Apple Computer has a message for Windows users considering an upgrade to XP: “Come back to the Mac.” In the wake of a $1 billion Windows XP marketing campaign, all eyes would appear to be turned away from Mac OS X 10.1.1, the new operating system Apple significantly upgraded in September. But Apple is convinced that Windows XP’s endorsement of technologies that first appeared on Macs–802.11b wireless networking, CD burning, DVD playback, movie making, and easy retrieval of digital camera images, among others–will help Apple system and software sales.In the meantime, Microsoft Office X for the Mac slipped into stores Monday, culminating a nearly five-year development effort by Microsoft. The delivery of Office v. X has not been easy, requiring once bitter rivals Microsoft and Apple Computer to cooperate on major changes to Mac OS X, a product that arguably competes with Windows XP. The relationship between the companies in fact has changed substantially since January 1997, when Microsoft formed a Macintosh Business Unit (MacBU) to reignite its development of applications for Apple’s Mac operating system.
Apple: Forget XP, try the Mac
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
If like me, your the geek in tha family ( I own a PPC and hobbit bebox, Netbsd x86, MacoSX) then I recommend recommending a Mac, becuase you’ll never have to do any support …..
The idea that you put out the product first will bring people in will not work. It’s who makes the most noise about it. MS is making a lot of noise claiming all the new things in XP. While Apple may have got it in their product first most people just didn’t notice. Especialy the average consumer or windows regular. Yes you may have introduced it first but most won’t care and others will think that MS was first just cause MS made it sound that way and they don’t know any differantly. When they see both products have the same feature they will just not look at those features they will base their choice on what one has that the other doesn’t.
On a side note the title “come back to mac” is odd. Since most of the worlds current computer users started on windows. And those who did start on macs probly still use macs. Just a thought, and it has a hint of being desperate for users.
Once Apple does a bit more refining of OSX, Adobe starts releasing OSX-compatible versions of Photoshop and the like, and the G6 proves to be a great 64-bit processor, I will most certainly begin to look at OSX and a Mac as an alternative. The power of BSD with a fair interface, why not? Now if they’d only make their machines a bit cheaper …
well, the iMacs are cheep enough, but the screens are to damn small, they neet to get iMacs with a 15 in viewable screen before I will buy one of those. also, they need to make a G4 tower that is around $1200…..I bet that box would fly out the door. even if it comes with a crapy video card and no CD-R, I can alays just go buy OTS replacments since Apple started to use ATA and AGP/PCI interfaces for their hardware.
Aw man, these stories always start bitter flame wars.
Actually ZDnet had a point to Apple being in a comfortable position at the moment. Though there is not a PC in every home quite yet and it will be awhile before that is likely to happen, you do have the folks who purchasing their second computer and some are thinking Mac right now, helk I am a Mac user thinking PC so I can run BeOS 5/Linux at home! Right now Dell and Apple are at the top of the charts in sales from the last I read in Business Week, both are sharing close margins! The guy who said “Its Who Shouts Loudest” is true and if Apple wants to get more of that other 95% of the market then they need to shout louder than Microsoft, unfortunately in this day and age, “it’s not quality that sales to the masses… it’s marketing!” and Microsoft knows marketing better than anybody, but Apple is becoming a quick learner of this phenomenon!
HAH, who knows marketing better than apple?
IMO apples campagins have always been the loudest and most noticable, starting back in ’84 with that woman who smashed the screen all IBM people were looking on.
IMO apple once loosed to MS because MS was smarter in business realtions with other software and hardware companies (namely and most important IBM)
>>HAH, who knows marketing better than apple?
IMO apples campagins have always been the loudest and most noticable, starting back in ’84 with that woman who smashed the screen all IBM people were looking on.<<
Yeah I agree with you, but I think Apple had lost its edge after Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs left the company. Now in the last 3 years with Steve Jobs return Apple has done a wonderful job with it’s marketing campaign, it not being all over their adverts, or someone elses adverts, then having a starring role in lots of movies which always makes me feel good thinking that all the Windows PC users around the theatre saying to themselves “what computer/OS is that?”. That is what I meant how Apple is learning once again. The really neat part is that they are going back to the basics of their marketing scheme and the ‘old skool’ is working quite well!
Oh and I remember that 1984 advert during the SuperBowl, it was really cool!
Yeah, Brad you’re right, when you shout the loudest to claim all the things in XP are originate from Redmond, the lie can overcome the truth.
But sadly, nobody can have that much money as MS to make lies. 1 billion dollar from MS is nothing. They can keep pump anothe 1 billion to make the lie even more convincing if the first 1 billion didn’t work well enough.
So how can be beat that?
How about more balance and reality check report and jourtnalism in the mainstream media and tech reports?
