll be switching to Vista (even after a few service packs).
Your pops bought an Apple II in 1984? Man, what a sucker. Of course, you neglect to mention that there was still active commercial software development for your Dad's Apple II TEN YEARS LATER. Oh, and that new models of the Apple II were still sold for the NEXT 8 YEARS.
Yep, sounds like he really got screwed, by buying a seven year old computer design that had at least seven more years of life. I would be so pissed, too.
Repetition does not transform a lie into the truth. - FDR
As for the "too cool for you" market segment, you state, "Just about no one else cares at all." Actually, besides ill informed IT writers who just regurgitate drivel, just about no one who uses Macs walks around thinking "I'm too cool using my Mac." They use them because they like them and they work. The cool argument has taken on a life of its own, but I haven't seen one person yet who described their choice of an Apple product as based on how "cool" it made them feel.
And, yes, Apple does sell hardware. It's where they make their money. ALL companies try to sell image as one point of their marketing strategy. Only people with a poor understanding of Mac uers' major reasons for loving their machines would say it was based on image.
I don't think you have an understanding of why Mac users like their Macs. Those same Mac users are walking around proselytizing because they love what they use. Very few products garner this much loyalty and loyalty is not based on "coolness".
Time and time again I hear about how BMW is making record profits, yet their market share never raises. I don't see how BMW is going to compete with the likes of GM. GM is the worlds largest producer of automobiles.
Despite being profitable BMW should try a different tactic.
Okay...
Excellent...
I see, so the MBP is this magical thing that resolves your hatred of Microsoft, allowing you to use XP on it and be happy again?
Or was your problem that you just hated your laptop?
Don't argue with me about this.
I'd mod you down, but "arrogant" isn't one of the options.
Your kids are right about a lot of things. Not having to make many decisions before or after purchase makes the Mac much more appealing for many consumers.
And people don't care about internals, as long as the machine does what it's supposed to. Since most consumers don't expect their computer to do anything it couldn't do seven or eight years ago, they don't mind having less muscle than they might with an equivalently priced pc.
(I keep hearing on irc and forums that with equivalent hardware a mac laptop is as cheap as one with Windows. As far as I can tell, this is utterly untrue. If anyone objects to my saying this, please provide a link to back up your claim.)
Mac laptops are certainly not bad in terms of build quality, but I think they enjoy a reputation for sturdiness that they don't entirely deserve. The ibm, dell and hp laptops on the market today are all much more rugged and sturdy than they were in the past. Shock-mounted hard drives are a common feature, for instance, and all-around build-quality is better than before.
As for compatability with peripherals, your kids are flat-out wrong (unless you're going to run Windows on the machine too, of course). Windows is still the compatability king, and while iPods in particular might have slightly better support on OS X than on XP, they're the exception, not the rule.
Finally, If you're savvy enough to run Ubuntu, I don't know what use you would have for a Mac. Aqua is pretty nice, but you'll get a lot more out of your hardware if you run linux. The next 3-4 years will see a lot of improvements to X, as well, so aqua probably won't be so tempting.
I still own 5 computers used for my consulting business, but I now just use a MacBook with Parallels + Windows + Linux -- works for me for about 95% of my work. I don't even bother (usually) using my Mac as an X Window client for Linux: now, I just run Linux under Parallels, as needed. Same for Windows.
One thing: Microsoft still makes money from this arrangement (the Windows license fee) so it is not like this is a totally bad situation for them.
Being able to copy and paste between Windows and Mac applications is useful, as is an optional shared file system.
For software developers not focussed on the Windows market, this is a great setup. I use Common Lisp, Ruby, and Java - all portable to many OS platforms, so I usually work on OS X.
Well, you might be attributing too much to the gaming market as well. Don't get me wrong, it's a big market and people who buy gaming rigs tend to push the bleeding edge of hardware. For some of us old folks, gaming on a PC has absolutely no interest whatsoever. A lot of people don't need the bleeding edge of hardware -- they need decent software that's easy to use.
