Yet another head to head review, this time from the perspective of a developer that’s spent 10+ years with Windows, “who views the Mac zealotry with a wary eye”, as he says. The same author also wrote “On Switching to the Mac” editorial in the past.
Perspective: Windows vs. Mac OS X
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
I started out using Windows as my first OS. In all honesty, I was brainwashed into Microsoft and had gotten so use to Windows that it became difficult to break old habbits and move over to a different OS. So obviously I failed on my attempt to convert to the Mac platform, that is my own failure and not that of the Mac.
What is preventing me from pursuing the Mac again? Even though most if not all my complaints against the Mac have been addressed with new software releases, hardware updates and price cuts, etc. why haven’t I given it a second chance? First impressions are always important in any situation, job interviews, etc. My first impression of the Mac did not leave a lasting positive impression to give me any incentive to try again. A second go at it for me would mean paying more money in addition to my intial investment. I’m quite happy with Gentoo Linux now because I’m using hardware I already bought. True, I can upgrade my iMac G4 to Jaguar, but I can’t justify that cost just to see “oh maybe I’ll like it now.”
You can call me cheap, you can call me any name you want. I just want to simply say the Mac isn’t for me.
but Windows vs. MacOS really doesn’t matter.
For example, my company is going to buy about 800 desktops this year…just normal replacement. The author’s figures show about a $600/mid-range machine price difference. That comes to nearly $500,000 in cost savings. Unless you are a dedicated Apple shop, that speaks more loudly than anything else.
Apple may just be the Betamax of the OS Wars…a better system, but just not able to compete with the price advantage.
I would say that BeOS was the Betamax of the OS wars. Apple is more like the laserdisc–something almost, but not quite entirely, unlike tapes.
For example, my company is going to buy about 800 desktops this year…just normal replacement. The author’s figures show about a $600/mid-range machine price difference. That comes to nearly $500,000 in cost savings. Unless you are a dedicated Apple shop, that speaks more loudly than anything else.
Initial cost, that’s accurate, but say those Apple’s have an additional 6 months to 1 year life span over the equivalent Dell, then the amortized cost is in fact lower than that of the initial cash outlay, and neither figure accounts for a Total Cost of Ownership over the span of ownership. Those are the figures that tend to matter more than purchase price. It’s one of the reasons that so many companies buy Dell’s or Gateways over a local vendor’s beige boxes, the TCO when you factor in support and service costs, the Dell @ $200 more, is a better deal over the life of the computer.
Smart review! This is the first one I’ve seen that noticed that Windows uses the common programmer’s trick of starting up with things still needing to load. When MacOS loads, it’s all there, no wait; whereas Windows forces you to wait a few seconds to start clicking away even though it looks done.
Despite all that, the Mac is still not ready for me.
BTW, about the $500k price difference — does that mean anything? Have they looked closely and found they weren’t being penny wise and pound foolish? In businesses, Macs may lead to productivity enhancements that overshadow cost. I sincerely hope they obtained one of each considered platform for user testing.
I liked this article because it doesn’t BS and tells things like they are ? which in some cases aren’t favourable towards a Mac.
As a Mac user it’s very, very easy to get caught up in all the zealotry, but working around PC’s every day coupled with balanced articles like these tend to keep my feelings towards Apple more objective. — Until the next Macworld, that is
Much better than the last OS X vs Windows article (IMO) that OSNews had, especially as the author as stated in one of the above comments is telling it like it is.
The only complaints I have is he talks about Apple’s keyboard controls, is it my understanding Windows doesn’t have a system just as capable? Using “Paint” as the bundled photo editing software is questionable, he should of just left that space blank.
Overall though, no bashing of either platform and reasonable reviewing.
Comparing hardware and not looking into what the total package is is a mistake. Also no iBook they used powerbook for low end. Mistakes mistakes mistakes
Nitpicking I know, but when someone starts out an article with lengthy paragraphs about how smart he is, and then he uses the non-existant word “virii”, he loses a lot of credibility in my eyes. He sounds like a thirteen-year-old script kiddie who uses slang he picked up from slashdot.
>Comparing hardware and not looking into what the total >package is is a mistake. Also no iBook they used powerbook >for low end. Mistakes mistakes mistakes
I see an entry for the iBook:
On the Road:
The Low End:
Apple iBook 800 – 800mhz, 128M RAM, 30G Disk, CD-ROM, 12.1″ screen – $999
Dell Inspiron 1100 – 2ghz, 128M RAM, 20G diisk, CD-ROM, 14.1″ screen – $899 ($749 w/ rebate)
The iBook was the low end :-), no PowerBook is available under in that price range.
I’m not sure what you mean by the first part of the comment though.
Windows is crappy, crashes all the time but it runs on cheaper hardware. Mac OS X not that great, looks good has a UNIX underpinning but has lousy support from its mother company, but its cool its hip but the hardware is expensive. Linux, Low cost, stable, does what I want it to do and I do not have to have abandon my current hardware just to stay up with the latest release.
