is macintosh a viable platform

is the mac a viable platform?
3 february, 2002
by johnmichael patrick monty monteith

Many columnists, including myself, have been recommending for years that if you are brand new to computers, a Macintosh is a great way to go. However, the days of finding people that are brand new to computers are over. Almost all computer sales happening today are to repeat computer purchasers, or to people that already use computers in their place of employment. Since over ninety-five percent of computers are running Windows, that means almost all potential computer buyers are Windows users.
Steve Jobs, the iCEO of Apple Computer, is well aware of the market share dilemma. In fact, he has built a series of Apple stores to entice 'the other 95%' to purchase Macintosh computers. In addition, he has re-vamped the entire Macintosh line with new systems that are visually stunning, and a new operating system that is even more visually stunning than the computers.

While I have been recommending a Mac to those that are brand new to computers for years, I have never recommended a Macintosh to someone that is currently a Windows user. But, since there is virtually no one left who has not used a computer, and since Apple is specifically selling to Windows users, we have decided to ask the big question: Is the Macintosh a viable platform for Windows users?

David Coursey at ZDNet is asking this very question right now as he puts himself through the same experience I am doing. At nearly the same time David and I attempted to switch to using Mac OS X to determine first-hand whether Apple has a true alternative for Windows users. You can read his experiences at the ZDNet Anchordesk. Although, I must admit, I believe David has been influenced a bit too much by his personal phone calls from Steve Jobs.

Anyway, back to the question at hand. We will document one Windows users attempt to go Macintosh (me). I firmly believe the findings will be as valuable to potential Mac customers as it will be to Steve Jobs and company. If the folks in Cupertino truly want to make an attempt at grabbing the other ninety-five, then their platform will need to recognize their computing roots.

Please keep in mind that this is not meant to be a feature-by-feature comparison between platforms. Some issues I will raise will be problems that I raise because the feature is available in Windows and not available on the Mac. However, if something is nicer than the Windows experience, that will be clearly stated as well.

For this comparison we decided to buy a Macintosh iBook. Steve Jobs and company have been claiming that these iBooks (and the rest of the Macs) are faster than Windows machines with supposedly twice the speed (mhz). No one has ever believed that, but clearly a 500mhz iBook should be comparable to an 800mhz PIII laptop, which is generally in the same price range.

So, let the comparison begin:

+ Mac With all of the talk about how much cheaper Windows machines are, the iBook has a better feature set for the buck than a WinXP laptop. My WinXP comparison laptop running 800mhz cost $1300, and does not include FireWire (although a bigger screen than the iBook).. The iBook ran $1200, and the laptop is far more inviting.

+ Mac The iBook packaging is very nice, and the computer is very impressively designed, all the way down to the power outlet adapter. Easily the most elegant laptop I have ever purchased. (Love the blinking white light next to the open button when in standby mode.)

+ Mac To my surprise, when I turned it on it booted into OS 9. Yet, the OS 9 setup program was far easier to understand and better designed than any setup program I have ever seen from Microsoft.

+ Windows The OS 9 setup program still asks some complicated networking questions that I can see some home users getting confused about. (Static IP versus DHCP, etc) This seemed silly to me since I had it plugged into a network with DHCP, and the Mac OS easily could have recognized that in the programming and avoided asking me complicated questions (as Windows does.)

+ Windows The OS 9 setup would not let me skip the mail server setup (Internet email, POP3, SMTP, etc) whereas Microsoft’s network setups will let you skip setting up email until you have that information, or in my case, if you want to get email on your computer later.

+ Windows After completing the new computer wizard for OS 9 the computer went to the Macintosh desktop, and immediately locked up (crashed).

+ Mac Starting the OS X upgrade process was easy to understand and get through.

+ Mac OS X is a prettier interface than XP. The photographic approach to the interface is quite impressive looking, and neat to watch. Clearly the next step (excuse the pun) in interface design.

+ Windows The OS X interface has a disconnect from the pointer and the windows / buttons. When I click on a button in pervious Mac versions and Windows it feels like the pointer is clicking the button. This is not the case in OS X. There is a such a delay in reaction from OS X that I end up doing the action multiple times to get it to respond. The interface and the mouse feel disconnected from the user experience. It seems that in Apple’s desire to make the most impressive looking OS, they left behind the Mac trademark of feeling like the operating system is an extension of the user. OS 9 was slightly better than any Windows version in this regard, but XP has OS X beat by a mile.

