A Growing Mac Community
With each iteration of Mac OS X, more and more Windows users are making the switch to a Mac. You rarely hear people making the switch in the other direction. Most consumers will be happy with the basic iLife, iWork, and Safari setup. Gaming enthusiasts will find that the Mac still lags behind the PC for the latest 3D titles, but many top-tier games such as Call of Duty 4 and StarCraft II are or will be available for the OS X.
In a way, you have to look at the Mac as a closed platform along the lines of Nintendo Wii, PlayStation 3, or Xbox 360. While it’s built using the standard hardware found in traditional PCs, Mac OS X represents a unique computing environment. By paying the Apple tax and giving up some freedom to play in Apple’s sandbox, Mac users enjoy a relative improvement in computing security and a user-experience that is unparalleled. If grandma’s PC is broken, would you trust Geek Squad to fix it for her? Depends on who happens to be working at the Geek Squad. If grandma’s Mac Mini is broken, would you trust the Genius Bar to fix it for her? Absolutely. It’s nothing special—Apple tech support simply has fewer variables to deal with.
Budget-conscious consumers will always find their best deal in a PC. Consumers with task specific goals such as first-person shooter gaming, Adobe Photoshop CS4, or Home Theater PC will still find the PC a superior platform. However, for most home computing (office suite, digital photography, and Internet) and the task-specific goal of digital video, the Mac is the ideal platform for those who can afford it.
How Apple Can Screw Things Up
Apple has done a great job of developing a viable commercially supported desktop operating system. There are thousands of applications that the PC has that the Mac won’t have, but at the end of the day, Apple has a solid platform that meets the needs of most computer users. Better yet, Apple has been able to do this at a premium. It has been able to market its platform as something better than what’s out there as opposed to the “same thing for less money.” In today’s financial crisis, this may actually help Apple remain stable. With healthy profit margins and a track record of efficient budgeting (just look at the cash Apple holds in reserve), it’s possible for Apple to maintain strong sales in 2009.
In a recession, less money is spent on luxury items. With that said, computers are a necessity. Those who just bought a new PC recently won’t switch to a Mac. However, imagine a PC user who was just infected by malware. This PC may be a few years old and “due for a replacement.” The options are to fix the PC by taking it to the local repair shop or getting a new one in order to eliminate the risk that any residual malware is on the PC keeping track of online banking passwords, etc. This is the type of user Apple wants to capture into the Mac world.
Therefore, security remains the critical feature that Apple must maintain. Security is one of the key selling points of Macs today. Exploits for Apple PCs have occurred in local environments, but to date, there hasn’t been a widespread malware attack on OS X users. The general public is savvy to malware, and as long as Apple can maintain the security of OS X against in-the-wild remote exploits, it’ll continue to enjoy strong sales even in an economic recession.
Latest Software News
Latest Software reviews
- 17/01 – In Pictures: Dear Developers, 15 Games Worthy Of A Sequel
- 09/01 – Nokia Lumia 710 Review: Windows Phone 7 On A Budget
- 06/01 – Web Browser Grand Prix VIII: Chrome 16, Firefox 9, And Mac OS X
- 06/12 – Star Wars: The Old Republic: PC Performance, Benchmarked
- 11/11 – Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim: PC Performance, Benchmarked
"For the average consumer, the transition to 64-bit means a more stable operating system."
Huh? There was silly old me thinking that 64-bit computing referred only to allowing you to address more RAM...
Such things were claimed about the switch from 16 to 32bit - the only difference is the amount of address space available. Stability and security still come down to the quality of the code written for them, not the system architecture as 32 and 64 bit systems are capable of being equally hardware-stable.
My 2009 predictions:
Business will stick with XP in the main until 7 is released and proven to be acceptable.
Home users will go with whatever is pushed at them.
Mac will continue to make obscene profits from great-looking but technically out-dated hardware. I will continue to not supply our staff with iPhones as the email hack is insanely inefficient compared to Blackberry for corporate mail. Hopefully I will stop getting harassed for them as the Storm and Bold 'berrys are released.
Linux will continue it's current trend of building on it's successful server-base. There will be a small incremental increase of desktop installations thanks to Asus E and other machines. People won't realise that their phone, car, fridge and watch have linux installations so they will continue to see it as the 'work ob teh debil'. Smart IT managers will continue to deliver colossal RoI with open source solutions where appropiate, but only in the minority of organisations as it requires them to actually do their job.
1)[quote]Machines with Windows XP RTM are infected at a staggering 33.8 systems per 1,000, while Vista SP1 brings this down to 4.5 per 1,000 and 2.3 per 1,000 (32-bit and 64-bit). As a group, Microsoft estimates 10 in 1,000 PCs as a whole have detected malware. quote]
Thats because people buy the tech without wanting learning how to use it safely, most computers users are bit like people getting drunk and having unprotected sex - both dont know what they're playing with and more often than not end up with a nasty virus from an unwanted download!
2) Most people associate 64bit windows with flakey/non-existent drivers and software issues - not stability and security.