The Winner is Linux
I have Windows boxes and I have Macs, but I get the greatest pleasure when I boot up and I see that itty bitty penguin sitting at the top of my screen. And in the case of the Macs, when I see that itty bitty Yellowdog sitting on my desktop.
>Windows is crappy, crashes all the time
Since I moved to XP, I haven’t seen a crash for YEARS. That is, 1.3 years, since I installed it. Microsoft has made a leap with 2k, then with XP and now with 2k3. Don’t include here products that were indeed problematic (Win9x), cause now they are not current.
>The Winner is Linux
Yeah, right.
Problem is, Linux requires time and thought to just install an app.
I’ve run Redhat 8 and 9 on a spare PC for a little while now, and I’ve never once gotten MPlayer, Crossover, Xine, or Rhythmbox to work.
I’ve spent at least a collective 20 hours trying to sort out what the heck is wrong, and in some cases even gone to the source code to try and compile my own versions to install.
In OS X if I want to install MPlayer I just drag it from the disk image to where ever I want it on my hard drive. Why can’t Linux work that way?
Mac OS X not that great, looks good has a UNIX underpinning but has lousy support from its mother company, but its cool its hip but the hardware is expensive.
Excuse me? Lousy support from Apple? Buddy, I don’t know where YOU got your OS X from, but I get great support from Apple! Next time, why don’t you try actually OWNING the damn product before you make an UNINFORMED statement like that.
Yes, OS X isn’t perfect, but as a user of Windows (including XP), OS X, Linux and FreeBSD, I say, hands-down, OS X has the best user experience of them all.
it’s too bad apple won’t allow do-it-urseflers to build their own macs.
so for me the ? is moot.
Windows is crappy, crashes all the time but it runs on cheaper hardware.
Yeah. Right.
The Winner is Linux
Yeah … whatever.
but I get the greatest pleasure when I boot up and I see that itty bitty penguin sitting at the top of my screen.
Typical masturbation process from a Linux zealots and unsignificant script kiddies. Your post is sooo original, I think I’ll cry.
The Winner is Linux
Okay, let’s look at your arguments.
Windows is crappy, crashes all the time but it runs on cheaper hardware.
In all my experience as a system administrator I’ve seen NT-based Windows operating systems (3.51, 4, 2k, XP) crash a total of 4 times (2 for NT4, 1 for 2k, 1 for XP) when not caused by a defective driver or hardware problems.
I’ve seen Solaris crash once under similar conditions. I’ve seen FreeBSD crash once under similar conditions. During the 2.4 series, I saw Linux crash several dozen times.
The early part of the 2.4 series was certainly a damnable thing to call “stable”. I’ve never experienced more OS crashes due to poor design and testing.
It’s great that the beta Linux kernels are getting regression testing now, but they certainly could have used it during 2.3. Bad experiences with 2.4 have forever tainted Linux in my mind.
Mac OS X not that great, looks good has a UNIX underpinning but has lousy support from its mother company, but its cool its hip but the hardware is expensive.
I don’t know how you can possibly claim that “Linux” (or any of its vendors) have better support than Apple.
Well no, even if you know what you’re doing it’s still a pain in the butt.
In Windows I just double click on an icon and it starts the installer. A few clicks of “next” and it’s installed.
In Linux I have to
su
*password*
cd /the/directory
./make
./make install
*pray*
Track down where the binary was installed
right click on my desktop and make a shortcut.
Add that shortcut to my app menu
Well it’s easy to see what one is easier.
Some people do like the extra work.. not me.
Now, a good example of a GOOD linux installer is CodeWeaver’s new Crossover Office. I just have to
su
*passoword*
cd /the/dir/
./theInstallFile
And it launches a nice GUI installer and it adds its self to my programs menu, AND when I install new programs from it, it adds them to my programs menu to.
It’s getting there, but Windows is still easier even when you know what you’re doing.
Well…I don’t use Linux much, but in FreeBSD I just:
cd /usr/ports/<category>/<program>
make install clean
And that it all installs as it should… I heard apt-get or whatever the exact spelling is works similiar.
“That is, if you don’t know what you’re doing. ::Glares at Eugenia::
btw: most of you need to actually RTFA instead of bashing the crap out of the OS you don’t like. It is very good :-)”
But that was Eugenia’s point wasn’t it? You can use Windows/Mac without needing to know exactly what you’re doing. Most of the time you just need know how to use the GUI and follow onscreen prompts, not spend hours reading TFM.
IME simple tasks in Linux often require you to learn a lot more about the system, so it often requires much more time to get a task done. If you enjoy learning about the system and doing things manually that’s fine. But for a lot of people who just want to get something done with minimal time and hassle, it’s a very big disadvantage. Personally I find studying Man pages and Howtos mind numbingly boring, it’s something I want to avoid if possible. Certainly for me the amount of time and effort wasted by the lack of ease of use in Linux outweighs the amount of money I’d save by not having to buy Windows.
