The name may read iDVD but you hear I, DVD. I, Movie. I, Photo. The “I” denotes something special, something important, something you should take notice in. The impact is most effective when the product name makes the “i” personal, as in I, Chat for the product iChat. Read the analysis at MacNewsWorld.
Apple’s Interface Strategy: Building on the Familiar
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
the Mac way of getting things done makes the user feel like he or she has control rather than the computer. Windows wizards seems more like “you cannot do it so I will hold your hand.
in reality, I know that is not what MS is doing, the developers are just lazy and do not want to set it up so that a user can easily set up the program. a wizard is easier to make for the developers, and it makes it easy on the user, but at the cost of feeling like you are using the computer.
Wow. Wait until they try the Pro line. The UI gap between Apple’s Pro apps and the competitors is far larger than between it’s iApps and Windows basic apps.
I never thought of it, but I agree too. I do think a wizard does have its place, but much more rarely. It wouldn’t be a bad deal to have one in the “help” menu or “file” menu, though.
Apple’s naming IS much better. Microsoft’s branding and nameing is quite cumbersome. I’m sure that is at least a small reason that Apple is seen as much more stylish.
It has nothing to do with the user or any focus on the user doing what they want. All that is marketing, which is what the “i” was all about. When the iMac came out, it was all about Internet everything. just like the “e” prefix and all the other stupid prefixes that have come and gone such as “cyber,” “Pro,” “Hyper” and so on.
The reason it was used in the first place and the effect it is having now don’t have to be related.
I agree with Jace as to the reason the “i” and “e” were initially used, although I also think the article and gamma make interesting points.
iAgree it is just “i” marketing.
Using both WinXP & OSX daily, the throughput on the Mac is just plain quicker with fewer motions = net productivity gain for me on my general purpose work. XP gets used for only 1 program doing 3D solids drawings on SolidWorks (which keeps XP free of bugs since it NEVER goes on the Internet).
In addition, I have yet to crash OSX. Closest thing yet is an application which quit.
XP just quit 30 minutes ago terminatting everything somewhat gracefully, though losing open document changes, because it claimed an external device had ceased to work (probably the Digital Phone Line it detects at startup which is not and has never been connected, nor has it ever been connected to a regular RJ-11 either).
Training & Support costs can totally overshadow hardware costs over time, and I think people are starting to realize, with the help of worms, trojans, viruses, and similar malware, that Mac has won the ease of use & reliability games.
Now it is up to Apple marketing to get their hind end in gear and make hay. They have at least 3 years before MS can probably get Longhorn out, and Linux and Mac need to move into overdrive.
Bo
an interesting take…
personally I’ve always found the difference between the Apple and MS naming conventions somewhat amusing. There’s a part of me that’s always felt that both are a subtle references to each respective company’s founding father’s psyche: the “i” in the iApps being a subconscious nod to Jobs and his tremendous ego and the “my” in “My Computer” or “My Documents” a reference to Bill’s belief that everything belongs to him. Much like the bleating of a 2 year old: “MINE! MINE! MINE!”
Well, whatever, with this article.
The thing I like is how Apple releases stuff that’s just awe-inspiring… or they put out stuff that I see as worthless or eye-candy, only to soon find out how great this new feature is. Expose comes to mind.
Apple’s ability to tell me what I need, and be right again and again, keeps me a loyal customer. In fact, my new dual G5 should be arriving at my home in about 30 minutes via FedEx.
OSX reminds me of OS 2 Warp. Ahead of its time, without any serious technical marketing. They should market to IT not just the consumer. IT managers think OS X is a tinker toy. They don’t realise that OS X was the bases for one of the top 3 supercomputers in the world.
I have demonstrated OS X to some of my coworkers, the superior command line (DOS Hmmph!), WYSIWYG PDF basic GUI (great for desktop publishing), BSD/Linux based software (via Fink), SAMBA, Apache, et cetra. and they basically said, “I can’t wait until windows does that!”.
