Choosing between Mac OS and Windows
In the wake of the Apple’s announcement of their new computer with Intel Core Duo CPUs - the iMac and the MacBook Pro - at the Steve Jobs Macworld keynote, I’ve seen a few types of comment that don’t make sense to me. The comments seem to be aimed at promoting Windows computers over Mac OS X computers. I’ve listed them below. Am I missing something?
1. “The new MacBook Pro will have battery life problems because of using the Intel Core Duo CPU”
Eh? I thought that Core Duo (Yonah) was the replacement for the Pentium M (current laptop) chip? Regardless, Mac OS and Windows laptops are going to have exactly the same CPUs. So, if there’s to be a battle on battery life, it’s not going to be anything to do with the CPU.
2. “Dual core processors are overkill for laptops”
At the risk of repeating myself, Windows and Mac OS computers are going to have the same CPUs going forward. And by the way, people better start getting used to multi-core processors. The only way CPU performance on any computer is going to increase for the next five years is via a move to multi-core CPUs.
3. “Apple’s hardware is way too expensive”
I just spec’ed a PC that’s broadly equivalent to the entry level new iMac. I couldn’t get it exactly the same (the Dell spec is lower, based on a Dell Dimension E310). The price of the Dell was $1009 cf the iMac price of $1299. Apple’s brands aren’t the cheapest around, it’s true. But it’s clearly not way too expensive. Now that Macs aren’t slow, very few people are going to decide between Mac OS and Windows based on price.
What am I missing? Personally, I think that there isn’t much to choose between Mac OS X and Windows in terms of core capabilities. I don’t understand all the claims that one is intrinsically better than the other.
Given, then, that there are no real differentiators, my preference is to go for the higher-volume platform because it’s better supported in terms of software, hardware, and interoperability. That’s the reason I buy Windows machines over Apple machines (if I want Unix, I use Solaris [and Linux]).
Asam Bashir wrote:
That’s becuase you actually know what you are doing, think for your average user, spyware/adware/virus are real problems, think how much CPU cycles are used for say MacAffee/Spyware Doctor 2005 ect.
Also small learning curves for your average user to get into using iLife and related products…..
Posted 12 Jan 2006 at 12:41 am ¶
Asam Bashir wrote:
Anyway, don’t freak out, have a killer idea for you, market of billions, platform independent, nothing even Apple has thought of, nice Java app for all phones, build in a subscription service even…
Obviously I’ll tell you nothing else till a paper is signed
Posted 12 Jan 2006 at 12:53 am ¶
simon wrote:
Yes - you’re right - spyware/adware/virus are real problems for people. That is a genuine downside to going with “the volume platform”. I don’t think Mac OS X is intrinsically more secure than Windows; it’s just that there are more people writing Malware for Windows. Nevertheless, the malware issue is a good reason for non computer-literate people to choose Mac OS X over Windows.
Posted 12 Jan 2006 at 1:02 am ¶
Asam Bashir wrote:
No, I think you are totally wrong, that’s the myth, reality is Windows is more insecure, full stop.
Do you think there is a more hated brand then Microsoft in the world? People remember these things, they don’t go away, just like virii will always be written for Microsoft….
Posted 12 Jan 2006 at 1:08 am ¶
simon wrote:
If you’re serious about the mobile idea, put a pitch together for your mobile idea, I’ll be more than happy to take a look. Take a look at this first though:
http://blog.guykawasaki.com/2006/01/the_top_ten_lie_1.html
to make sure you don’t do any of these in the pitch! No confidentiality agreements either (sorry!) - you won’t find anyone willing to sign those just for looking at an idea. Building apps for mobile phones that are worth a billion dollars is a tough thing to do. I’ve probably looked at over hundred ideas, and have had just one at that level make it through with no red flags - maximum potential value is around $5B.
Posted 12 Jan 2006 at 1:31 am ¶
Asam Bashir wrote:
You know me Simon, I have ideas, and if I say I have a killer idea with a market of billions that not even Apple has thought of, or is in the process of developing, then I really really really do
Yah, I ain’t pitching nothing till a paper is signed…..
Posted 12 Jan 2006 at 1:37 am ¶
Bazz wrote:
The Mac *is* intrinsically more secure than Windows.
It’s based on unix and if *that* had the security headaches that Windows does, no one would bother with it.
The fact is, that Windows is built on a “perimeter” or External security model. A firewall is a perimeter device - it stops nasties getting in.
However,once something breaks or sneaks through the perimeter, the whole machine is wide open.
Want to store a file in c:\windows\system32? ok, sure.
On the Mac there’s perimeter security also, a built-in firewall. But there is also Internal security. If something sneaks through the firewall on a Mac, ALL it can access is what the user can access which is NOT the system areas. At the very worst, a virus could hose a users area, which is bad enough, but it cannot bring the entire system down.
Want to store a file is /etc? Gimme an admin password, please. No? Sorry.
I use both Windows and Mac OS X and I know which I prefer, and it’s not just the added security.
