Macs vs Windows
Something I’m very often asked is what I think of Macs, and that question is usually followed by a comment on how good Macs are compared to “PCs.” One of the unfortunate, and possibly intentional, side-affects of Apple’s current TV ads is that most people now think all PCs run Windows.
Why would Apple use the term “PC” instead of “Windows” in their ads? They may have done this to create the impression that Macs are more different from Windows machines than they actually are (both use the same Intel platform), and also to imply that non-Mac PCs are inherently flawed (combating the increasing popularity of Linux distributions on netbooks).
However, Apple’s latest marketing campaign is apparently working, and Macs now account for nearly 10% percent of the total market – this is according to web browser statistics from Net Applications.
On Windows. Even though Mac OS X and Windows are similar operating systems, they are each focused on different groups of users with different sets of problems – making them difficult to compare. The advantage that Windows has had since its introduction is the support of software developers, and unfortunately this has also created the biggest disadvantage. Microsoft is now unable to substantially improve Windows without making sweeping changes that would disrupt backward compatibility.
If a new version of Windows could no longer support the myriad of older applications, it would lose this huge advantage over Mac OS X and Linux. Plus, from a user’s point of view, if the new version didn’t support the same programs that the older one did, then it would seem the new version was broken and buggy.
Microsoft appears to be solving this problem with the increasing use of the .NET framework which separates the Windows API (what applications run on) from the operating system itself. Then in theory, multiple versions of the framework (multiple APIs) could be run in parallel creating both efficient frameworks and backward compatibility. However, many older applications have not been updated to use .NET, and even new applications often require components outside of the framework. So it’s not clear yet how effective .NET will be in solving this issue.
On Macs. On the other hand, Macs are not the mainstream platform, they do not have nearly as much third-party software, and they are built for specific groups of users. This enables Apple to make larger changes more frequently and deliver higher quality at the expense of backward compatibility.
Also, Apple’s marketing strategy has taken great care to portray Mac users as trendy and intelligent – which has an interesting effect on people’s understanding of their computer and the problems they have. Most people never know the real cause of their problems, and it’s common practice to put the blame on whatever feels right. So if you hear that Vista has lots of problems, you’ll assume it’s responsible for your badly written application’s crashing. However, if you got the same problem on a Mac, you would probably assume that the applications – or even you – are at fault.
Apple is also the most restrictive, do-it-our-way PC vendor out there. While this hasn’t been much of a problem with Mac computers, it has created a lot of negative publicity for products such as the iPhone and iPod Touch. As many as 2 million customers, unhappy with the App Store, have resorted to “jail breaking” their device in order to download software from other sources.
The Price. Macs are also very expensive for the hardware they use. For example, a Dell Optiplex 760 with a 24″ LCD and 3-year warranty costs $890, but a comparable iMac costs $1,668.00 – which is almost double the cost. The biggest reason not to get the Dell computer is the fact that it ships with Windows Vista, but with the increasing support for Linux, that reason may disappear.
My Guess. Macs will remain an expensive but well-designed choice for high-end and specialty-purpose users, and their market share will continue to rise, but they won’t become the dominant PC in the market. I think it’s more likely that as Microsoft loses ground to the competition, most software developers will begin to focus primarily on internet-based and multi-platform approaches. And if and when that happens, I believe free operating systems (read: Linux) will take over the market.
Update 1: After much speculation and rumor, Google has finally announced the development of a desktop operating system! It will be a separate project from Andriod (their mobile operating system) that is based on the Linux kernel. Although it will take some time for “Chrome OS” to be developed and ready for use, it will certainly push even more developers to write for web platforms, and in turn, that will drive down the cost and market share of Mac OS X and Windows systems.