Several things come to mind: the book I, Claudius, the “i” as statement of self, of something important. The name might read iDVD but you hear I, DVD. I, Movie. I, Photo. The “i” denotes something special, something important, something you should take notice of. The impact is most effective when the product name makes the “i” personal, as in I, Chat for the product iChat.
Yew, but only for english speaking customers. I am speaking english so well that some people i’ve met didn’t realize it’s not my native language, but when i hear “i chat”, the first thing i’m thinking of is a certain Apple application – even though i don’t own a mac (yet).
However, i find all marketing names ridiculous. Good names for applications tell what the applications do, and don’t have any additional “waste” in the name (like an “i”). GNOME comes to mind (with its “Image Viewer”, “Web Browser”, and so on), or the BeOS with its unique yet clear names, like ShowImage.
Regarding the whole wizard stuff, that’s why i wouldn’t even use Windows any more even if it was stable, secure and wouldn’t have any spyware in it.
Luckily, there are a number operating systems or desktop environments who aim to make it “just work”, while at the same time putting the computer under your control. Again, BeOS / Haiku comes to mind.
except the names of the iLife apps DO have names that tell what they do.
iChat. and IM program
iMovie: a movie editing program
iDVD: a DVD authoring program
iphoto: a photo editing and database program
GarageBand: a music program
now, you could do it so that it is even more descriptive, but then it is boring and uninteresting.
i dont give a shit about mac or apple in the software department. most of the software while good is locked to a cookiecutter os on top of a cookiecutter computer. when can i buy my own set of hardware, put it together and then install osx (or whatever else i want) on top of that? sure i can buy a complete mac and install linux afterwards but i can buy all the parts of a intel or amd box and then install linux on top of that. try the same ting with with mac hardware and boom your faced with exclusive supplyer contracts and so on from here on to the apple HQ. and when will os x get the flexibility shown in kde and gnome? its still saying that this way is the best way to use a computer, period! hello, even windows is more flexible. just look at what people can pull of useing litestep and similar on that os.
i dont care about wizards, they are nice to use, just like following a step for step guide as your sure you get all the options correct. sure its fun playing around with options left right and center (that one of the things that makes linux so fun, nothing is set in stone) but if your want the job done and done right the first time a good wizards is the best way to do it, but only for one of tasks like first time configurations and similar.
hobgoblin, you sound like the typical hardware lover. I hope you get a job working with hardware, because with an attitude like that you won’t be very productive on the software side if you ever need to do anything more than configuration and email.
In Sweden it is somewhat risky to rely on non-official spelling of your trademarks. Many newspapers write trademarks using the official grammar rules, thus iPhoto becomes Iphoto according to these rules. (The first letter in a name should be a capital one, followed by small ones. Abbreviations that don’t sound like a single word are written in capitals only.)
More examples:
IKEA –> Ikéa (it is pronounced as a single word)
iDVD –> IDVD(every letter is pronounced)
This can be confusing to consumers. What is an Emac (pronounced EHM-ac)? A new kind of soda? Oh, you mean an eMac (EE-makh)! Another example is the iPod (I-podh) vs Ipod (EEP-hodd).
Are there similar grammar rules in English?
There are similar rules but once something becomes commonplace they are ignored/become an excepetion. Especially with tech related words.
maybe i am, but personaly i just like being able to fix things myself without haveing to erly on some expensive helpdesk.
or maybe its just the geek in me:)
oh and im quite effective with software after i have gotten it tuned just the way i like it
a computer should form to my needs, not have me form to its limitations 
i can and have put together many machines myself, yet i’m still buying a powermac even though it “locks me in” and i “can’t configure it”. macs are more productive for getting work done, and are a pleasure to use. if you’re more productive, you can make more money thus paying for that more expensive hardware.
i even administrate several gentoo servers and have a wintendo at home, yet you can pry my powerbook from my cold dead hands when it comes to getting work done without the operating system getting in the way.