+ Mac Mac operating systems are less bloated than their Microsoft counterparts, so having a ten gig hard drive seemed sufficient for two Mac operating systems, whereas I would not want Windows 2000 and Windows XP running on the same 10 gig hard drive.

+ Windows The fact that two operating systems need to be included adds an element of complication that is not in Windows XP. Windows users will need to learn two operating systems instead of one .. So I will try to limit myself to OS X user from here on out.

+ Neither The packaging for Microsoft Office v.X looks cool but is a pain in the butt to open up. Shame on you, Microsoft!

+ Windows The installation of OS X on the iBook took more than twice as long as the installation of Windows XP upgrade on a Windows 2000 system.

+ Windows Tabing along in dialogue boxes completing data, in OS X it skips menus, requiring me to use the pointer to choose those options instead of using the keyboard (slowing down entry tremendously.)

+ Mac The startup animation in OS X is much more impressive than the startup after installing XP.

+ Windows Boot time with OS X (and nothing installed) on my iBook: 2 minutes, 25 seconds. Boot time for OS X with dozens of applications installed: 41 seconds.

+ Windows I can actually type faster than the iBook displays characters. This makes type-intensive projects very difficult on what appears to be an extremely slow machine.

+ Windows Login name is limited to eight characters. Since most systems, including Windows, do not have this limitation, it makes authenticating to other systems that have longer login names very difficult.

+ Windows Both OS X and Windows XP require reboots for major installs, but OS X seems to require them for some relatively minor installs as well. XP also boots much faster, so while OS X appears to require more reboots, it also does it many times slower than XP.

+ Windows The iBook screen has a tendency to jiggle when in motion, plus, the screen will not tilt back far enough. When having a laptop on my lap (standard use), my Windows screen would always be tilted back much further than the iBook can do. It made the iBook the most uncomfortable laptop I have ever used.

+ Windows In a non-scientific study of having OS X IE rendering pages versus Win XP IE, we found that the OS X version renders pages considerably slower.

+ Windows Having one mouse button may be semi easier for brand new users, but if a five year old can handle twelve buttons on a GameCube controller with ease, most adults can handle two buttons for their pointer. The integration of left and right mouse clicks into XP makes the operating system much faster to perform tasks.

+ Windows My first time using OS X I tried to download Stuffit Expander so I could download Adobe Acrobat, and upon installation Internet Explorer kept replicating itself (probably fifty times) before the computer froze. It was my first crash in OS X, and it happened only minutes after installation.

+ Mac Neither OS 9 nor OS X required authentication for software piracy concerns. We cannot say the same about Windows XP.

+ Neither Both operating systems have compatibility problems with older software. OS X may be worse in this regard, but I will call it even due to the difficulties I had with CD burning in Windows XP when the Windows 2000 system it upgraded had no difficulties with CD burning (and, in fact, used the same software, Roxio, that Windows uses in XP.)

+ Windows Apple needs to work on a tighter integration of the keyboard with the operating system. When I highlight an icon on the desktop and press the “delete” key, it should go without saying that the icon and / or application should be deleted. Instead – nothing happens. Yes, you can drag it down to the trashcan – but that many times longer than pressing a single key.

+ Mac Apple’s design is somewhat simpler to use because it has less options. For example, while in Windows one can drag an icon to the recycle bin or press delete or (you get the point), in the Macintosh world you are generally limited to one or two options (drag to the trash can). This makes the OS slightly simpler to use. Having more options can sometimes make things easier, but overall I believe Apple has made a slightly easier OS.

+ Neither OS X uses a bouncing icon in the taskbar – er, I mean “dock” - to signify that the application is running. Is it just me, or does the bouncing icon seem to seem to signify a computer needing to go to the bathroom? It is only personal preference, but I prefer the little watch since that seems to make the point clearer.

+ Windows There is no question that this 500mhz iBook running OS X operates considerably slower on every count than a comparable WinXP system. In fact, to the point of making the OS nearly unusable at times.

+ Mac I have really grown to love the look of the iBook. It seems a simple thing, but much like how much pleasure I take in the design and look of an automobile, I find myself having the same sort of pleasurable feeling toward the Mac. I can see how Mac fans can fall in love with these machines.