In my opinion, Apples are coming bundled with a lot more software which is relevant to what people want to do. Handling your digital photos, movies, e-mail, and some light productivity software is probably what a lot of people want. I've been waiting got the right time to add a Mac Mini to my network -- it doesn't need to be huge, it can share disk space with the other critters on my network. But, I want the OS and the apps that come with it. I'm willing to pay a premium for that 'underpowered' machine.
I can't even fathom what you're doing with your machine. And, it is certainly not representative of what I and loads of other people do with out home machines.
I think Mac is currently in the midst of breaking into the market in serious quantity. The fact that this thread exists tells me it is.
I think you might also be missing what older people are willing to pay for a machine which doesn't give them troubles. Old ladies routinely seem to buy Cadillacs, because that's what their husband always bought and they like them. If I had an old grandma who wanted a computer and could afford to put up the cash, I'd absolutely steer her towards a Mac -- because it won't contribute to er early demise with all of the frustration.
You are a developer, and probably a gamer. But, you're also not representative of the rest of the consumer market for computers. I'm a developer at work -- but at home, I'm a light casual user who doesn't really tax his machines all that much: my XP box running at equivelant to around 2.8 GHz (AMD CPU) with 1GB of RAM is more than I've ever needed at home. My even slower FreeBSD box with 768 MB of RAM is just as zippy. I would personally never spend $2k on a machine (my last few have been less than $500 CDN), but I might be willing to go up a couple of price points for a Mac.
The whole point of this thread is that for a lot of people, the Mac offers a very attractive alternative to a Windows machine. For the people who really will do some web surfing, mail, a little light word processing, and handling all of this new-fangled digital media they still don't quite understand, the Mac is an exceptionally good choice.
Well, considering the revenues Apple has been pulling down (even if you discount the revenue from iTMS), and considering entire Universities are announcing they're going all Mac, I think you might find yourself wrong on that statement. Apple has been in 'real' businesses for a few decades now.
Apple aren't trying to supplant Microsoft as the dominant operating system. They're trying to make a niche for themselves of people who want something a little different out of their machines. Personally, that hipster marketing campaign makes me really wish I had one. There will always be a market for the big, honking PC rigs. But, there will always be a market for what Apple is selling as well.
You are entitled to your own opinion. Cancel or allow.
Cheers
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Ha-ha! Definitely BMW is just a bunch of losers. They have profits and cannot increase the market share. What a shame!
FYI, in fact BMW's market share is increasing.
And regarding multimedia software and editing - you would not believe the difference! For professionals and amateurs alike working with video, photos and sound the Mac beats everything out there. Do you know anyone in the industry at all?Absolutely not! Even with comparable Intel C2D + 2GB of RAM my MBP boots way faster than any of my Windows PCs! And I keep them mean and lean.
On the other hand the Linux distributions I have tried have been much slow(er) to boot. But then again I never bothered to configure them properly.You mean like installing Linux on a Compaq? Or changing the hardware configuration on a Windows Vista PC? Besides most people on Macs don't need to hack anything - they just work. The hardcore gamers are all on their PCs anyway, let's just agree to disagree.
"No one will use a product at home that is not used in business without good reason. "
That statement is just dumb. I'm not going to even bother to respond to it.
"People forget that one of the biggest buyers of systems in the government, and we are always swapping hardware and shuffling systems around. At home I run a dual core 64 bit laptop, and it's barely up to par, but it's better then my friends MACBook Pro."
That's funny you feel that way. Not sure where you work, but where i am developers are jumping over each other to get Mac laptops or pro stations and a few have even paid for them out of their pocket.
It's funny you bag on Mac hardware (which is fine) but at the end by this statement I can see why you say that: "I run Linux at home and it's a headache going between XP and Ubuntu, but it's worth it because it's free and stable." I don't think you know elegance and design if it walked up to you and gave you a donkey-punch.