One could make a completely opposite argument that a computer should be installed in usable form out of the box without requiring you to tinker around fixing the interface to suit tastes, but have a usable interface convention that is as close to second nature out of the box as possible. A well designed interface “works” and doesn’t require tweaking, placement, and/or dissecting; only minor personalization is necessary to make it homey.
One reason Linux struggles to get to the desktop (consumer) is simply because of the lack of UI consistency, not just between builds, but also for having umpteen window managers, various x11 themes, and because of that… has nothing for a more average end-user to cling to for safety. Keeping things as consistent as possible, as well as regimented (giving the end-user a structure to work within by default that’s expansive, i.e. Apple with a single button mouse, upgradable to 2, 3, 4, etc.), assists in providing a user interface can be as much or more a positive as a negative if you really think about it.
The Mac offers all of the positives of a Linux/Unix-style underpinning/foundation, without having to configure 30,000 different interface elements to make it usable. Even then, unless you’re an IT junkie or a GNU software supporter, there’s little usable for the casual end-user out of the box that is viewed as a “STANDARD”. GIMP does the task for what most Linux users do, but it’s not remotely usable compared to it’s competition. You’re not going to see desktop publication hit Linux anytime soon, video editing is doubtful on the level that it is on the Mac and Windows, and even the lack of native in-system support for Vector SIMD units cripples Linux; yes it’s stable and supports every piece of hardware known to man… but it doesn’t maximize itself with GPU’s (Quartz Extreme-style), nor does it support stuff like AltiVec, MMX, 3Dnow, etc.
Thinking Linux’s dominance is inevitable, is merely a techhead missing the boat. I’m very computer literate myself, but I’m not delusional in thinking that Linux is going to magically end up on the desktop without giving up some of what appeals most to it’s diehard techies. Don’t fall into the Slashdot Syndrome… not everyone nor will anyone ever magically pop-up with the computer knowledge of a computer science IT Geek. The days of everyone owning a computer and programming for it were left behind after the BASIC computer era. There’s still people that struggle on Macs even trying to figure out how to work a single button mouse for Christ’s sakes! ::laughing:: Linux everywhere just isn’t happening unless it embraces dumbing itself down and alienating it’s staunch geek userbase or fragmenting into Linux for Geeks, Linux for Intermediates, and Linux for Dummies.
Linux’s flexibility is also it’s curse, it’s expansiveness makes it have strengths in areas like IT where techies will tweak and fiddle it in an environment that it fits like a glove in. That’s where it’s positive and where it will *OWN* most other operating systems. Don’t take it as me downing Linux, in honesty… it’s a very powerful and well conceived OS for what it’s target market is, and that’s not a “TINY” piece of the pie in any sense. For an Apple or MS to step into the Linux segment and win, it’ll be hard for the same reasons it’ll be tough for Linux to defeat Apple and Microsoft in their strongholds.
Another downside of Linux trying to get bigger…
Linux has a very small profitability scale based on the OS alone, and the only people making $ on Linux are those selling hardware. Very few buy into or want to buy into Redhat or SuSe or Debian because Linux’s allure is the “free” and open nature of the code under GNU. Why buy something pre-packaged because if you’re armed with a compiler or fast internet, you can just download it? It’s hard for companies like these to make significant $ to go out and beat an Apple or MS. Even most of the apps. of accord are GNU-licensed, making their profitability hard. I can see Apple or Microsoft reaping Linux for their own gain (much as IBM does while pushing it’s own proprietary apps. on top) at some point (although doubtful with Darwin on Apple’s side), but only as the basis for something that doesn’t really do anything to make Linux any better. Basically I see Linux as the foundation under a proprietary OS & GUI for the desktop, and nothing more.
In most other areas for Linux though, it’s a fish out of water, and it’s going to be “VERY” hard for it to reach into these other segments without getting the “Killer Apps” to sway users over, and to promote a standardized user interface guideline to make those apps. usable and consistent within the system UI.