As for stability, personally I ran Win 2k for well over a year without a crash and I’ve had one crash in 8 months of using Windows XP.
In OS X if I want to install MPlayer all I have to do is drag it from the disk image to any place on my hard drive. To remove it I just drag it from my hard drive to the trash.
That’s called direct interaction. Me, the user, actually put my virtual hand on the “thing” I wanted to move, and I just moved it.
Why can’t Linux work that way? Is there something technologically inherent in Linux that prevents this kind of simplicity?
I’ve tried to get several media apps and other assorted programs to install from packages or from repositories on many different Linux and BSD OS’s. FreeBSD ports, and Gentoo emerge are about the most trouble free so far. However they require that the repositories always be up to date, and in many cases actually require a compile before you can use the software, and further still that doesn’t give you any really knowledge about what exactly that install action did to your computer because you are so far abstracted from the process.
“Am I an “Industry Expert”? Probably not, because I lack that academic background to be taken serious by the people who haven’t spent any time working in the industry.”
I wonder if this person knows about the people who have both the education AND worked in the industry. This bitter tone set off my “Windoze sux Mac roolz” alrams, but as it turns out this was a pretty good article.
The guy worked for Stardock developing WindowBlinds? I had a hard time thinking of the article up front as a “Windoze sux Mac roolz” type of thing.
I wonder if this person knows about the people who have both the education AND worked in the industry. This bitter tone set off my “Windoze sux Mac roolz” alrams, but as it turns out this was a pretty good article.
*laugh*
Oh yes, I’m aware of them, it was really intended more as a jab at the ‘Industry Experts’ that have excellent academic credentials and near zero experience in practice. My educational background is in Accounting and Finance, because I already had a computer background, I cut my teeth on an IBM Series 1, and the System 32. It is less about bitterness, and more about a lack of respect for so many of the ‘Industry Experts’.
In Gentoo Linux Im a couple mouse clicks away from anything I want in Kportage or a single command away from the command line…..
emerge sync && emerge mplayer whaalaa
etc. etc……oh ya, and it all costs me nothing. Next version of Gentoo….no problem emerge sync && emerge -u world and a recompile of the new kernel using your existing config file if you want a new kernel. Thats a bit easier than saving up $150 bucks, going to store and plunking down, running the upgrade that requires your attention all the time….and in the end you have an upgraded (not clean) install.
Windows, OSX, Linux all have their places. Some are not for everyone. People shouldnt rush to judgement of things they dont understand and/or have little to no expertise or experience in. I use Linux for everything but some games, but whats best for me is not best for everyone…..I understand this. I do believe that Linux is the most rapidly developing OS though. It has its shortfalls, but one by one those will be eliminated in a VERY short period of time. Take a look at how far linux has come in a couple short years…..then look at how long it took MS to get from Win95 to XP.
just another $.02 in the piggy bank
I did (and still do) work for Stardock, but not on the WindowBlinds project. WindowBlinds is the work of another truly gifted developer. My contributions to Stardock were in other applications, ControlCenter, TabLaunchpad, Object Edit, a bunch of utilities, and the original deployment system for their Network distribution of software.
AC
Initial cost, that’s accurate, but say those Apple’s have an additional 6 months to 1 year life span over the equivalent Dell
Do you actually have any data to back this up? A Dell I bought back in 1995 is still running happily without any upgrades except for the hard drive – even the monitor still works well.
R.J. Dohnert
Windows is crappy, crashes all the time
And Linux is too difficult to use because you have to compile everything you install.
I have Windows boxes and I have Macs, but I get the greatest pleasure when I boot up and I see that itty bitty penguin sitting at the top of my screen
As someone else pointed out, I can’t help but wonder if you start jerking off during this process.
That’s called direct interaction. Me, the user, actually put my virtual hand on the “thing” I wanted to move, and I just moved it.
Why can’t Linux work that way? Is there something technologically inherent in Linux that prevents this kind of simplicity?>>>
No.
But as I understand it, Apple had to do A LOT of coding and tweaking to make an easy to use *nix. Apparantly Apple’s fix creates something called a prebinding problem. It can’t be much of a problem because I’ve never had an install go bad.
The other distro providers don’t have the manpower or money to create the same kind of prebinding problems that apple has.
But yeah, why should you *have* to go to the command line to install a program? Download, double click, go. ‘Tis not rocket science.
—
Incidentally, in the 2 years I have owned an OS X capable computer I made my FIRST and ONLY trip to the command line three weeks ago. Due to a hack on the server, the webzine I write for changed from allowing FTP uploads to SSH or SCH.
I got a brief tutorial on how to SCH from the command line and even did 1 practice upload.
