The question is asked, "Why do you use a Mac?"
Let's start by reversing the question. Why do you use Windows? Did you actually choose Windows or did it choose you? Have you used anything else for any significant length of time (especially in the last five years)?
Since better than 9 out of 10 computers use Windows, I'm going to guess most computer users have learned Windows, and Windows only. It was a difficult learning curve, with countless hours dedicated to computer classes, tech support, and general frustration. The effect of this is that now that you can function, you're not about to start over with something new!
But what if you found out that three fourths of that learning curve was unnecessary? That some computers are user friendly and intuitive? That some computers DON'T crash? You thought you didn't have any other choice. You were wrong.
I have a five and a half year old Mac laptop. I use it hours everyday. I use Word and Excel and I surf the internet high speed. My ancient laptop has not crashed in about three years. Individual programs may crash once every few months but they can be immediately restarted in about two seconds. How about your five or six year old computer?
Generally though I'm not led by pragmatism alone. That's what I was getting at in my comments, which I'll post again here:
The difference between the Mac operating system and most any other OS (like Windows) is a simple matter what approach you take to usability.
The typical interface is simple and straightforward. Which is good until an actual user comes along. We click in the wrong place and make mistakes and then we realize that it's hard to use. The designers then must examine this after the fact and try to fix it. This is called "usability by evaluation". Every product needs it but it's not the only way.
Apple as a company designs their products with "usability by principles" in mind. This means they decide ahead of time what is desirable and who will use it. This makes the interface more user friendly, more robust (idiot proof), and more fun.
Apple designs for the user and not for the technician. This means some experts won't like it, especially those whose livelihood depends on the regular folks needing their assistance.
Using a Mac for me means:
More independence, less hassle; I'm free to do my thing, not what the programmer should have done already.
Better aesthetics prompts creativity.
Fewer and less severe learning curves.
The empowerment of being on the cutting edge of design.
The satisfaction of not following the herd.
You couldn't pay me to use Windows.
13 comments:
After years of using only Apple computers, I found myself in a job that requires me to use a boring PC as a daily tool. And, after having my eyes opened and seeing firsthand how "the other side" lives, after using a PC EVERYDAY for the last three and a half years, I would give my left arm to have my Mac back on my desk...
I find myself staying up late at night several times a week looking at apple.com, counting the days until I can be writing this comment from the comfort of a beautifully crafted machine that allows me to work uninhibited. EVERYTHING that I do on this machine (one of my two $3,000+ laptops) takes too long and too much time on the phone with tech support. I got a new digital camera... I had a new baby added to my family this week... think I can plug in the camera and sync the photos to my laptop? Of course not. I'm using the latest and greatest software and hardware from Microsoft -- Windows XP Professional SP2 on a new laptop with all the extras -- but does it matter? Three weeks later, I STILL have not been able to download my photos to a computer because it doesn't work when I plug it in. I just want it to work the first time!! Is that too much to ask?! So, I put it on the back burner of things to do, and when I have a few hours (or days) with nothing else to do, I'll sit down and make sure that I've downloaded all the available drivers and properly installed the software and spent a few hours on the phone with tech support talking to some guy in India who can't speak English asking me if I have the camera plugged in and the computer turned on, only to find out that he has to transfer me to Level 2 support so I can spend ANOTHER 15 minutes on hold, only to have THEM tell me I need to call the manufacturer!!!!!
*sigh*
In the end, I've become an expert on digital cameras and storage drivers and I know more than I ever wanted to know about everything in between. I'm informed enough to have a job in the call center speaking with other hapless victims... only without the foreign accent.
ALL I WANT IS TO SEE MY PHOTOS!!
Or... I could go to my mom's house and plug in the camera to her Apple for the first time and immediately see and edit all my photos and videos within minutes. Spending more time on what really matters-- looking at my new baby, Clara Jean! I would share a photo of her with you, but I still can't...
So basically if you are not very bright when it comes to computers and technology you should get a Mac so you can catch up to the rest of us who are. That way certain people will be able to show pic's of their new babies.
Wow, well I guess everybody should just get used to Windows since a huge majority of software companies when developing software use Windows not Mac Operating systems. That ought to tell you something. I mean why would some local companies like Sprint and Cerner load their devices or design their software to run on Windows instead of Mac Operating systems. But I guess they have became billion dollar companies of making horrible decisions.
If you are an artist, teacher, or a musician a Mac can be a great tool. If you are using a sytem to actually functionable in a business or if your brain is not a bowl of mush then you should stick to Windows. It isn't going away and they have huge market share. The only reason Mac is still breathing is because of I Pod.
You answered your own protest.
Companies make software decisions based on quantity (market share) not quality. If 9 out of 10 computers used DOS, that's what the software would be written for.
It reveals nothing about the quality of the platform. It reveals tons about business and monopolies.
That said, I'd ask what programs you use in Windows that I don't use on a Mac? I have Word and Excel and Powerpoint and Firefox and iTunes. I can get Photoshop and Unreal Tournament and World of Warcraft. What exactly are the Mac users missing?
The majority of the cars on the road are Ford and Toyota and the like... Does that make them superior vehicles to Lexus and BMW because they have the larger market share? I guess somebody should tell Mercedes-Benz that they're doing it all wrong.
Well said.
Macs are definately the Mercedez of the computer world. You still will pay an extra $100-500 for a Mac (and it used to be worse).
