Nickname: atuqtuaq

Review: The last Apple I used was a 2e. I use Windows because the work computer comes with it. I have no computer at home, and gave up trying to keep up with the changes when my knowledge of COBOL and RPG 2 bacame obsolete. I hate computers but I'm taking the time to write on one. What a hypocrite. I'm a libertarian working for the U.S. government too.

Date reviewed: Apr 20, 2006 4:51 PM

Nickname: thomcarl

Review: I'm a retired electronics technician who has worked for the government, Apple, Ampex Corp., and an R&D outfit called Sturman Industries. I've used both Windows and Apple software over the years. As far as my needs and most of my family and friends go we could care less about Apple being able to run XP. The only Microsoft app that I use is media player and that is recoded by an app called Flip for Mac. I think that all of the open loop thinking by journalists, analysts, and the public in general is hilarious. Amazing how many people with no idea of what their talking about feel compelled to offer up some of the most screwed up thinking I've ever had the pleasure of laughing at.

Date reviewed: Apr 8, 2006 9:26 PM

Nickname: BladeMetal

Review: Think of the percentages of people who don't really grasp how to use a computer. There are huge numbers of these users. You say that the hand-holding in Windows is bad. Cope wit it. Windows is designed not only for computer geeks like us, but also (strange as it may seem to you) other people who need to be told what to do, need to be catered for. In the software design world, its called inclusivity, the process of making the software available and usable by the widest possible audience. Why don't enough home users use Macs? They don't do enough hand-holding and you need to pay a technician to come and help you. Wake up and see the reality of why Windows is dominating.

Date reviewed: Apr 8, 2006 10:46 AM

Nickname: Ciper

Review: A terrible article. I expected a story about the technical reasons behind Mac/Windows operation. Instead I read what could be found in any random internet forum. Even if you are a Linux or MacOS fan do you think the following sentence is true " Every time I use it, before I can get anything done, I need to update something -- whether it's a new set of spyware or virus definitions, some new component of Windows, or the driver software for my mouse" . I will buy an Intel Mac to run only windows. Know why? Because I prefer Windows and the 799 dual core mini has lots of features in a small package. I've owned a G4 Titanium and an older Mac Mini (overclocked to 1.5ghz) and still prefered to use Windows. I expected alot more from businessweek writers and from the people commenting on this story :|

Date reviewed: Apr 5, 2006 11:51 PM

Nickname: CoreDumpOfMemory

Review: I, myself, am an open source evangelist, but I'm not a critic of Microsoft. Like Linus Torvalds (creator of Linux) himself said, "Gates does best what he can-- packaging." We also need to appreciate that since Windows is the most widely used OS it is the most attacked one and hence the number of updates and patches which keep coming up. Also since we have so many people hooked on to Windows-- imagine if one day all the Windows systems went down-- do we realize the impact? So let us enjoy the best of both worlds as consumers and let the giant and the challengers slug it out :).

Date reviewed: Mar 28, 2006 9:26 AM

Nickname: Alex Clarke

Review: @Mark: Programming the Mac using the Cocoa frameworks is mostly done using Objective-C, not C++. This is the recommended language for modern Mac OS X apps, although you can use plain C, C++ (if you must), Java, Python, Ruby or any number of other languages. Indeed, in much the same way, level of complexity depends on what kind of application you are coding. However, Cocoa compares very favourably to .NET and C# for efficiency of code and ease of leveraging the APIs. Apple provides a massive set of frameworks, which have a heritage that goes back 15 years to NeXT's NeXTStep and OpenStep. Look them up sometime.

Date reviewed: Mar 26, 2006 5:50 AM

Nickname: Todd

Review: Rushing out Leopard is the sort of thing Microsoft would try to do, and would put marketing over quality. Apple is far enough ahead to humiliate Vista no matter what they try to put into it before '07. Why blow the lead by being a glutton?

Date reviewed: Mar 26, 2006 5:00 AM

Nickname: Mark

Review: To Frances: It depends on what kind of software you are talking about. Is it software that would appeal to a wide audience, or is it vertically oriented? Is it shrink-wrapped and sold in stores, or is it software oriented towards specific industry and sold as a business-to-business transaction? The reason there's less Mac software overall is there's a smaller user base, around 4.5% last I heard. Whereas Windows has more than 90%. What market would you sell into? Most businesses have Windows somewhere in their operation, so many business-oriented PC software is written for Windows. This is not the case with OS X. Lastly, developers looking for work are going to have much better luck finding it writing software for Windows, or the Java platform, than for the Mac specifically. The difference in employment opportunities is ~55:1.

Date reviewed: Mar 26, 2006 2:22 AM

Nickname: Frances

Review: Amen. Good article. I've worked on both Mac and Windows extensively all my life, and not found one essential app on Windows that either had no equivalent or didn't have an OS counterpart on the Mac. I am, therefore, quite interested in knowing which apps others are referring to when they say Apple/Mac doesn't include them. I appreciate there must be certain jobs that require very specific apps, outside of the plethora of [more appealing and inter-compatible] apps which Apple has created for work, personal, and fun use. But then, I'd put that back on the developer: If s/he knows they could get better performance, security etc. on a Mac, why then have they not developed in this area? It seems more likely a case of whining, instead of proposing real solutions.

Date reviewed: Mar 25, 2006 2:51 PM

Nickname: John

Review: I agree with what you wrote about Apple, but I have some objections to the TV ad suggestions. "Tired of waiting for a next generation operating system? Get a Mac, now running Leopard." In a 15 or 30-second television spot, it is much more effective to show a tangible product like an iPod or an iMac or even show what you can do with an application like iMovie, rather than trying to sell an intangible product like an "operating system." Remember, Apple thinks of the marketable product as the whole package (hardware, software, services). This one touting how much more secure the Mac OS X is than Windows. If you're an airline company, you don't run ads talking about how your planes do not crash or are safer than others, because one day it could very well happen to you. There is a fine ethical line between hard-hitting advertisements and negative mudslinging. Yes, security is an advantage for Mac OS X but it is a questionable marketing message and could easily backfire.

Date reviewed: Mar 25, 2006 2:06 PM