+ Mac The Office v.X installer is so much better than the Office XP installer that the two are barely even comparable. One (v.X) is simple, straight forward, powerful, and easy to use – and the other is complicated, cumbersome, and difficult to get used to. The Mac group at Microsoft needs to help out the Windows group.

+ Windows Apple may believe that the use of lines in the OS X design is artistic, but it makes it difficult to read and use the computer. So many windows have lines throughout them (and every window title bar) that I am reminded of the early web page (HTML) days when everyone used horizontal rules every couple lines in their web pages. Not only was it annoying, it made things more difficult to read and use.

+ Windows I could not just upgrade to OS X 10.1, unlike XP where upgrading to the latest service pack was just a matter of downloading from Windows Update. In fact, I had to PAY for the upgrade and wait for it to be shipped via snail mail. (On a brand new computer purchased in Jan 2002!)

+ Windows Office v.X will not work on OS X. It requires OS X 10.1. Office XP works on Windows XP without any additional software requirements.

+ Mac The transparency effect on the windows in OS X is a very nicely done effect and enhances the user experience. At times it got a little confusing as to which window was in front of which, but overall I like the idea (it just needs some improvement.)

+ Windows Due to the Unix side of OS X, installations of most products are more complicated than previous Mac versions. Also, the file extension issue starts to weigh heavily on using files on the Mac. While these are issues in Windows, Microsoft has had time to make these acceptable in Windows if not easy to use. The installation of iTunes and many others seemed like I was installing the product numerous times before it finally was, and going through a bunch of windows to get there. Apple still has some work to do in OS X to get these individual file installations as easy a Windows is today.

+ Windows Virtually every application I tried to install simply did not work and did not give any understandable reasons. “The application iPhoto has unexpectedly quit.” The only way I could get any work done was to boot into OS 9.

+ Windows I am using the ESC-OPTION-Open Apple trick to shut down crashed applications far too regularly. So far my experience has been that Windows 98 is far more stable than OS X. Perhaps things will get more stable when my ordered copy of OS X 10.1 shows up.

+ Windows No separate settings for “Energy Saver” based on plugged in / battery power / etc ..

+ Mac The touchpad is better than any Windows laptop I have used – almost making me not miss the movement of a mouse or trackball (both of which are still superior.)

+ Windows The touchpad button is far worse than that on any Windows laptop I have used. That sucker is a real workout after spending a few hours working on the system. I suppose my thumb is getting good exercise, but it should require considerably less force.

+ Mac Built in screen savers in OS X are far more impressive than those in XP.

+ Windows I mentioned it once before, but I am stuck in OS 9 for getting work done because OS X shipped with this iBook, even though X 10.1 was released months ago. To make matters worse, I cannot download the latest update, as I could from Windowsupdate.com, and I have to PAY $20 for the latest bug fix from Apple. (?!) Reminds me of the Windows 98 Release 2 dilemma for which Microsoft was scalded over.

+ Mac The “terminal” is a standard Unix CLI, and I quickly found myself right at home. The scripting abilities and the way a Unix shell works is an overall better and more uniform experience than Windows.

+ Windows Adjustments to the date format and other formatting did not take place until after I rebooted. Such changes in Windows are instantaneous through the applications.

+ Windows When I double click on an icon on the desktop in Windows, such as a hard drive icon, the icon changes to notify me that the item was selected and the window is loading. When I do the same in OS X, nothing happens until the window appears, often forcing me to select items again because I am waiting for the window to appear.

+ Windows System crashed again, but this time from just running the screen saver. Pointer still works, but no response, and the ESC-OPTION-OPEN APPLE is not doing anything for me.

+ Windows I cannot connect to any Windows networking devices. I tried the “SMB://workgroup;device/share” trick that is described online, but I still can not get it to work. I have been trying to compile a new version of Samba on the system with little luck. Clearly, if Apple wants Windows users to use an iBook as their laptop, they need to have Windows networking seamlessly working. Hopefully this will work when 10.1 arrives, however everything I have read online says that Apple has done a poor job in this area, so I do not have high hopes.