But I haven’t had to really use it. The webmistress found an incredibly cool program called Fugu and now I simply log in and drag and drop the files where they need to go.
I’ve considered switching to MacOS for awhile.
I don’t want to buy any more Windows for a lot of reasons. MS’s policies is the main reason. The fact that I want a system with a lot of Unix-like goodness is another.
But I’ve used Linux quite a bit and have been unsatisfied as well. Installing has become a no-brainer, but administering and changing the system to what I want it to be afterward is a PITA. And I can’t afford to buy/download the flavor of the month.
So hopefully I’ll have saved enough money soon to buy my own iBook and/or iMac with OS X. This article has really influenced my decision. Other articles here and elsewhere filled me with doubt because of speed and UI issues, and I’ll hopefully still be able to try one out before I actually buy it.
Mac OS X right now looks like the only way to get Unix goodness with UI and get-out-of-my-way-and-let-me-work goodness at the same time.
The article didn’t give a full comparison with regard to laptops.
Apple’s consumer and professional laptops are the price leaders in nearly all comparisons when both laptops are upgraded to have equivilent (or as close as possible) hardware.
A few weeks ago I compared 20 different laptops from Apple and Dell each with identical (or as close as possible) specs. Apple’s laptops won in nearly every comparison.
“when both laptops are upgraded to have equivilent (or as close as possible) hardware.”
make that… hardware AND software.
All i could say that this was a better review than the previous one. This time the author had unbias opinion of Windows and Mac OS X. As he said PC hardware is upgraded every 3 years time and that is true., I had a celeron 300mhz processor with 128 mb ram with 10gb harddisk bought 3 years back. At that time i was using Win98se(one of the worst operating system i used in my life). When Win XP came i decided to upgrade my hardware to match its performance. I upgraded to P4 1.8Ghz processor with 256 mb ram and additional 20GB hardisk.As for now i will not upgrade my hardware for a long time,as my winXp is very stable to use. And after reading this article whether i will shift to Apple hardware or Mac OS X, Definitly Not!. The biggest problem facing Mac OS X is availability of Apple hardware, price comes later and If u a living in Asian country then the ratio of Apple and Windows hardware is 1 : 10. Definitely I would love to use Mac OS X. But looking at cost, availability and support i am most happy with my PC and Windows XP.
I liked this:
“Microsoft has proven throughout it’s history, that technical superiority cannot beat the marketing might combined with a product that is just good enough.”
I think that linux is becoming just good enough to desktop use. I think that linux only needs more marketing to surpass Windows and MacOS X…
And I’ve got to say that it is simply amazing. I was a Systems Admin working on Novell and NT 4.0 and 2k systems as well as Mac based networks and built one of the first Mac-based render farms. All I can say about this laptop is WOW! I have looked and test drove other laptops and simply, they don’t come close. The price is only one factor. MacOS X on a laptop is simply amazing. What surprised me most is that I am actually an order of magnitude faster at troubleshooting this machine than I am at OS 9 and I know I am an expert in that. Sure, I used MacOS X in its public beta stage, but hadn’t really seen it since then (my other Mac is a PowerCenter120 clone bought in 1996 and still going strong). MacOS X is that easy. Most things are centrally located in one of 3 locations, so tracking down where changes need to be made is a cinch.
Frankly, the only thing that worries me about this machine is that my wife will finally get her hands on it and won’t give it back! I mean, it maximizes my cable connection (regularly 200+KB/s), has an easy to understand file structure once you spend a little time with it and I have NEVER had such an easy time installing system updates and upgrades. The programs people are making for it, like Watson are simply so amazing that I have rediscovered my love of computing. The iApps are stunning. Quartz Extreme is simply marvelous. Gates is right to copy that idea for Longhorn.
Anyway, based on software, hardware, ease of use, ROI and TCO, this laptop is a Grand Slam and leaves its PC brethren in the dust.
I also have a 17″ Pbook, and havent been happier.
even my PC zealot friends dont try to make cracks at it.
I run VPC for my engineering software at school, and that works flawlessly. The only thing i am still waiting for is Outlook for OS X, because the mail server here is outlook. It is SUPPOSED to be out this summer, which will complete the package.
I cant even image what i would want (other than new iapp versions) in Panther. That is how good OS X is. Imagine trying to make a wishlist of things you want for the next OS, and all you can come up with is new versions of iapps and more consistant windows networking.
On another note, i think it may be too late for apple to regain marketshare. Its not that i think apple will go under, its that they are fighting a steep uphill battle from now on. When Microsoft won its antitrust case, it basically opened the gates for them to finish off the rest of the commercial OS market. Although Linux might be considered a comercial OS, i would put it more in the same category as OpenBe and MorphOS and such. Linux will definately grow, and with enough developement, may create some problems for microsoft on the x86 platform.
