The roadblocks to Apple's OSX challenge to Vista

The dull roar about Vista seems to be getting louder, but perhaps it is just people clamoring for an extended life to Windows XP.  Given my Vista experiences I was surprised to read Preston Gralla's Five reasons why Vista beats Mac OS X.

I was most surprised by reason five.

Reason #5: Two words -- Steve Jobs

There's no doubt that Steve Jobs is a master marketer. And he also knows good design. But he's also vindictive, sends his lawyers after people who report leaked information about Apple products, and has hypnotized Apple users into drinking the true-believer Kool Aid. Don't reward him by making him richer.

Well, as much as part of Apple irritates me, I have spent the last four years trying Windows XP, various distributions of Linux, and Windows Vista.  I have to conclude that while I can get my work done on Windows it lacks something. 

I am not willing to let any dislike of Steve's business practices keep me from a good computing experience.

Perhaps twenty four years of using Macs has ruined me, but I feel more comfortable and productive on a Mac.  I say that while writing this post on my HP Vista laptop.

Most people who use both systems think OS X is better than either XP or Vista, though there are some interesting arguments about XP being faster at least using Photoshop.

I have my HP with me today because I have some real contracts to do later in the evening.  If I were planning on doing website work, I would like have my MacBook with me.  It is actually at home and my wife is doing some website maintenance using it.

My use of Windows or OSX is driven by what I need to accomplish.  I have the luxury of both machines so I do not have to compromise. 

But given the pain that Vista has brought on many people, why is there no huge stampede to OSX.  There are arguments about cost, but I can partially refute that by saying that I happily living in the pre-Leopard world and my wife has no problems on her pre-Tiger system.

You could, and I have argued that Mac hardware is more expensive for what you get.  Still the pricing differential isn't huge, and some would argue it does not even exist.

At the end of the day, the real reason challenge to Mac OSX is the world of Windows users.  Apple information just does not get to them.  They do not read Macsurfer, Digg, or almost anything else to do with computers.

Their computers are there to do their chores not necessarily to make a statement about ease of use or style.  While a Mac might be better for most of them, they would have to relearn everything they have known.  Having helped a few people over to the Mac side, I have to admit that many were challenged by learning OSX.

The relationship with their computer also has to change.  More importantly the people on whom they depend for their technical help would likely no longer be able to help them.

While Macs are easy to use and generally reliable, they do on occasion have problems.  Sometimes Apple can or will help, but often you turn to the user community for a solution.  If you have been in the Mac world, that is a normal thing.  In fact it is often easier to get a good solution out of the user community than it is out of Apple.

What I have noticed among my Windows using friends is that they want tech support to do the work.  They will wait days for an expert to come try to solve their problems rather than reach out to the user community and ask for help.

Perhaps my real estate world is so populated with non-technical people that I am seeing a strange sample of users, but I remember much the same behavior when I worked for a company full of geeks.

Will the iPhone and email on the iPod Touch crack that Windows world and the light of the Mac shine?   I am just not sure.  I know Macs are making great strides in some areas, but I really feel that most Windows users are not getting the message from the Apple-Vista commercials.

I could tell Windows friends that today it took well over eight minutes to get my Vista system back to where I needed it after the graphics freaked out on waking from sleep.  That has happened to me a lot.  I consider it a Vista productivity tax, but no one in our office seems to have my exact Vista problems so my message falls on deaf ears.

They have other problems but most of the time they blame the problems on something they might have done. They seem almost like someone who has been abused and cannot make the break from the abuser.

Until Apple can figure out a way to break through that Windows wall of silence, most Windows users are just going to keep on using Windows.

That is how I see from the Carolina coast.

Our high temperatures that approached 80 degrees Fahrenheit are gone, but today's temperature of 70 degrees here along the Southern Outer Banks was not too hard to take.  There was also plenty of blue sky which is always welcome.

Comments

[Dave M.]

You talk about Windows users not wanting to get help from the Windows community... I would offer this point when it comes to that.

If you were to go to a forum for Windows users and ask why your Vista installation is having graphics issues with waking up from sleep, you would get one sure fire answer. Download and install the latest drivers for your video card.