Once it does that… it’ll lose it’s appeal to people like you unless it retains the flexibility to be freeform. That freeform nature defeats the ability of one casual/novice Linux user to get things done on another’s Linux-installed computer unless they’re the infinite overlord of computer operation on any platform, and most casual users are not (hence AOL’s large installed base on dial-up is centered around ease of use to a mind-numbing level). At which point, if you have the savvy to use anything thrown out in front of you because of your wealth of knowledge… it typically becomes less about how the UI is configured, it’s more about knowing how to exploit whatever is thrown at you.
I like Linux for what it does, but be real. Until it changes to appeal to the masses out of the box, it’ll never get the draw that the Mac/PC does for the consumer or creative desktop markets. It’s the future Enterprise OS of accord, likely kicking MS out of a segment they were previously looking at gunning Sun down in. Yet beyond that… Linux’s future is pretty sketchy unless it can create some standards. That’ll likely require Linux software writers creating software for Windows and Mac that is superior to what’s already out there. Without that penetration, the vast majority won’t give Linux the time of day.
“Linux for Geeks, Linux for Intermediates, and Linux for Dummies”
That’s the one I see happening. Linux for Dummies being made soley by one distributor so they are all the same, Linux for Intermediates being more configurable (choose your own window manager, access to a terminal, that stuff) which would be aimed at pro users (if/when Linux gets media creation apps) and also aimed at developers, and then Linux for Geeks being the ultimate configurable server OS.
You’re right on the money though. Linux is being pushed and pulled in different ways. It’s being pushed on the desktop, but being pulled back by it’s userbase who don’t want to lose what they’ve got. Then you’ve also got different distros trying all kinds of approaches, which confuses the hell out of prospective users who are stuck thinking they can only have thigns one way, which in part they are right. Windows isn’t staying so big because of MS’s business practices, it’s staying big because it standardized everything down to the smallest detail. People simply don’t want to use computers in the first place, so having to figure out things they don’t want to know about in the first place is out of the question.
I use both OS X and Win XP on a daily baises. OS X is just more productive and gets out of the compared to XP. I spend to much time fixing window problems in XP from worms to trying to find fixes and answers why xp wont import video from my camcorder through firewire. Crazy xp!
It’s crazy to that that people buy Microsoft products(myself included)when all the software has so many securtiy holes and most of its written from a left-brain design(non-creative, linear thinking instead of non-linear and intuitive).
the only thing holding back linux is in reality the fact that people dont know about it or dont know how to install a os. i know i said i like to build a box myself but i allso see that to make a os become known and used you have to sell computer that have it preinstalled so that they new user can just plug the keyboard, mouse, screen and power into it (unless your useing a design like the imac that is).
ui design and so on means jack shit to a normal user as long as they get a os that does what they want it to do.
being productive on mac vs being productive on anything else i dont belive as you cant put it down in numbers. people are allways more productive in the enviroment where they know where everything is so if someone have spent all day useing a linux box with the software that it supplys i would belive he could be just as productive as any mac user one a mac.
as for linux being pulled in all directions, thats just what linux is about. screw the old hats, they can have theyre slack intalls (the latest came out just now). but that does not say that someone cant create a distro that works for new or casual users. mac and windows are molds that the user have to fit into. linux as a os is like clay that forms around the user.
if someone shows up and whats to use your computer for a job then give him a new login with default gnome or kde of choice. forget about the one computer, one user, one desktop metahpor that is the legacy of windows and mac, on linux one user on the computer run blackbox, a diffrent can run kde, and someone else can again use afterstep/windowmaker/enlightenment/gnome/xfce/younameit.
linux’s flexibility is only a curse to the ones that are so used to a box that they cant wthink outside of it:) and i thought mac users where creative, sounds more like brainwased style zealots to me:)
if you forget your apple ID passwort and wanna retrieve it, you get to a page called iForgot
gotta love’it
florian
“linux’s flexibility is only a curse to the ones that are so used to a box that they cant wthink outside of it:)”
That’s exactly the point. Have you met these people that work in offices on Windows all day? If any little thing is different they don’t know what to do. If you sat one of them down in front of Gnome or KDE they would flip and tell you they can’t use it and will refuse to learn because it’s not Windows. Don’t even try something like WindowMaker. Then you have the IT guys that won’t allow any software in the company unless it’s from Microsoft because they feel protected that way. I don’t think they could be more wrong, but that’s the way it is. I have tried it myself. It’s not just Linux either, anything different works. These people flip out when they use OS X because it’s not Windows, and because they don’t like computers in the first place, they will not learn anything new.