"It's just not feasible to use Java to do something when I know it will be slower and require more overhead then C++, Pearl, or
As far as Java and slow, nobody in their right mind would say that Java on Desktop is great, but there is nothing wrong with running it on the server. Web pages will run just as fast w/Java as they do with C# and if your writing web apps in C++ I question the credibility of your opinion. You made comment of your development starting to move web based, our development has been web based since 98 and we have worked with Perl/PHP then moved onto Java about 6 years ago.
Now we're making the same transition again from Java to Ruby on Rails. We've launched our second large scale RoR based project, the productivity of our programmers has more than doubled moving from Java to RoR with the only expense being slightly slower runtime (which for our application and requirements isn't a big deal, we're not Yahoo or Google). Anyone who's actually making decisions based on $ will see really quickly that the real expense is the dumb-ass programmer that's being paid $100k to write web applications in C++ when they can be done in 1/20th the amount of time with the right tools.
As a matter of fact, as a business the level of rapid deployment we can do now having improved our framework has given us new oppurtunity for growth into services we in the past had to leave alone due to lack of developer resources.
I can buy 4 dell 850 rack (XEON's with 2 gigs ram) servers for the LESS than the cost of 4 weeks of one of our engineers, a productive software stack for development so far outweighs the cost of hardware I can't imagine that anyone even brings it up anymore for run of the mill business-solution web-based applications.
Enjoy your C++ web development
Core 2 Duos have the 64 bit extensions. Don't believe what people in the Apple Store tell you. Even though they call them geniuses, they're just techs with a knowledge born from proprietary manuals.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
Well said. It's nothing to do with image for me. "It just works" pretty much sums up the Apple experience. How many Mac users here remember their first Bluetooth phone ? My Mac already had BT built in...my address book was synced with the phone within minutes of unpacking the phone. No software to install, no data to copy into a new application, it just worked.
Some evidence:
MacBook 2.0GHz:
Intel Core 2 Duo 2.0GHz
1GB DDR2-667
80GB HDD
Dual-layer burner
13.3 glossy widescreen
Integrated 802.11 a/b/g/n
Bluetooth 1.3 + EDR
Integrated webcam
Magnetic power cord
Intel GMA950 graphics
Total: $1299
Dell XPS M1210
Intel Core 2 Duo 2.0GHz
1GB DDR2-667
80GB HDD
Dual-layer burner
12.1" glossy widescreen
Integrated 802.11 a/b/g
NO bluetooth available as upgrade
Integrated webcam
NO magnetic power cord
Intel GMA950 graphics
Total: $1493
I chose the XPS M1210 because of the form factor. Dell's closest performer to the MacBook in question is a 15.4", and from my experience talking to MacBook owners, most feel that 15.4" is too large and immobile for their tastes (though I personally use a 15.4" MacBook Pro). Many PC users complain when I make the magnetic power cord as a bullet point, but I think it's valid. I've known multiple Dell users who have, in college environments, libraries and whatnot, trashed their laptops by someone tripping over the cord and yanking pins off the motherboard internally. There is a mini-industry repairing these things in my college for those not covered under warranty. I know personally that the MagSafe has saved this laptop at least twice since I got it.
Allow me to price out the alternative...
Dell Latitude D620 (look in the small business section)
Intel Core 2 Duo 2.0GHz
1GB DDR2-533
80GB HDD
Dual-layer burner
14.1" glossy widescreen
Integrated 802.11 g only (no a/b/n)
Integrated bluetooth 1.3 + EDR
NO webcam
NO magnetic power cord
The above machine runs XP SP2, since it won't let me configure a Vista machine with bluetooth options (driver issues still?)
I've tried to be as objective as possible with this comparison. From this I think it's clear that the Macs are very competitive. I usually get a lot of people complaining that you can buy a cheapo Dell for $600 but can't do so for a Mac... but that's not really an issue with Macs being too expensive, more of one with Apple not servicing your particular demographic.
Intel GMA950 graphicsTotal: $1268
I see, so the MBP is this magical thing that resolves your hatred of Microsoft, allowing you to use XP on it and be happy again?