Dustin find someone you know who owns a Mercedes. Then, find one with over 100k miles. Let me give you a hint check the junk yards. You owned a Toyota that was obviously driven until it died and I guarantee it had a gizzilion miles on it. So lets not compare and say Mac=Quality and Microsoft doesn't. That is a ridiculous comment. Besides if you own two computers and only need one for work then why do you not have a Mac now?? Or are you on your way to pick one up in your Mercedes? Nope didn't think so...You say that there isn't anything like a Mac and a Mercedes however you don't own or use either. Having a conversation with someone about something that they don't even use or own is like slamming your own hand in a car door. Please leave further discussions regarding this topic to Thumper at least he owns what he is discussing.
Well, Hollywood, er... Anonymous, I have worked with Macs all my life until this most recent phase when I have been married. I had an iMac until I tied the knot. And since then, I have still been around and in touch with Apple more than most people who don't own one. The only reason I own two PCs now is because I work for a company who didn't give me a choice. I know the difference, unlike "some people" who probably have only taken someone esle's word to base their opinions on, instead of actual on-going, day to day experience.
So, Texas Ranger... I never meant to imply that Microsoft doesn't make anything quality. I only meant to imply that higher market share doesn't NECESSARILY mean they are better machines, like you would have us to believe. After all, Toyota does make some great cars. But, you get what you pay for, and you can't honestly say the BMW or Mercedes aren't superior machines relatively. Anyway, you're the one that sarcastically said, "I guess Sprint and Cerner have become billion dollar companies by making bad decisions." You began this debate with a statement that argued that Microsoft is obviously a superior machine, otherwise MOST people wouldn't be using it, including big corporations. And you can refer to Thumper's comments for a response to that.
Well let me see how I would like to respond to that. We (Cerner) gave our clients a choice in the beginning between Mac and Microsoft. These dumb hospitals (Harvard Medical Cntr., Northwestern Med. Cntr., Mayo Clinic, Childrens Mercy of KC & Boston) All made horrible choices and chose the Microsoft operating system. Considering I sit next to #19 in the world according to PC World magazine of the most intelligent people of IT, and I posed him the same question and I quote myself "why would someone choose a Mac OS over a XP for example" He stated "exactly Chad why would they". Enough said. But, I am sure that the Dubious Duo of Jared and Dustin will combat my statements and make them rubbish. P.S. Yes, I do believe Toyota, Honda, & VW do make better(longer lasting)vehicles then Mercedes, BMW(Big Money Wasted), etc.... All you buy with these cars is a head turn and status. And who needs status. I want quality and thats why I use Windows XP. P.S.P.S. If you would like some help using your digital camera in connection with your PC let me know and I can teach you..young skywalker.
Why use a Mac?
One word:
Viruses.
Long live Mac!
viruses are transported through the internet so that is basically what is the problem. Internet Explorer is a hot bed for viruses so use Mozilla Firefox, AOL, or even MSN Explorer and you eliminate your chances. By saying just having a MAC eliminates your chances is false by eliminating the transportation of these viruses through the host Internet Explorer is the problem. It is entertaining when others chime in. It is obvious that the only ones capable of having this conversation technology speaking are Thumper and I.
Whoever made the previous comment has no business "chiming in", because they exposed themselves as being entirely clueless about viruses and spyware, and obviously, grammar...
What's even more offensive than your third grade writing ability, is the size of your ego. You should do even a little research before you start flinging poo by saying, "It is obvious that [Thumper and I are] the only ones capable of having this conversation."
The easily penetrable design of Windows and it's poorly written software lends itself to having harmful programs written and spread from PC to PC. Apple has a little more than 5% market share, and there are over 72,000 viruses in existence. Wouldn't one assume that there are is a similar % of them for Mac? That would be 3,600 viruses for Mac, right?
For Macs, there are 26...
And for Mac OS X: zero, zip, zilch, none.
Even worse, Microsoft's email software is able to infect a user's computer when they do something as innocuous as read an email! Don't believe me? Take a look at Microsoft Security Bulletins MS99-032, MS00-043, MS01-015, MS01-020, MS02-068, or MS03-023, for instance. It's easy to run executables (.exe) in the Windows world, and users who get an email with a subject line like "Check out this wicked screensaver!" and an attachment, too often click on it without thinking first, and BANG, we're off to the races and a new worm has taken over their systems. And because Windows allows users to run in root (or Administrator) by default, these executible files are given automatic permission to run when users connect to a certain internet link or open an email attachment. In Mac OS, it takes several intentional steps for the system to be infected (read, save, become root, give executable permissions, and run). That makes it hard to infect and even harder to spread. Still, people are ignorant of this fact and try to argue, "if Macs had 90% of the market, they'd have just as many virus problems as Windows does," as if this justifies Microsoft's sloppy coding.
It can be argued that just as the majority of Mac viruses can't be counted against OS X, so too the majority of Windows viruses may very well not affect Windows XP, (the latest Windows operating system). To this, I say: If you feel like digging into each and every one of the 71,000 virus descriptions to see which versions of Windows are affected, be my guest. Even if it's only a few thousand, that's still infinitely more than none.
In the end, to mess up a Mac computer, you need to work at it; to mess up your Windows computer, you just need to work on it. I know which one I trust...
Dustin wow, some backing to an argument I like it. I do feel the anonymous person had some points as you do too but, I think you kind of made a point for Windows. Realistically what is your goal if you make a virus? To infect as many people as possible, right?? So, eventhough I agree that their may be some benefits to all the safeguards that a Mac is capable of. Do you really feel that it is fair to say it can stop all of the viruses that were created in the past, given that Mac had the market share? I don't think that they would be able to however, I am not a Mac lover and you may answer differently. I don't know if we will ever find out since it looks like Mac has expanded its focus in a lot of other successful arenas in technology to make money. I would be curious to see how the Mac OS X would hold up in those situations. Either way I would like to commend your argument anyway. And good luck with the debate.
~ Chad
Post a Comment