“the only thing holding back linux is in reality the fact that people dont know about it or dont know how to install a os”
They know how to install Windows just fine.
“being productive on mac vs being productive on anything else i dont belive as you cant put it down in numbers. people are allways more productive in the enviroment where they know where everything is so if someone have spent all day useing a linux box with the software that it supplys i would belive he could be just as productive as any mac user one a mac.”
Not everything is measurable with numbers. OS X is generally more productive because it stays out of the way of what you are doing. Windows does just the opposite. Getting something done is much quicker when you only have to deal with what you are doing, and not also with the operating system.
any os your familiar with will stay out of your way when you are working. in fact any nicely configured dektop os will stay out of your way if all you do is use the software installed on it and dont try to add something to it yourself.
allso, 99% of the wintel systems that are sold for home use these days are sold with a recovery cd. insert cd, restart box and you are greeted by a one step reinstall/recovery. installign a os from the ground up is something the avarage user is protected from. if a lintel computer came the same way then noone would have to deal with the install there either. in fact its easyer on a lintel box as there the install system of the distro itself supports building up a preset of packages that are to be installed. and you can put the user files on a diffrent partition that dont need to be formated in the event of a os reinstall. problem is that some people would try to reinstall when in fact its the desktop and not the os itself that fails, then the desktop config files of that user would have to be removed/reset.
but anyways, this discussion is getting us nowhere. there will never be one os that will fit everyone on the planet as we are all are bunch of prisoners of habbit. enjoy your mac panther, i will enjoy my homebuilds that run anything:)
“any os your familiar with will stay out of your way when you are working. in fact any nicely configured dektop os will stay out of your way if all you do is use the software installed on it and dont try to add something to it yourself.”
You must not have used XP lately.
“allso, 99% of the wintel systems that are sold for home use these days are sold with a recovery cd. insert cd, restart box and you are greeted by a one step reinstall/recovery.”
And that’s all people who don’t like computers want.
“installign a os from the ground up is something the avarage user is protected from.”
Because there is no reason for it to be such a pain in the ass.
“if a lintel computer came the same way then noone would have to deal with the install there either.”
Until they think they’ve screwed up the system and try to reinstall themselves, as they’ve been told by tech support to do so many times before.
“in fact its easyer on a lintel box as there the install system of the distro itself supports building up a preset of packages that are to be installed.”
Which shows that they can install it if they learn how. But go into any office and ask if they want to learn. They won’t.
“and you can put the user files on a diffrent partition that dont need to be formated in the event of a os reinstall.”
And now you just stepped into territory that’s way to complicated for people who hate computers.
“problem is that some people would try to reinstall when in fact its the desktop and not the os itself that fails, then the desktop config files of that user would have to be removed/reset.”
That all comes down to people not wanting to learn about this stuff.
“but anyways, this discussion is getting us nowhere. there will never be one os that will fit everyone on the planet as we are all are bunch of prisoners of habbit.”
That’s not true at all. Anyone who uses multiple OS’s isn’t a prisoner of habit. Windows has done an excellent job of standardizing everything, no matter how pathetic of an OS it is. The world doesn’t want options and choices, and they don’t like change.
You would never be able to build a home-box as nicely designed as a G5. Therefore I see it as apple doing you a favor by giving you a boxed system.
You may feel a special empowerment by putting your own computer together and trimming 30% of the cost, but you still end up with an ugly hung of junk, and you probably put an expensive amount of man-hours into it. That makes you a hobbyist. Not to mention it is more than likely running either hot or loud.
Please run panther exclusively for a few days- find a friend that has a laptop or something. Then get back us on the topic that the OS limits you. Thanks.