Just a question for the OS X users out there … what is the point of the button in the upper right corner of OS X windows. I mean, I know it hides the toolbars, but what good is that? I’ve never once had a use for it and don’t see why they felt it necessary to make it do that instead of something useful like windowshading (as in OS 9).
It’s actually pretty useful, since it collapses all toolbars in a window in most cases. It’s something I use quite a bit when web browsing, or coding.
I don’t know about you, but I like to use toolbars when web browsing…
For example, my company is going to buy about 800 desktops this year…just normal replacement. The author’s figures show about a 600/mid-range machine price difference. That comes to nearly $500,000 in cost savings. Unless you are a dedicated Apple shop, that speaks more loudly than anything else.
With Windows you also get for free all those fantastic neat and creative viruses and security vulnerabilities. Yippee. Since I’m the network administrator here at work, I get more work trying to make sure those little buggers don’t do little things like destroy all our business records.
My XP box here at work has 169 Quarantined viruses on it just from our email for the last couple of months (we get about 4 a day).
Macs are lacking here. I have only gotten 2 viruses in the last 10 years. I don’t even currently own or use virus protection software for my PowerBook. (note: I will once Norton 8 comes out that filters out Windows viruses as well as the few mac viruses).
-tink
And has on the last two computers on which I’ve used it (a Dell laptop and a no-name desktop). I wouldn’t give OSX any points there, except that it might be a tiny bit faster waking up.
For example, my company is going to buy about 800 desktops this year…just normal replacement. The author’s figures show about a $600/mid-range machine price difference. That comes to nearly $500,000 in cost savings. Unless you are a dedicated Apple shop, that speaks more loudly than anything else.
This is typical of regular business practise. Go with the cheap. However, for this amount of windows machines they probably will need an IT support dept around 25 people, to get rid of virus attacks, BSOD, upgrades, et caetera. Turn these 800 desktop to macs and the IT support personnel can go down to 10 (just the good number to play UT on a lan during work hours). Now compute the yearly salary of decent IT support personnel and multiply by the number of years these dektops are planned to last (and given current machine performance for office apps, these machines should probably last forever :-).
Why do people insist on comparing the Inspiron line to the Powerbooks?
Come on! 3 hour battery and 7.8 lbs compared to 4.5+ hours and 5.4 lbs.
As a laptop user, I would give this to the iBook on battery life, but being as I’m trying to refrain from a bias, I’m giving this to the Windows side on price.
What? If you’re trying to make a fair comparison how about comparing similar systems? Battery life and weight are issues for laptops. People just don’t get it….
It’s alright that he knocks the desktops around because that’s pretty much fact. But he shows that he’s totally clueless when it comes to laptops.
First, I didn’t realize companies still actually bought hardware. I thought everyone rented?
Second, it would be really interesting to see an IT cost comparison between XP and OS X. $500,000 may sound like alot but it would only pay for probably 2 IT people for the expected life of the computers (3 years). Do you think using OS X machines could save 2 admins over using XP boxes? Interesting to think about.
Of course you could always do like they do at my current workplace and just ignore all that “admin” stuff like security patches and upgrades (yeah, Slammer from a laptop took us down hard). It’s all about the backups!
Why do people insist on comparing the Inspiron line to the Powerbooks?
Come on! 3 hour battery and 7.8 lbs compared to 4.5+ hours and 5.4 lbs.
As a laptop user, I would give this to the iBook on battery life, but being as I’m trying to refrain from a bias, I’m giving this to the Windows side on price.
What? If you’re trying to make a fair comparison how about comparing similar systems? Battery life and weight are issues for laptops. People just don’t get it….
It’s alright that he knocks the desktops around because that’s pretty much fact. But he shows that he’s totally clueless when it comes to laptops.
considering that I don’t use a desktop at all anymore, I’d say that battery life means alot to me, hence the comment that battery life does win serious points with me, but most laptops aren’t used in battery environments that often. Most are merely portable desktops, where the go from desk at work to desk at home, with power at both ends. Only true road warriors view battery as a serious balance against cost. After all, Toshiba seems to think that a 9.8 pound laptop with a 1.2 hour battery life is acceptable, and they sell alot of those Satellite behemoths.
This is the reason behind going with price in that case. Secondary to that is the fact that Dell has a revolving special that places a second Lith-Ion battery in the package for no cost. That second battery adds weight, but pushes the battery life over the iBook and PowerBook.
And I’ve got to say that it is simply amazing. I was a Systems Admin working on constructing Macintosh customized chips from raw sand. All I can say about this laptop is WOW! I have looked and test drove [sic] other laptops and simply, they don’t come close. The price is only one factor. Windows on a laptop is simply amazing. What surprised me most is that I actually don’t get to do a whole lot of troubleshooting on Windows 2000. I just run programs. I surf the Web; I read e-mail; I take notes on the road. I take it on the road because it weighs 3.5 pounds and gets 5 hours of battery life. A second battery would give me 10+ hours.