+ Windows I could not figure out how to get VPN working on the laptop. How is anyone supposed to get work done without VPN built into the operating system? (This has been a standard feature in Windows since the original version of Windows 98.) Nearly every company in the world uses VPN, and this feature needs to be built in and super easy to start up.

Windows 31, Macintosh 15
However, this game has been ruled 'disqualified'.

Before Bill Gates cries foul over the disqualification, hold on -- I will explain that in a bit. And before Mac users cry foul about the score, keep in mind that I was being quite generous to Apple. Some areas, such as over two minutes to boot the computer, are so bad they make the laptop nearly unusable. The fact that I can type many times faster than OS X can keep up with, or that the screen can not tilt back far enough for the computer to be used comfortably, makes me wonder if Apple had anyone actually use this computer before putting it on the market.

This has been a total surprise to me. The one area where Apple always destroyed Windows in the past was usability. In fact, during the time I spent with OS 9, I found that the older Mac operating system is still more usable than Windows XP. However, OS X is like a Ferrari with a fifty horsepower engine and bricks for seats. Windows XP, on the other hand, is more like a modern Japanese sedan. It works, it has enough power under the hood to get you to your work, and the looks are good enough to get by.

I have heard that OS X 10.1 (shouldn't it be OS X.1?) is much faster and more stable than the original OS X. It better be, because so far my Mac experience has been a disaster. I have yet to even be able to run Microsoft Word on the system since Office v.X will not run without OS X 10.1. My plan was to write this piece on the iBook, but because the system cannot run any of the software I have installed on it, I have been forced to use the Windows laptop. Heck, even Apple's new iTunes will not run on OS X. (?!)

However, a Mac friend (thank you, Brian!) told me that my troubles with not having OS X 10.1 pre-installed was simply a problem of getting an older iBook. That, in fact, this comparison should have been with 10.1 from the get-go. So, with that in mind, we are going to disqualify this first half of play, and start a whole new ball game for the next part of this series.

Despite the dominating play by Windows, stay tuned boys and girls. We will start a whole new ball game shortly, and I fully expect the next episode, which will include 10.1, will make this a real ball game. At least, for Apple's sake, it had better.