BAzz
Posted 12 Jan 2006 at 1:39 am ¶
simon wrote:
Bazz, there are security issues on all OS platforms. That’s why people put multiple firewalls and intrusion detection systems on their networks. Aside from the many bugs that are present in al OSes, there are plenty of ways to leave back doors open when setting up Unix machines. And many Unix boxes on networks are set up in such a way as to be open to attacks if network perimeter defences are breached.
The fact is - there is more malware written for Windows than is written for other platforms…
Posted 12 Jan 2006 at 2:01 am ¶
simon wrote:
Asam, it’s not that I don’t believe you! I’m just letting you know what my policy is on confidentiality agreements for “idea” stage stuff. And, to be honest, my companies are better about giving people comfort with CDAs than most. You don’t have to tell me!
However, can I offer a little bit of genuine advice if you’re serious about pursuing this? The bottom line is this: no-one that can help you develop your idea and business will sign a CDA in order to hear what you have to say. Not a one. So, unless you have the resources to develop this idea yourself, you will have to tell people about your idea *without* being under condifentiality.
I understand that you feel protective of your idea; it’s really common for entrepreneurs to feel nervous about disclosing their ideas. But, trust me: the problem you will have won’t be people *stealing* your ideas. The problem you will have is getting anyone to be *interested* in them in the first place.
(See: http://www.psynixis.com/blog/?p=90 )
Posted 12 Jan 2006 at 2:18 am ¶
Asam Bashir wrote:
Hey, its just an idea, I ain’t got time, you want it for Psynixis and develop it or not?
Posted 12 Jan 2006 at 2:20 am ¶
simon wrote:
I’d be interested to hear your idea, of course. Feel free to drop me an e-mail…
Posted 12 Jan 2006 at 2:28 am ¶
Asam Bashir wrote:
Yah, when I’m back in Cambridge, I’ll develop it some more with back up info in the meantime
Posted 12 Jan 2006 at 2:30 am ¶
ex2bot wrote:
I used to think the same thing. Why buy a Mac? Windows machines have a windowing gui and lots more software, better support, etc.
That’s true. But here are some arguments for using Macs which will may have strong appeal for many users.
1. OS X’s GUI is better designed. No speech bubbles popping up all the time. A “Control Panel” with HALF as many “screens” or tabs or whatever you want to call them. Same functionality, half the screens. I counted. I don’t have a life
Just ONE example of the better design.
OS X has had three major revisions since Win XP was released. Each time, the GUI was refined. It went from rough and unfinished to world-class. Without peer.
The gui is aesthetically and functionally superior. If poor aesthetics don’t bother you, you won’t care.
2. Apple’s software is damn good overall. And you get a lot of software with a Mac. You will probably like it very much once you get used to a somewhat different software philosophy. Apple’s software is powerful, but the interfaces are somewhat minimalist. Windows software interfaces look horribly cluttered to me at this point.
3. Much much less threat from malware. No viruses or worms at this time. Except Word macro viruses. A handful of spyware apps.
OS X is/was inherently more secure despite a legion of ignoramuses saying otherwise!! All ports are closed by default! Steve Gibson warned Microsoft of the MESS they were going to create with XP’s open ports. He. was. correct. Yes, SP2 finally plugged the major holes in the sieve.
Research suggests ~80%+ of Windows machines are infested by spyware. True. Sad. The newest stuff is almost impossible to get rid of without breaking the system. ~0% of Macintosh machines are infested by spyware.
-
Some people _should not_ consider Macs. Anyone who doesn’t react well to change will probably not be happy. Macs do not work exactly like Windows. They will do _everything_ a Win XP system will do, often more efficiently. Same functionality. Sometimes there’s a different way of doing it.
Real Estate agents probably shouldn’t. The websites they depend on use ActiveX. That’s a Windows-only technology.
Anyone who uses custom applications developed for Windows shouldn’t. Or Microsoft Access. There’s no OS X version.
Anyone who needs to be very mainstream and who gets upset and embarrassed unless he is doing what everyone else is doing will be upset with OS X.
If you are unwilling to give up certain applications for OS X analogs, maybe you should stick with Windows. But there are many, many excellent software apps for OS X. Check Apple’s site.
I’m an expert user, Windows (until 2002) and OS X. I have only Macs at this point. I have a wireless gyroscopic mouse and keyboard (awesome), a Sanyo projector for movies, close to a dozen reasonably recent games you’ve heard of, two HP printers that work great, I use lots of high quality free software as well as MS Office, Photoshop Elements, Google Earth, etc. Whatever I want, really.
Do I miss anything? Only a handful of legendary games that will likely not make it to the Mac, such as Half-Life 2, GTA, and Deus Ex 2. Of course, my next Intel Mac will run them fine.
For users who really enjoy playing with technology, as I do, you would likely enjoy a Mac mini. You might even decide to use Macs as your primary machines.
ex2bot
Sorry this was so long. I hate long posts. Argh! I hate myself!!
Posted 18 Jan 2006 at 9:42 am ¶
simon wrote:
ex2bot, those are all great points.
Posted 18 Jan 2006 at 2:22 pm ¶