No company on earth today have the wealth of MS, and part of it’s success is due the the blind support of irresponisble journalism for MS that make them so big. Just as the Megahetz myth… now what to do with such mess…
1 billion dollars? Please. I’d really like to know who comes up with these figures. Get a grip, people. MS is not spending anything close to that for marketing XP.
1 billion: http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-6382865.html
There will always be people that think different. They will see through the hype and buy the better product. Apple only needs to get the word out to these people. And don’t forget, M$ pissed off a lot of people. They will only get more angry at a 1 billion dollar campaign.
What I think Schiller means is that people will see the programs available with Windows XP and discover that they want that, but only better. MacOS X has the better tools…WMP sucks compared to iTunes and Quicktime, iMovie is much better than the program you get with XP, etc, etc.
Ummm…..
“No company on earth today have the wealth of MS, and part of it’s success is due the the blind support of irresponisble journalism for MS that make them so big. Just as the Megahetz myth… now what to do with such mess… ”
Sorry Eboy, but MS is not the most wealthy corperation in the world, I think it is GM or somthing…..MS does not even show in the fortune 50 companies (I think if not I know it is far from #1). it is true though that MS is the most wealthy company in the Software industry, I am not even sure that they are top Tech in the tech industry.
I’ve already got lots of x86 hardware at home (two dual processor boxes, one laptop), and OS X doesn’t run on any of my PowerPC hardware (a dual processor BeBox and a dual processor Mac clone, neither of which is blessed by Jobs). That’s a huge barrier to entry.
I’d love to try out OS X… maybe it would get me excited about computers again, like BeOS did when it appeared. But I can’t drop $4600 Cdn for a decent box (dual G4 with SuperDrive, minimal everything else because I can buy RAM and disk cheaply myself). If I were interested, I could pick up XP for way less than that.
As it is, I’ll just keep playing games in 98, and wishing Linux didn’t have so many “issues”. :-\
– chrish
Chris,
I don’t understand why you think you “need” a dual G4 with SuperDrive to run OS X? Sorry but it sounds like your “Huge barrier to entry” is just a lame excuse that exists only in your own mind – because you “need” to get some souped up whiz-bang box that will be obsolete tommorow. Never buy hardware at the high-end, grasshopper.
Meanwhile, I too have not one, not two, but THREE x86 boxes. Lemmee see, lemmee do the math here, XP pro upgrade = $199, $199×3 =~ $600. That’s not including Officex3. By the time you add it all up, you’ve exceeded the cost of a top of the line iMac, and you are well on your way to a mid-level G4 – which, given enough of that RAM that you can buy cheaply yourself, is totally adequate for running OS X.
Just my 0.02. What do I know. Nothing, thats what. See? I admit it.
XP is a closed operating system that runs on (almost) open hardware (PC). MacOSX is derived for a open o.s. (FreeBSD) but it is still a closed o.s. that only runs on a expensive and closed hardware.
Why not to try Linux ? It runs on PCs AND Apple hardware (PowerPC). It runs also on the excelent Aplha and UltraSparc processors.
Apple is now a subsidiary from MS. MS sells the principal softwares for Macs. MacOS X will never be a threat to Windows while it runs on a proprietary hardware.
If we are using linux on almost all desktops, any new hardware architecture will be welcome.
Bill gates owns part of the company, not Microsoft. yes that means that BG can make stockholder decisions by way of vote, but he owns about 30% of the company where Steve still owns about 40-45% bill can make apple go under but it would be hard work and a bad investment for him, not to mention he would be liable for lawsuits from the other 70% of apple share holders for destroing the company.
“There will always be people that think different. They will see through the hype and buy the better product.”
And right now, if you think OS X is the better product, I’d argue that you’re not seeing through the hype. Yes, it has a lot of potential, but when you sit down and honestly look at what XP delivers vs. what OS X delivers, you’ll see that XP offers a lot more. In a few releases, OS X might be a far better product than XP, but right now that’s just not the case.
“What I think Schiller means is that people will see the programs available with Windows XP and discover that they want that, but only better.”
Yes, but this has been the problem plaguing the Mac forever. It simply doesn’t have a lot of the high-quality programs that Windows does. Compare AIM for WinXP vs. the slow, ugly AIM for OS X. Compare ICQ between the two platforms. The Mac doesn’t even have a Kazaa/Morpheus client, and it got its first Mac Napster client (a third-party program) months and months after Windows users got Napster. Look at all the great games the Mac lacks. Etc. etc.
“MacOS X has the better tools”
In a few areas, yes. But for most areas, Windows still has the better tools (the cases I named above are just a subset).