+ Mac	With all of the talk about how much cheaper Windows machines are, the iBook has a better feature set for the buck than a WinXP laptop. My WinXP comparison laptop running 800mhz cost $1300, and does not include FireWire (although a bigger screen than the iBook).. The iBook ran $1200, and the laptop is far more inviting.
+ Mac	The iBook packaging is very nice, and the computer is very impressively designed, all the way down to the power outlet adapter. Easily the most elegant laptop I have ever purchased. (Love the blinking white light next to the open button when in standby mode.)
+ Mac	To my surprise, when I turned it on it booted into OS 9. Yet, the OS 9 setup program was far easier to understand and better designed than any setup program I have ever seen from Microsoft.
+ Windows	The OS 9 setup program still asks some complicated networking questions that I can see some home users getting confused about. (Static IP versus DHCP, etc) This seemed silly to me since I had it plugged into a network with DHCP, and the Mac OS easily could have recognized that in the programming and avoided asking me complicated questions (as Windows does.)
+ Windows	The OS 9 setup would not let me skip the mail server setup (Internet email, POP3, SMTP, etc) whereas Microsoft’s network setups will let you skip setting up email until you have that information, or in my case, if you want to get email on your computer later.
+ Windows	After completing the new computer wizard for OS 9 the computer went to the Macintosh desktop, and immediately locked up (crashed).
+ Mac	Starting the OS X upgrade process was easy to understand and get through.
+ Mac	OS X is a prettier interface than XP. The photographic approach to the interface is quite impressive looking, and neat to watch. Clearly the next step (excuse the pun) in interface design.
+ Windows	The OS X interface has a disconnect from the pointer and the windows / buttons. When I click on a button in pervious Mac versions and Windows it feels like the pointer is clicking the button. This is not the case in OS X. There is a such a delay in reaction from OS X that I end up doing the action multiple times to get it to respond. The interface and the mouse feel disconnected from the user experience. It seems that in Apple’s desire to make the most impressive looking OS, they left behind the Mac trademark of feeling like the operating system is an extension of the user. OS 9 was slightly better than any Windows version in this regard, but XP has OS X beat by a mile.
+ Mac	Mac operating systems are less bloated than their Microsoft counterparts, so having a ten gig hard drive seemed sufficient for two Mac operating systems, whereas I would not want Windows 2000 and Windows XP running on the same 10 gig hard drive.
+ Windows	The fact that two operating systems need to be included adds an element of complication that is not in Windows XP. Windows users will need to learn two operating systems instead of one .. So I will try to limit myself to OS X user from here on out.
+ Neither	The packaging for Microsoft Office v.X looks cool but is a pain in the butt to open up. Shame on you, Microsoft!
+ Windows	The installation of OS X on the iBook took more than twice as long as the installation of Windows XP upgrade on a Windows 2000 system.
+ Windows	Tabing along in dialogue boxes completing data, in OS X it skips menus, requiring me to use the pointer to choose those options instead of using the keyboard (slowing down entry tremendously.)
+ Mac	The startup animation in OS X is much more impressive than the startup after installing XP.
+ Windows	Boot time with OS X (and nothing installed) on my iBook: 2 minutes, 25 seconds. Boot time for OS X with dozens of applications installed: 41 seconds.
+ Windows	I can actually type faster than the iBook displays characters. This makes type-intensive projects very difficult on what appears to be an extremely slow machine.
+ Windows	Login name is limited to eight characters. Since most systems, including Windows, do not have this limitation, it makes authenticating to other systems that have longer login names very difficult.
+ Windows	Both OS X and Windows XP require reboots for major installs, but OS X seems to require them for some relatively minor installs as well. XP also boots much faster, so while OS X appears to require more reboots, it also does it many times slower than XP.
+ Windows	The iBook screen has a tendency to jiggle when in motion, plus, the screen will not tilt back far enough. When having a laptop on my lap (standard use), my Windows screen would always be tilted back much further than the iBook can do. It made the iBook the most uncomfortable laptop I have ever used.
+ Windows	In a non-scientific study of having OS X IE rendering pages versus Win XP IE, we found that the OS X version renders pages considerably slower.
+ Windows	Having one mouse button may be semi easier for brand new users, but if a five year old can handle twelve buttons on a GameCube controller with ease, most adults can handle two buttons for their pointer. The integration of left and right mouse clicks into XP makes the operating system much faster to perform tasks.
+ Windows	My first time using OS X I tried to download Stuffit Expander so I could download Adobe Acrobat, and upon installation Internet Explorer kept replicating itself (probably fifty times) before the computer froze. It was my first crash in OS X, and it happened only minutes after installation.
+ Mac	Neither OS 9 nor OS X required authentication for software piracy concerns. We cannot say the same about Windows XP.
+ Neither	Both operating systems have compatibility problems with older software. OS X may be worse in this regard, but I will call it even due to the difficulties I had with CD burning in Windows XP when the Windows 2000 system it upgraded had no difficulties with CD burning (and, in fact, used the same software, Roxio, that Windows uses in XP.)
+ Windows	Apple needs to work on a tighter integration of the keyboard with the operating system. When I highlight an icon on the desktop and press the “delete” key, it should go without saying that the icon and / or application should be deleted. Instead – nothing happens. Yes, you can drag it down to the trashcan – but that many times longer than pressing a single key.