New Hardware, New Compatibility
Or page two of why to buy a mac.
Another example of an article trying to look fair while being pro mac.
The main issue with Macs is that their philosophy is "my way, or the highway" and its more like the computer leads you around by the nose rather than doing your bidding.
I really think the thing with Windows' domination is that the philosophies of our various software vendors goes a bit like this:
Mac: Do it our way.
Linux: Do it yourself.
Windows: We've done it for you.
No large companies really want to buy into the Mac's closed platform, not to mention Apple's own licensing really hindering the Mac's growth.
Linux, from my growing-every-day experience is the operating system that claims to do it all, pretty much does, but makes it really hard to do. Particularly things like Internet connection sharing/network bridging which I have yet to configure without it doing something strange.
Windows seems to be a quite polished from the end-user perspective, can be run on any X86 hardware you see fit and everything's extremely simple to do with an amazingly consistent user interface that you can use without even touching the command line.
Really it's not that Mac OS X and Linux aren't viable alternatives to Windows, it's that Windows is the 'happy medium' for the vast majority of users between a completely closed but insanely easy to use platform (Macs), and a completely open but very difficult to get to grips with platform (Linux).
Macs are for morons, Windows is for retards and Linux is for people who actually know how a computer works
For someone who has used linux for that long, I am somewhat surprised that the author has given this the review he has. I do not believe 2009 is "the year of the linux" but the sector could grow over the next ten years or so. Who knows?
Specifically part of the article is quote below...
"Imagine a stripped-down distribution with Open Office, Evolution, Firefox, F-Spot, Gimp, Brasero, Banshee, xgl/Compiz, and essentially nothing else. Finally, lock everything down to ensure adequate security."
Ubuntu 8.10 (this means it was released in 2008 in October) comes with Open Office, Evolution, Firefox, F-Spot, Gimp, Brasero, Rhythmbox Music Player & Compiz by default out of the box. Exactly what was stated was "needed" in the article.
it's all just there pre-installed (along with some games, a movie player, brasero cd/dvd burner, and Pidgin (msn messenger) amongst other things)
The installation is as simple as any mac/windows installation, it comes in both 32 and 64 bit variants and you either stick to the LTS (long term) releases released every 3 years, or upgrade the platform every 6 months as most people do!
For those that are not aware, software installation can be easy to if you want extra programs! just select the "package manager" and type what you are after (for example "wireshark" and click the "apply" button then it is installed for you).
Take a look at www.ubuntu.com, download it, and give it a try (you can dual boot it).
You have to question the impartiality of a journalist that waxes rhapsodic for five pages about obscure colour correction features and how the hardware has managed to catch up with the OS in the "Big Two" operating systems, and then gives Linux a single page, and spends over half of that page discussing why it isn't as good as Windows and OS X, instead of the ways in which it approaches or even exceeds their features. Approximately 20 seconds research is apparently more than he did - that's how long it takes to find a RAW plugin for GIMP.
Let's flip this over ; for the vast majority of users, the marginal return of choosing Windows or OS X over Linux is now solely about familiarity, intertia, and market control. All "standard" Windows users who only use their browser, email, and office applications would be served well by one of the desktop oriented Linux distributions, and more secure. Their upgrade cycles would be longer - they could spend the money and time saved buying and setting up a new computer, and research and buy a nice Linux-compatible printer. They might even do something new with their computer after browsing through the package manager.
I think some people don't give Linux a hard enough time... Tried Internet connection/network bridging with a crossover cable over a Linux distribution and tried to have it work exactly as it would in XP? Well first you have to install bridge-utils, before creating a bridge with the brctl addbr command, then configuring all the ethernet ports' configuration files you want to bridge with static IP addresses, adding the ports to the bridge, finding out you can't use the Internet on the computer you're using to bridge the connection any more, but it's okay, you can finally connect to Xbox Live!
I've still got no idea how to bridge a connection and have the network connection work on the host computer under Linux, under Windows it's 'highlight two or more network connections, right click and press "bridge connections".' Seriously, Linux is great and all but it has some horrific usability problems.
That said, Linux isn't the OS for people who know how computers work - it's the OS for people who know how Linux works.
Setting up Linux takes the expertise.
Using it for day to day stuff (web browsing, OpenOffice) just requires basic IT competence.
I work for Contact, a Mental Health Charity and we had an Ubuntu Linux PC hanging around to let our members access the internet. It worked well enough that our other 2 internet access PCs are going to be converted to Ubuntu Linux as well.
Installin Ubuntu is as easy as using it, if not easier! It's as easy as istalling windows (or mac osx)!
setting up Ubuntu takes putting a cd in and pressing return when "install" is selected and tpying your name and password in etc. That's it!
Setting up Ubuntu can be done by anyone, people just assume it is going to be difficult!
luckyluke699 has made some very valid points. I got Ubuntu ordered which was delivered to me for free. I then installed and within a few clicks i was up and running with much every already pre-installed. Unlike Windows where there's about 3hours of installation time awaiting u. Anyway, I also felt the article was a little pro-mac.