I kept my last laptop (a Sony Z505 with Windows 98) for 3 years, until it broke. I hope to keep this one just as long. Anyway, based on software, hardware, ease of use, ROI and TCO, this laptop is a Grand Slam and leaves its Mac brethren in the dust.
not a noteworthy attempt…
I keep posting this whenever XP comments come in. I can make XP forget how to network so darn easy (like it really new how in the first place). Using XP professional, I dont really bring down the system, but Networking goes south. XP really is a major annoyance to me, particualarly having to tweak it so much to stop all the damn reporting to MS.
On the other hand, I would like to spend some time with OSX. I actually have always hated Apples. The OS makes no sense to me at all (last one I used was OS 9 on a laptop I have). I found it so counter intuitive that I am always ready to pull my hair out using it. No, I dont come from a MS users point of view on that, I have used many OS’s before. But I am at least saying I am willing to try.
I use Linux. I like it. I have problems with it, but I eventually sort it out. Currently, its got the best software packages avialable for the price. SMILE!
It seems I misread article, ooppppsss
Ironically, I switched from MacOS to Windows for my own use *because* of the development environment, so I find his comments a little weird. I’m a commercial Mac app developer and I dread coming to work each day because of the endless misery having to deal with Classic, Carbon and Cocoa all mixed together – having to support MacOS 8.6 all the way to MacOS X 10.2.5 and all the ones between – can be. Codewarrior has become flakey and erratic. Application Builder on MacOS X is just barely integrated and difficult to use.
Microsoft’s VS.NET 2002 and 2003 are true joys – tightly integrated and easy to use and for the most part, as long as I stick to Win32 or .NET, my code works on all Windows variations. In fact, as a lark, I’m duplicating all of Aqua as .NET controls just to prove it can be done and that you don’t really need the horsepower Apple wants us to thing we need. (And yes, it’s working… even the ripply animated bits and translucent parts… Maybe I should port iTunes before they pick someone to write it…
But right there is the core problem with any kind of comparision like this. If it’s just one guy’s experience, it’s just not going to be meaningful for a wide range of people.
Case in point, he argues that PCs have a two year life span while Macs have a three year life span. Well, I don’t know where he works, but at most places I’ve worked the Macs AND PCs have ‘lifespans until they die’, which can be easily four to five years. When a worker gets a new machine, the old one isn’t just thrown away, it gets cycled down.
Moreover, he neglects a real cost saving on the PC side for which there really isn’t an equivalent on the Mac. Again, most of the places I’ve worked (and that’s big companies like RSA and Seagate) don’t go to IBM, Dell HP/Compaq to buy most of their computers: they go to ‘white box’ local companies. Only the execs get brand names.
The reason? Twofold: whitebox PCs can be custom built inexpensively, and when something goes wrong, you just replace the part – so you can carry an inhouse set of replacements. When the motherboard goes obsolete, you replace the motherboard, which costs less than $200 in most cases.
The only time you get hit with a real major expense is when there’s a core change in technology – like going from Pentium III to Pentium 4, which changed the pinouts on the CPU and required a change from SDRAM to DDR, but that’s only because you have to buy a new CPU or memory. Typically everything else in the box is compatible.
That means that upgrade costs can be spread out over far more than the lifespan of a Mac, which typically is an all or nothing upgrade.
I’m not going to dive too deeply into user experience here – MacOS 9 was the last version of MacOS that has been seriously and professionally analysed for user experience. All I’ve seen for XP and X are anectodal reports. My own experience is that if you’re a MacOS 9 user, you’ll find Windows XP more familiar than MacOS X, but if you’re starting from scratch, then X and XP each have their own advantages and you’ll have to decide which are more important.
But in the long run, like it or not, the similarities between MacOS and WinOS grow larger and larger with each release and the differences become more trivial and preferential.
Personally, I think it’s time to give up this computer pissing war, use whatever you like and stop trying to convince people that your solution is better. After a while it starts to sound like you’re trying to convince yourself.
btw> is that IBM only produce new powerpc chip for Apple only? or they also wanna create new line of workstation on it? would they ask microsoft to port XP for it?
Case in point, he argues that PCs have a two year life span while Macs have a three year life span. Well, I don’t know where he works, but at most places I’ve worked the Macs AND PCs have ‘lifespans until they die’, which can be easily four to five years. When a worker gets a new machine, the old one isn’t just thrown away, it gets cycled down.
I’m glad someone finally brought up this point, as well as the point about single-part replacement. I may have had approximately 5 computers in the last 5 years, but only the first one was built all at once. Even then, I spread the cost over 3 or 4 months by buying parts as I could afford them (starting with the parts least likely to go down in price, buying the CPU and RAM last for about $400 less than they would’ve cost when I bought the monitor and case at the start). The most I’ve spent on a computer at one time was $800, and that was the monitor and case (totalling everything together that first computer was very expensive, but then the video cards alone were ~$800 (3 cards not including a DVD decoder card added on much later)).