This is just more validation for all the Krazy KDE application names.
All of you critics… and other gnomes… always have a KFieldDay whenever a new app is announced for KDE with the “Oh dear God… another KDE app with a K name. how will I ever find it in the Kmenu” or “KWhat Kis Kwith Kthe Knaming Kscheme Kfor KDE?”
Now, you see why. It’s all in marketing
“being productive on mac vs being productive on anything else i dont belive as you cant put it down in numbers.”
The numbers are there, but I really could care less, because OS X is way more productive than XP.
“if you forget your apple ID passwort and wanna retrieve it, you get to a page called iForgot
gotta love’it
florian”
If it’s a public computer, go into single user mode and “hack” into the hash and retrieve the admin pass.
One reason Linux struggles to get to the desktop (consumer) is simply because of the lack of UI consistency, not just between builds, but also for having umpteen window managers, various x11 themes, and because of that… has nothing for a more average end-user to cling to for safety. Keeping things as consistent as possible, as well as regimented (giving the end-user a structure to work within by default that’s expansive, i.e. Apple with a single button mouse, upgradable to 2, 3, 4, etc.), assists in providing a user interface can be as much or more a positive as a negative if you really think about it.
False! The only reason Linux struggles on the desktop is because there isn’t a multi-billion dollar marketing budget to fuel its growth in that sector, unlike the luxury afforded its rivalries–Windows XP and Mac OS X. In fact, Mac OS X and Windows XP have as many inconsistent, non-standard UI as does GNU/GUI/Linux, yet their users like yourself seem to overlook such inconsistencies and supposed blasphemous design error.
If UI consistency was the most critical factor responsible for an operating system’s dominance among desktop consumers, undoubtedly computers powered by BeOS and Amiga will be on everyones desk. Heck, perhaps, Apple will likely have 50% of the desktop market share in this imaginary UI consistent desktop utopia.
Fact is not many people know that there are other alternatives to Microsofts’ Windows and Apples’ Macintosh. That is likely to change in the future. In fact, rumors abound that Linux’ market share is slowly overtaking Apples, or tied with it.
Desktop Linux is still at its infancy and spreads largely by grass root marketing. Is it any wonder then that operating systems defended by multi billion dollar marketing departments are more popular than ones without such beneficence?
The Mac offers all of the positives of a Linux/Unix-style underpinning/foundation, without having to configure 30,000 different interface elements to make it usable. Even then, unless you’re an IT junkie or a GNU software supporter, there’s little usable for the casual end-user out of the box that is viewed as a “STANDARD”. GIMP does the task for what most Linux users do, but it’s not remotely usable compared to it’s competition. You’re not going to see desktop publication hit Linux anytime soon, video editing is doubtful on the level that it is on the Mac and Windows, and even the lack of native in-system support for Vector SIMD units cripples Linux; yes it’s stable and supports every piece of hardware known to man… but it doesn’t maximize itself with GPU’s (Quartz Extreme-style), nor does it support stuff like AltiVec, MMX, 3Dnow, etc.
False! Mac offers one and only one advantage over Linux and sometimes Windows XP. It works seamlessly well with Apple certified hardware peripherals—i.e digital cameras, printers, usb kits, external hard drives to mention a few. The GIMP does tasks for not only what most Linux users do, but for what many users do.
The advanced functionality in the GIMP’s competition are used by only a few highly specialized professionals. The keyword here is “few.” The same goes for video editing software. For your average home/desktop user and developer, the GIMP is more than functional. Finally, Linux, or gcc rather, does support flags that activate AltiVec, MMX, 3Dnow and so on.
While I find it hard believe that Linux will be the dominant desktop operating system in this decade, it is noteworthy to emphasize that Linux is being acknowledged and used by many in the academia, which is my opinion is a lot more important than the casual end user market.
Why so? Well, because while Microsofts and Apple’s greatest assets might be the billions of dollars in cash reserves and whatever they have in their asset section of their balance sheet, Linux’ is human intellect and community. The academia is better suited to provide those resources than the ordinary end user who whines about why GIMP isn’t Photoshop or about how esoteric the command line looks.