+ Mac	Apple’s design is somewhat simpler to use because it has less options. For example, while in Windows one can drag an icon to the recycle bin or press delete or (you get the point), in the Macintosh world you are generally limited to one or two options (drag to the trash can). This makes the OS slightly simpler to use. Having more options can sometimes make things easier, but overall I believe Apple has made a slightly easier OS.
+ Neither	OS X uses a bouncing icon in the taskbar – er, I mean “dock” - to signify that the application is running. Is it just me, or does the bouncing icon seem to seem to signify a computer needing to go to the bathroom? It is only personal preference, but I prefer the little watch since that seems to make the point clearer.
+ Windows	There is no question that this 500mhz iBook running OS X operates considerably slower on every count than a comparable WinXP system. In fact, to the point of making the OS nearly unusable at times.
+ Mac	I have really grown to love the look of the iBook. It seems a simple thing, but much like how much pleasure I take in the design and look of an automobile, I find myself having the same sort of pleasurable feeling toward the Mac. I can see how Mac fans can fall in love with these machines.
+ Mac	The Office v.X installer is so much better than the Office XP installer that the two are barely even comparable. One (v.X) is simple, straight forward, powerful, and easy to use – and the other is complicated, cumbersome, and difficult to get used to. The Mac group at Microsoft needs to help out the Windows group.
+ Windows	Apple may believe that the use of lines in the OS X design is artistic, but it makes it difficult to read and use the computer. So many windows have lines throughout them (and every window title bar) that I am reminded of the early web page (HTML) days when everyone used horizontal rules every couple lines in their web pages. Not only was it annoying, it made things more difficult to read and use.
+ Windows	I could not just upgrade to OS X 10.1, unlike XP where upgrading to the latest service pack was just a matter of downloading from Windows Update. In fact, I had to PAY for the upgrade and wait for it to be shipped via snail mail. (On a brand new computer purchased in Jan 2002!)
+ Windows	Office v.X will not work on OS X. It requires OS X 10.1. Office XP works on Windows XP without any additional software requirements.
+ Mac	The transparency effect on the windows in OS X is a very nicely done effect and enhances the user experience. At times it got a little confusing as to which window was in front of which, but overall I like the idea (it just needs some improvement.)
+ Windows	Due to the Unix side of OS X, installations of most products are more complicated than previous Mac versions. Also, the file extension issue starts to weigh heavily on using files on the Mac. While these are issues in Windows, Microsoft has had time to make these acceptable in Windows if not easy to use. The installation of iTunes and many others seemed like I was installing the product numerous times before it finally was, and going through a bunch of windows to get there. Apple still has some work to do in OS X to get these individual file installations as easy a Windows is today.
+ Windows	Virtually every application I tried to install simply did not work and did not give any understandable reasons. “The application iPhoto has unexpectedly quit.” The only way I could get any work done was to boot into OS 9.
+ Windows	I am using the ESC-OPTION-Open Apple trick to shut down crashed applications far too regularly. So far my experience has been that Windows 98 is far more stable than OS X. Perhaps things will get more stable when my ordered copy of OS X 10.1 shows up.
+ Windows	No separate settings for “Energy Saver” based on plugged in / battery power / etc ..
+ Mac	The touchpad is better than any Windows laptop I have used – almost making me not miss the movement of a mouse or trackball (both of which are still superior.)
+ Windows	The touchpad button is far worse than that on any Windows laptop I have used. That sucker is a real workout after spending a few hours working on the system. I suppose my thumb is getting good exercise, but it should require considerably less force.
+ Mac	Built in screen savers in OS X are far more impressive than those in XP.
+ Windows	I mentioned it once before, but I am stuck in OS 9 for getting work done because OS X shipped with this iBook, even though X 10.1 was released months ago. To make matters worse, I cannot download the latest update, as I could from Windowsupdate.com, and I have to PAY $20 for the latest bug fix from Apple. (?!) Reminds me of the Windows 98 Release 2 dilemma for which Microsoft was scalded over.
+ Mac	The “terminal” is a standard Unix CLI, and I quickly found myself right at home. The scripting abilities and the way a Unix shell works is an overall better and more uniform experience than Windows.
+ Windows	Adjustments to the date format and other formatting did not take place until after I rebooted. Such changes in Windows are instantaneous through the applications.
+ Windows	When I double click on an icon on the desktop in Windows, such as a hard drive icon, the icon changes to notify me that the item was selected and the window is loading. When I do the same in OS X, nothing happens until the window appears, often forcing me to select items again because I am waiting for the window to appear.
+ Windows	System crashed again, but this time from just running the screen saver. Pointer still works, but no response, and the ESC-OPTION-OPEN APPLE is not doing anything for me.
+ Windows	I cannot connect to any Windows networking devices. I tried the “SMB://workgroup;device/share” trick that is described online, but I still can not get it to work. I have been trying to compile a new version of Samba on the system with little luck. Clearly, if Apple wants Windows users to use an iBook as their laptop, they need to have Windows networking seamlessly working. Hopefully this will work when 10.1 arrives, however everything I have read online says that Apple has done a poor job in this area, so I do not have high hopes.
+ Windows	I could not figure out how to get VPN working on the laptop. How is anyone supposed to get work done without VPN built into the operating system? (This has been a standard feature in Windows since the original version of Windows 98.) Nearly every company in the world uses VPN, and this feature needs to be built in and super easy to start up.