In 5 years I’ve had 4 CPUs (one of which was damaged in a move), 4 motherboards, 4 cases (only because I don’t like removing motherboards from cases, only one of those cases was a required upgrade, for the latest CPU/motherboard upgrade), a dozen or so video cards (I’ve slowed down in the last 2 years on video cards because they’ve gotten to the point that games aren’t keeping up), a half dozen hard drives (most of which are still in use in other computers, though one of the first 2 drives I owned bit the dust about a year ago), a half dozen sound cards (SB PCI 64,128, 256, Live, Audigy2, and Diamond MX300 (which was the best of them, but is mostly unsupported in 2k/xp so it’s in another system I use mostly for trying new OSs)). There’s probably a lot I’m forgetting, but I am still using the same floppy drive I bought 5 years ago, and the same network card I bought 4 years ago (an Intel card to replace the cheap card I bought the year before). I have friends and family with computers built from my upgrade fallout, and a complete second computer built from a motherboard I haven’t brought myself to part with (because it’s the only computer part I’ve ever bought that went up in price after I bought it without it having been on sale, and it’s hard to justify getting what it’s worth from people that will never use a SCSI drive) and various other spare parts (including a 500 MHz P3 I got from a friend in trade for a video card). If I project my spending out another year (in which I expect to buy a new sound card, hard drive, and maybe a video card) to get to 6 years, I still don’t expect to have spent enough money for 2 Macs at a level equivalent to where my computers were at the first purchase and 3 or 4 year marks. My initial computer most likely cost more than a single Mac, but it’s unlikely that I could’ve purchased a Mac over a 4 month period without credit (and I had a $500 credit limit at the time, none of the computer I bought ended up on there, either; besides, most of the local computer stores discount for cash).
This is typical of regular business practise. Go with the cheap. However, for this amount of windows machines they probably will need an IT support dept around 25 people, to get rid of virus attacks, BSOD, upgrades, et caetera. Turn these 800 desktop to macs and the IT support personnel can go down to 10 (just the good number to play UT on a lan during work hours). Now compute the yearly salary of decent IT support personnel and multiply by the number of years these dektops are planned to last (and given current machine performance for office apps, these machines should probably last forever :-).
I see people tout these kind of numbers all the time and wonder if they’ve ever actually worked in a place like this. A few years back I worked in a mostly pure MS organization (the occasional unix or novell box running some legacy app), about 1200 workstations, maybe 50 or 60 servers, over 12 sites, running mail, fileserving, the typical stuff, plus a custom vertical market app that added SQL Server boxes, and most of the users had. The IS dept had 4 techs, a DBA, and 3 part time people to answer the phone (I think only 2 were ever on duty). So 8 FTEs for 1250 machines and 1200 users. They provided windows, office, the vertical market app support, training, and deployment. So I wonder, does everyone else just hire stupid and/or lazy IT people, or is this just a number pulled out of the air?
[i] Case in point, he argues that PCs have a two year life span while Macs have a three year life span. Well, I don’t know where he works, but at most places I’ve worked the Macs AND PCs have ‘lifespans until they die’, which can be easily four to five years. When a worker gets a new machine, the old one isn’t just thrown away, it gets cycled down. [i]
Have to agree with you there, as I sit hear at work typing from my 4 year old PIII-500 desktop, next to all my office mates also on 4 year desktops or 4 year old PII-366 laptops.
So I wonder, does everyone else just hire stupid and/or lazy IT people, or is this just a number pulled out of the air?
They’re probably doing the ‘get rid of the virus attacks’ thing manually. That’s about the only way I can think of to justify 25 people to support 800 workstations, unless 24 of them are incompetant (but then, if they’re manually removing viruses from workstations then I guess they’re all somewhat incompetant as IT people, though probably pretty competant computer users overall). Most people don’t even contact support if they get a BSOD, though if they did it could probably stop being a problem if support can narrow down the hardware/driver problem that is most likely causing it. Viruses are filtered by the email server, and current versions of Outlook (in the last 2-3 years) block most file types that can carry a virus in the first place. Upgrades can be automated until they involve hardware, in which case many shops will simply replace the workstation and upgrade the previous workstation off-site (or at least away from the desktop).
The biggest problem in Linux is the kernel. The Linux kernel was designed by total amateur. Kernel development should be done by professionals, not amateurs like Torvalds. Now the everybody think’s he’s a great kernel guru. In reality he doesn’t even know what he’s talking about.
Example: Torvald’s comments on Mach kernel were based on the over 10 years old argue with Andrew Tanenbaum and they had nothing to do with kernel used in Mac OS X. It’s NOT a microkernel. Why people have to critize stuff they don’t understand or know about! Learn the facts and understand them before you start making comments.
Finally, Linux is NOT operating system. It’s just a kernel. Everything else has been “stolen” from the GNU project. Having just a plain kernel doesn’t take you very far.