“WMP sucks compared to iTunes and Quicktime”
Windows Media Player 6.2 (still installed with XP) is the fastest media player ever. Loads instantly, plays many files, good video quality (hardware overlay), etc. It puts QuickTime to shame in many regards. I’ll admit that I prefer iTunes and QuickTime to Windows Media Player 7/8. However, this is one area, and many, many quality third-party programs are available for Windows (the free Winamp jumps most readily to mind).
“iMovie is much better than the program you get with XP, etc, etc. ”
Certainly no argument here. But you’ve only named two select cases. You had to resort to “etc.”s because you couldn’t think of any others. :\
Clearly, OS X has a lot of potential and the reasons for wanting to switch to the Mac are increasing faster than ever before (within the last decade, at least). But to say that Mac users are “the smart 10%” is a quite a bit of unfounded arrogance. There are still many, many valid reasons why someone would want a PC with XP over a Mac with OS X.
If in a few years this changes, no one will be happier than me.
licht said:
1 billion: http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-6382865.html
cnet sez:
update Microsoft said Tuesday that it, together with Intel, PC makers and retailers, will spend $1 billion promoting Windows XP, the software giant’s upcoming operating system.
————-
Yeh, “together with Intel, PC makers and retailers”
In other words, a total figure pulled out of our arse in order to make a great headline. I billion dollars for ONE company is still a ridiculously insane amount, even if you are Microsoft.
Really, Steve.
People like “bkakes” will never be satisfied so Apple shouldn’t even try.
I used MacOS because I could do what I wanted to get done in less time. I don’t have to waste time fiddling, configuring, or using every single feature of XYZ. It seems DOS users have always ENJOYED configuring their machines ad infinitum and basically SPOOGED their pants when Linux came along because it provided new an ingenious ways to waste time.
I’m not doing to debate such issues based on the support of 3rd parties for obscure software titles because such reasoning inevitably leads such people to use crappy Ti calculators–err Wintel PCs.
Just recently I read Apple had just over 4% of the computer market, not 10% claimed here.
I “need” a dual G4 with SuperDrive because there’s no point in buying a computer that’s worse than what I’m already using. I “need” a dual system because I want the box to still be responsive, even under heavy loads. Again, no point in buying worse than I’m already using (dual P2 350, dual P3 666).
iMac is at a good price, but there’s no way in hell I’m downgrading from a lovely 19″ to a half-decent 15″ display. Same for iBook; tiny display compared to the x86 laptop I’ve already got.
There’s no way I’m “upgrading” to XP; it’s just as good as the 98 I’ve already got for the tasks I do under Windows (ie, playing games).
If OS X ran on x86 hardware, I’d be first in line to try it out and do some development. As it is, I’m stuck with Linux’s slowness and lack of responsive UI (and yes, I know OS X has the same “feature”), wishing Be had been successful.
– chrish
Just FYI, the fortune 500 based on revenue ($millions):
1 Exxon Mobil 210,392.0
2 Wal-Mart Stores 193,295.0
3 General Motors 184,632.0
4 Ford Motor 180,598.0
5 General Electric 129,853.0
6 Citigroup 111,826.0
7 Enron 100,789.0
8 Intl. Business Machines 88,396.0
9 AT&T 65,981.0
10 Verizon Communications 64,707.0
…
48 Dell Computer 31,888.0
…
79 Microsoft 22,956.0
…
236 Apple Computer 7,983.0
Of course, that is just US Companies…
I’m running OS X on a 450MHz Mac Cube. That’s pretty middle of the road hardware for nowadays. The responsiveness is comparable to that on my W2K boxes running at 500MHz and 1GHz. The same things make the GUI jerky on both machines (usually disk I/O). OS X on the other hand has great, free, development environments and Unix to boot.
As I’ve said ad nauseum before, I ditched MacOS back in the early 90’s when I had to for school. Never looked back until the first screenshot of OS X came out. I’ve been using it since PB, and couldn’t be happier. I’m going to buy a new PC soon however, but just for testing purposes for Java and web browser compliance. I’m sticking with OS X all the way. Couldn’t be happier. That’s not to say it is perfect, because no OS in existence does.
“There are still many, many valid reasons why someone would want a PC with XP over a Mac with OS X.”
Your kidding right?!
bkakes… you and I usually have some good discussions on this and I consider not biased, but this comment above is ridiculous, most people who purchase a PC don’t really know what their buying except for people like you and I… they just buy something by maybe what someone else told them!