This is a great answer and is certainly worth trying. However, most Windows users (my parents for example) have absolutely no idea what kind of graphics card they have in their system and even if they did, they have no idea how to install an updated driver.

A more likely reason for not going to Windows users forums for questions is that there are literally billions of combinations of hardware that Windows runs. After asking your question, you would be asked what video card you are using, what computer manufacturer or even motherboard you have. What version of the OS you are running, if you are running any 3rd party software that might interfere with your system, etc... The list goes on and on.

With Macs there is a set number of hardware cards that can be installed into the Mac Pro. Other than that, no other Mac system is expandable in any way. iMac's have one or two types of graphics cards and thats it. So it's pretty easy to tell what a system's configuration is based on what model of Mac they run. Plus they can find out what Mac they are running by simply pulling down the Apple menu and selecting "About This Mac..."

As to Windows users "discovering" Macs, it is happening. Thanks to Apple stores popping up all over. They can pop into a store and play with a Mac to see just how easy the system is to use.

I wonder though if the Ads that Apple are running are really helping. Even though they are funny, at least to us Mac users, Windows users may find them a little corrosive and insulting. After all, they may have just purchased a Windows box and now they are hearing stuff that makes their decision look bad. Just a thought here. I also never really liked the "Switcher" ads either. I just found them annoying.

The iPhone ads are great. They don't put down any other phones and really show off what the iPhone can do. If Apple could somehow create ads for OS X and Macintosh that are like the iPhone ads, then they might actually get somewhere.

[Roland Dobbins]

I have to say, although I enjoy your commentary immensely, I find the whole notion of a laptop just to run a Microsoft operating system quite bizarre. All you need is VMWare Fusion, you can boot Windows under OSX when you need it, and then turn off Windows when you're done, all on a MacBook or MacBook Pro. My black MacBook w/4GB of RAM handles this just fine - why aren't you doing this?

[ocracokewaves]

It is a little complicated. The full details are at:

http://viewfromthemountain.typepad.com/applepeels/2007/10/on-the-eve-of-a.html

The short version is that I would have had to buy more memory, a new hard drive, and a MS OS and I still would have been stuck with 13" screen.

The legal forms are hard to read and really wanted a 15" screen for a lot of reasons. The bottom line is that my complete Windows system cost me $849 which is less than half of what a MacBook Pro would have cost.

Today I could get even more memory, hard drive, etc for $749 and the MacBook Pro is still $1999.

If I had another $1,100 to spend I would have bought the MacBook Pro. Real estate isn't exactly doing well right now so I was a budget issue.

I didn't want to put a lot of money into my MacBook since it will be two years old in June.

Whether the decision was right or wrong, I now have two laptops, each of which helps me get my work done.

Would I rather have gotten a Mac? Yes.

If Apple will send me a free MacBook Pro, I'll be glad to write about how easy it is to be a Realtor® and use a Mac.

[JonJ]

I can only rely on anecdotal evidence, but there do seem to be a fair number of freelance translators switching (not a huge market, I'll admit). And they do make heavy use of advice from old Mac hands via email lists, etc., often asking questions that make us oldies (opposite of "newbies") smile a little.
(Good thing they can't see the smiles in the emails.)

They tend to use Parallels and Fusion heavily, since a lot of translators who switch still rely on Windows software for computer-aided translation tasks.

As for the additional expense of the Mac, if you are using them for business, they are deductible at least to some extent.

[Jan]

In your opinion, what is the biggest obstacle for enterprise to go from XP to OS X?
- Is it a mental thing?
- Is it all infrastructure and investments they have done in the past?
- Does OS X lack some fundamental functionality that Windows have?
- Are they scared to take the step?

Do you also think that they will be forced to take the step, sooner rather than later? How long can they endure?

[ocracokewaves]

I can relay some comments that I have received over the years from CIOs.

One who had 50,000 seats told me that he would love to get away from MS, but that if he changed the desktop of his mostly somewhat older workforce, he thought he would have a revolt.

Another who encouraged a mixed desktop environment in scientific environment was fond of saying "managed diversity has great advantages." He believed that letting users select their own desktop tools enhanced organization creativity.