It is true that many laptops are simply portable desktops. But when doing a comparison you should consider the use of the product in mind. If someone wants to do a truly fair comparison then they should do TWO laptop comparisons. One for actual “laptops” and another for “desktops with handles”.
As this writer says:
As a laptop user, I would give this to the iBook on battery life, but being as I’m trying to refrain from a bias, I’m giving this to the Windows side on price.
How is ignoring a major design feature that many people require refraining from bias? He even titles the section On the Road.
This wasn’t the first writer that just ignored the weight and battery issues and compared a light, long-lasting Apple with a monster from Dell or some other PC manufacturer. Well, of course the Dell is going to come out shining. I could similarly write a review and say, “The Dell has a larger screen and DVD player but I like to watch movies on my laptop. So, to refrain from bias I am going to ignore those features and give this to the iBook because it’s smaller and lighter.” That would be just plain stupid but that’s exactly what this author did.
Peter, have you actually used a Mac laptop extensively or are you just so happy with your PC that you assume the Mac must suck?
That would be like me saying, “My wife is so wonderful that your wife *must* be a dud.”
I can see how the comparisons with P4 vs. G4 desktops were right on the money but I feel that the PowerBooks and iBoooks are a good value, especially the PowerBooks which basically use a desktop processor.
Weight should have been factored in. I don’t know a mobile user that favors a heavier and bulkier laptop regardless of the platform.
I don’t see how the PowerBook 17″ versus the Dell Inspiron 8500 lost. If you are willing to go to the $3K pricepoint for a laptop then cost is not a major issue. Its like deciding to get cloth seats on a BMW 7 series because the leather costs too much.
The PowerBook gets you a 17″ Cinema display, bigger HD, slot loading DVD-R/CDRW, backlit keyboard, gig ethernet, 802.11b/g and a lot of multimedia software. All of which are extra or difficult to impossible to add on the PC.
As far as processor goes, you will never see a P4 tested against a G4 with the P4 using DDR memory. The G4 in the PowerBook is a full desktop processor, the mobile P4 is not even close in performance to a desktop P4 and factor in using DDR memory which is NOT optimal for the P4.
The PowerBook gets you a 17″ Cinema display, bigger HD, slot loading DVD-R/CDRW, backlit keyboard, gig ethernet, 802.11b/g and a lot of multimedia software. All of which are extra or difficult to impossible to add on the PC.
You know, I would love to have a 17″ PowerBook, and I can certainly understand the pricepoint that it’s at (at least right now, in 6 months, though, I expect that it’ll be nearly the same price, and that will be somewhat disappointing). However, it bothers me when people try to justify the expense of Mac hardware with some of these items (even moreso on the desktops than on the laptops, though). If I don’t want 802.11(b or g), or GigE, and I don’t use the multimedia software in any capacity beyond what I use Windows Media Player for, there’s no real added value.
I priced out a 17″ PowerBook today, for my needs, and ended up adding the AirPort unit just for the hell of it (and really, once you’re spending 3500, what’s 80 or so?), and even with a small number of fairly minor additions (support, extra ac adapter, extra battery, AirPort, case, I’m pretty sure I didn’t add the RAM upgrade because it was outrageous, but Id have to double-check the price) it came out to $4500, which is basically more money than I’ve spent on anything I own other than my car (and is more money than I owe on my car). Maybe in a couple of years, or maybe I’ll wait for someone to release a comparable x86 notebook. Realistically the 17″ widescreen high-resolution display is the only selling point, and the majority of the ‘standard’ features are things I can do without (just give me a DVD-ROM and enough CPU + RAM to run things smoothly).
“Peter, have you actually used a Mac laptop extensively or are you just so happy with your PC that you assume the Mac must suck?”
I was commenting on an earlier post, using the exact wording of a Mac zealot, but reversing the computers. If there was an argument I was making, it was that I don’t buy a computer because of the operating system. I buy one based on what it can do. I continue buying a certain operating system family, because of the software I already own.
Macs are fine; Windows machines are fine; Linux machines are fine. Am I happy with my Windows machines? Yes. I like to tinker a bit with hardware. Like others here, my upgrades happen gradually. I tend to end up with machines the way I like them.
The Alt+F4 style of keyboard shortcuts haven’t been the standard since Windows 3.1. They still work, but the “preferred” ones are Ctrl+W, etc (which are still dumb, but for a different reason).
Btw, for those who don’t know, you have IBM and OS/2 to thank for those RSI-inducing keyboard shortcuts like Alt+F4 and Ctrl+Ins, not Microsoft.
Ctrl+W may be the standard, but it’s now displayed by the user interface, and therefore, it’s inconsistent. For grins, hit Alt+Spacebar on a Windows machine and notice the documented keyboard shortcuts for the actions in the user interface.
In other words, which is in fact correct and more current?
Dru