Windows XP maybe good for the simple folks who only browse the internet and check email, and maybe type a few documents in Word and/or build a few spreadsheets, but at the end of the day Mac OS X is the better buy and a better investment period. Especially if you’re having to upgrade your computer again. I have been playing with XP on my friends machine and coming from the Windows 95 era, other than the GUI I am not really all that impressed. If you want to Multimedia stuff then Mac OS is the way to go, plain and simple
A note… I’ve been using both PC (win/lin) and Macs for a few years, and guess what I still go back to a pc. Personally the Mac interface (pre X) is nice to look at, but it slows me down… no keyboard equalents for many popup choices, having to mouse over to the top left, etc. OS X, still has the same issues (the keystroke for every choice option thingy is still not quite working)and now they’ve added this monster of a look. I can’t do a single thing without being reminded that I’m using os X. God… it’s like the start up sound… you have to be reminded that you are in the company of the best damn thing to happen to human kind since the wheel
Just thought that I’d let you know, that there are a few (more then you think) people that do make a conscious choice to use a pc over a mac.
oh… and everytime I see a bondi coloured iMac on TV or a movie… I don’t wonder what a neat thing it is, I cringe at the lame attempt of whoever put it on the set to look trendy.
my, two cents… I know I’m looking for trouble, sorry.
I.
I used to be a very active Mac user while at school and college, but for economic users I left the Mac two years ago. Since then, I have been using Windows, Linux and Solaris machines (and some other Unixes as well, but no so frequently). My only contact with Macs was helping a friend’s boyfriend to configure his severely mis-behaving blue iBook. In fact, I’m posting this using a Konqueror browser in a Linux Xvnc session running inside a fairly decent Win2000 machine.
With that said, I must say that I am craving STRONGLY for an iBook running MacOS X (although a Ti would be better š )!! I REALLY miss the Mac’s ease of use, but would not give up Linux/Unix’s stability and technical efficiency (because, personally I was much more efficient when I used Macs). With OS X I can have both, at the same time, on the same machine. About Win 2000 I would miss some programs (like the VNC client which s far better than any of it’s counterparts). But not much more.
Unfortunately I work in a completely Mac-less environment, so a Mac would not be the best choice…and I don’t have the money right now to spend it for hobby. Maybe next year, when I plan to start graduate studies, will be a good one to go back to the Mac.
…if they would port it to the x86 architecture.
I was surprised to see a new Apple store in the local mall. The store
basically had alot of machines along the periphery, and software for the
MAC in the middle. I walked up to one of the new G4s, as I have really not
seen one up close. As I was playing around with it, two Apple sales guys,
I use “guys” because these people had like white Apple T-shirts and jeans on.
Started talking to me like I was their best friend. They were very polite, but
I asked them first, “What can I do with this computer that I can’t do with
my Windows machine?” They basically showed me i-Tunes and the Video Editing
package. Although I thought that this software was pretty good, I felt what
the hell am I going to do with this? I don’t own a camcorder and even if I
did, I don’t think that I would want to spend the time to edit videos on my computer all of the time. To me the Firewire and software was like a feature
with no benefit. And i-Toons? You can burn and manipulate music on any PC
with ease, so not so sure what made this application so more useful. Then
I asked him about Soft-Windows. I though this would be much more useful,
as if I got a MAC at work along side of other PCs, I could run some of that
useful Windows software that I have laying around. Basically, they acknoledged
that I could get this but “what is the point…most people who use Macs don’t
feel a need to use Windows Software.” Kinda strange to me in that I have
alot of software for Windows that is not available for the MAC, who’s output
I use with my business. Overall, I thought that Mac OS X was pretty cool
visually, and when the sales guy told me that I could load up a Unix shell
from the machine, i asked to see it. He could not show it to me because
all of the machines were locked down, as they were demo machines for the
store, which is understandable. Then I looked at the price tags of the
hardware! I mentioned to the sales guys how you could easily edit movies
under Windows with like a $60 firewire card and $100 of software. They
told me, “yeah but the mac already can do that.” I figure that for
$2500 for a G4 machine, I could just get a Win XP machine loaded for
like $1200 with the firewire. Plus, I use Linux at work, which I dual boot
on my machine at home. I was interested in finding about more about Red Hat
for the Mac, but they would not elaborate.
All in all, although I liked the interface of the Mac, I was not ready to
dish out that kind of money for the hardware, when there is very capable
PC hardware around that can do the job for like half of the price.
And who wants an iMac with that small crappy screen? As for the Mac OS,
I was glad that they have finally added a real memory protection scheme, but
wondered why I have to buy Mac hardware to run the OS. If it runs under a
Mach? kernel, why not port the OS to the PC and increase your software
market share? I think that Apple still believes that a PC is more than
just software, its suppost to be hardware too. This is an old idea that
Microsoft has proven wrong for years.
Hope that Apple can make some affordable hardware to compete with the
PC; then I will try the machine out. What do you think?
Dano.