Not at all. I don't have a hatred of MS, nor a love affair with Apple. I was agreeing that the Parallels option on a Mac makes it easy to justify the switch to some people because they can keep their XP programs and have the benefit of whatever drew them to OSX and Apple in the first place.I don't think crushing Microsoft is part the business plan. Let's put aside Apple's consumer electronics push as symbolized by the dropping of "Computer" from the company name for a moment. First, Apple can happily double its market share off the switchers disgruntled with Microsoft woeful security issues or its convoluted and belated Vista solution. Apple would not rule the market but it would show growth and delight investors. Second, Apple has not or does it show any intention of partnering with the other big OEMs to offer OSX with their desktops. Moreover, they show no signs of switching the kernel to Linux to take advantage of the pool of OS drivers necessary for releasing Leopard in the wild. They are not including a win32 compatibilty layer, releasing a fully feature office suite, making a concerted push into enterprise computing, or doing any other action to throw down with Microsoft. Lets not forget that Microsoft can afford to screw up for a long time before there is any appreciable exodus. Thus, I don't the see logic behind any assertion of the end of Microsoft dominance but I understand the sentiment. Microsoft has woefully proven it does not deserve to be the de facto desktop standard and Apple arguably does have a better OS. But, all the posting on slashdot will never change the status quo.
You don't have to be smart to use a Mac, you just have to be smart enough to buy one
Yawn. Another Slashdot pule about Microsoft. How trite.
Once Apple starts gaining more than a token market share, maybe MS can start worrying.
Once Apple starts putting out something other than consumer-level crap, maybe MS can start worrying.
Once Apple starts selling stuff which isn't horribly marked up, maybe MS can start worrying.
Until then, Microsoft has nothing to fear from a niche market monopolist like Apple.
Perhaps that's how it should be. Certainly, the OS should get out of the way and let you get on with something productive. However, in practice, we're not always very close to that ideal.
I use XP at work every day, and every day it gets in my way in countless little ways, from snatching focus when I'm typing, to making my Explorer windows bigger each time, to taking unnecessarily long to unminimise apps, to getting confused about whether I'm pressing any of the control keys after switching away from Remote Desktop, to freezing the entire window manager when an app is slow responding, to continually popping up windows on the wrong desktop (using MS's own Virtual Desktop Manager), to presenting lots of unnecessary and annoying fake directories while pretending that my desktop is the root of the filesystem, to making it unreasonably hard to enter accented characters, to... to... Well, I could rant on for hours more!
I use Mac OS X at home, and though it's far from perfect, it annoys me far less because it keeps out of my way more. I'm doing different things, of course, so it's hard to compare; but I certainly feel more productive with it.
Now, I obviously have more emotional investment in a machine that I chose and bought than in one I'm expected to use at work. But I've been using Windows regularly for over twice as long (since 3.11) as Mac OS X (since the Public Beta), so it's not that I'm more familiar or more experienced with the Mac.
I haven't used Vista for more than a few minutes. (Not that I'm bothered.) Any Vista users care to mention whether they thing Vista has a better 'gets out of my way and lets me work' score than XP?
Ceterum censeo subscriptionem esse delendam.
There is a lot more to the CAD world than just being able to draw lines. Arcitosh is nowhere close to the big picture that is required. Drawings move between different companies with the expectation of compatibility. We use AutoCAD 2007 but most of our customers use 2004-- this alone is a challenge. The biggest hope is when a viable competitor can come out with a solid professional level CAD package with automation support for less than $800. At that price point, there is hope.
I hoped Omni Graffe would work for me... it did many things better than Visio... but smart blocks from Visio weren't compatible in it. Other programs I have tried like Excel substitutes (Mariner Calc was one) couldn't even handle merged cells in a spreadsheet.
Primavera has hope, but the big picture still has a lot of major holes.
Again, for myself, I can work around limitations... but many of my co-workers can't. I hope things get better over the next year.