At one time in 2003, Apple discussed giving away OSX in a version that would run on all Intel systems. At the time many CIOs were tossing around the idea of Linux since it could be used on their existing hardware.

I have seen little of that happen, but Red Hat has made some progress because they can be held accountable and are a resource beyond the geek in the back room.

We once ran free introductory Geek to Geek seminars where we got Windows Certified System Administrators to take a course to try to understand how easy Macs were to put on a network. It was tremendously successful and enlightening. What we found out was that many Windows technical people thought Macs were from a different planet. It was in 2003 and some still thought Macs had to have Appletalk networking.

I think in the end one of the biggest problems other than the legacy hardware is fact that so many enterprises have been burned by the one vendor relationship on the software level. The Army once told us that they would never again be held over a barrel like MS was able to do to them in 2003.

So while Apple software and maybe even hardware looks attractive, if you moved to Apple you would be putting yourself in double jeopardy. You would be dependent on one vendor for your software and hardware. You would have zero leverage. Would you trust Steve Jobs to have the interest of your enterprise at heart?

Steve publicly called CIOs assholes so I suspect most remember that. The other thing that I actually think plays against Apple is that the new generation of kids coming into the enterprise are platform agnostic.

They can be perfectly happy working on one platform at work and another at home. My grown up kids do.

When Apple was successful in the enterprise it was because college students coming to the enterprise brought to work revolutionary Apple technology that could accomplish tasks that were being done outside the enterprise.

Today the Macs work much better, are generally more reliable, but all the same functions can be accomplished by a Windows box.

So I think they'll keep using XP until someone forces their hand or until Apple frees OSX to run on hardware manufactured by other vendors.

[Joe]

I've been a fan of Apple's for 20 years, a shareholder for 10 of those, own an iPod, at times use Safari. But Apple hasn't ever tempted me to make the switch to a Mac.

Apple won't support Windows on Boot Camp, leaving me to deal with Microsoft if there was an OS problem with Vista. Microsoft charges for support and Dell doesn't. So while Apple has opened a crack in the door with Window users, most won't switch until Apple makes it public that they'll provide free phone support for Vista problems. Apple doesn't want to do that understandably but in not doing so, won't get the masses looking to make a switch.

I purchased a 420 XPS Dell that runs flawlessly even though it's a new model. Apple's iMac has had one problem after another with quality. Dell's new 22" display with a higher contrast kicks the iMac's butt and I have an 8800 GT Nvidia card that plays games like BioShock amazingly. Sorry, Macs can't match that.

Snobbery aside, Apple's OS X isn't the big winner that home grown fanatics think it is. Sorry, it's just a decent OS and I have one called Vista. Contrary to the majority of US nutcases complaining about it, it's simply 10 x what XP was.

Thanks for the good read.

[kenny]

Hi. A good post (as usual). I agree with the first post. Most people really don't care about computers, let alone care to bother to find out the differences between them all. A company has to be very careful if the only advert it does is "Ha ha ha, you've got Windows you mong" which is all I've seen in the UK in the last few years for Macs.

[Jan]

Okay, I can understand the one-supplier-problem. But placing that much emphasis on hardware, is it not overstating its importance? Apple is not a hardware company anymore (at least not in my mind). Vista has only one supplier as well. But when it comes to applications, Apple isn't a single-source company any more. If you don't like Keynote or Pages, you have PowerPoint and MS Office, or even Open Office. Is hardware really that important today? When you take a good look at the killer applications companies use, you come to the conclusion that it is PowerPoint, MS Office and Exchange and maybe some more. Personally I believe the CIOs don't want the hassle of making a migration. In the long run, the inability of Microsoft to evolve Vista will hurt the productivity of companies. If it amounts to 0.01% or 0.1%, I don't know, but I think it's a problem for the economy.

[Alex Palma]

Thank you for this article because its really informative, i love reading your article and i hope that i will read some more about this stuff, its really informative and very entertaining. thanks a lot and have a great day. hope you can also visit my site by clicking my name ~ god bless ~

[Partners in Grime]

"[W]hat is the biggest obstacle for enterprise to go from XP to OS X?"
1. The MS bigot in the IT department.