At this stage desktop Linux doesn’t need mere end users. Linux needs end users that are contributors and community driven in excitingly unique ways.
“False! The only reason Linux struggles on the desktop is because there isn’t a multi-billion dollar marketing budget to fuel its growth in that sector, unlike the luxury afforded its rivalries–Windows XP and Mac OS X. In fact, Mac OS X and Windows XP have as many inconsistent, non-standard UI as does GNU/GUI/Linux, yet their users like yourself seem to overlook such inconsistencies and supposed blasphemous design error.
If UI consistency was the most critical factor responsible for an operating system’s dominance among desktop consumers, undoubtedly computers powered by BeOS and Amiga will be on everyones desk. Heck, perhaps, Apple will likely have 50% of the desktop market share in this imaginary UI consistent desktop utopia.
Fact is not many people know that there are other alternatives to Microsofts’ Windows and Apples’ Macintosh. That is likely to change in the future. In fact, rumors abound that Linux’ market share is slowly overtaking Apples, or tied with it.
Desktop Linux is still at its infancy and spreads largely by grass root marketing. Is it any wonder then that operating systems defended by multi billion dollar marketing departments are more popular than ones without such beneficence?”
You managed to get two things wrong in big ways there. First, the inconsistent GUI did not refer to a single windows manager being inconsistent with itself, but the fact that there is more than one. Second, marketing is not the biggest factor in OS sales by any means. Microsoft got ahead by many ways I won’t go into right now, but they stay ahead because they have standardized how things work in business. Linux on the other hand has a great weapon that MS doesn’t, it’s cheap.
“False! Mac offers one and only one advantage over Linux and sometimes Windows XP. It works seamlessly well with Apple certified hardware peripherals—i.e digital cameras, printers, usb kits, external hard drives to mention a few.”
I take it you’ve never used OS X then?
“The GIMP does tasks for not only what most Linux users do, but for what many users do. The advanced functionality in the GIMP’s competition are used by only a few highly specialized professionals. The keyword here is “few.” The same goes for video editing software. For your average home/desktop user and developer, the GIMP is more than functional.”
The GIMP is far from being anywhere near commercial image editing apps. It’s obvious it can’t touch Photoshop, but it’s not even a lowly PSP, or my fav, FireWorks. But then again, Linux is also missing very important print related tools, like a good vector application, a good page layout application, and so on. Don’t even get me started on video and media creation.
“Finally, Linux, or gcc rather, does support flags that activate AltiVec, MMX, 3Dnow and so on.”
There’s a difference between supporting and being written for and taken advantage of.
“While I find it hard believe that Linux will be the dominant desktop operating system in this decade, it is noteworthy to emphasize that Linux is being acknowledged and used by many in the academia, which is my opinion is a lot more important than the casual end user market.”
As far as research goes, academia use is great. But it only goes so far. Hell, Xerox never even wanted to make the GUI public.
“Why so? Well, because while Microsofts and Apple’s greatest assets might be the billions of dollars in cash reserves and whatever they have in their asset section of their balance sheet, Linux’ is human intellect and community. The academia is better suited to provide those resources than the ordinary end user who whines about why GIMP isn’t Photoshop or about how esoteric the command line looks.”
Microsofts greatest asset is the IT industry and the decision makers who are afraid of anything without an MS logo. Apple’s greatest assets are it’s developers and designers. Money is just the consequence of those things.
“At this stage desktop Linux doesn’t need mere end users. Linux needs end users that are contributors and community driven in excitingly unique ways.”
Linux needs a lot of both. They need commercial application support to get applications (beyond the most basic) that are on par with everything else. Linux needs to start standardizing how they do things instead of having everyone argue back and forth about everything.
To hell with the OS zealotry comments… (they’re all only valid from one person’s perspective anyway). screwjack’s comment was amusing as hell. Wish I’d thought of that one…