Mass Microsoft Defections to Apple Possible 722
An anonymous reader writes to mention a MacWorld article covering research by the Forrester group. Their report shows that mass dissatisfaction with Microsoft and its products could lead to defections from the company. From the article: "Over all, only Apple and Tivo saw their brand trust rise in the last two years, according to the report. The final tally saw Bose, Dell, Hewlett-Packard, Panasonic and Sony earn the highest marks, while Microsoft, Gateway and LG ranked lowest. The low scores for Microsoft could mean good news for Apple as consumers showed their distrust of the Redmond-based software-giant."
Are we reading the same data? (Score:4, Insightful)
If all your sales outlets have really high customer satisfaction, it's not really a big deal if your customers hate your guts.
Defect my butt (Score:5, Insightful)
Argh. (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean really? This is news? Product-specific magazine predicts rosy future for the product it reports on? No shit?
I am not expecting a rush. (Score:4, Insightful)
Convicted monopolist (Score:1, Insightful)
It's the reason Microsoft has actually held back computing by about five years, altering the course of history. We should be farther ahead in the experiences of using a desktop computer, and Mac users know what it feels like to be there already.
It's amazing the American economy has come to rely on something so...unreliable.
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:1, Insightful)
Doubt it highly unlikely (Score:1, Insightful)
It's a Macworld article... (Score:3, Insightful)
Proof the general public doesn't know jack (Score:3, Insightful)
...about computers. Sony got high marks this year in customer confidence. That proves it pretty much.
Yes, mass defections are *possible*, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
I wish the article had more numbers and less hypothesis. The gist seems to be "people distrust Microsoft, therefore Apple could get bigger." Now, how long has Forrester been conducting these surveys and for how many years in a row has Microsoft been un-trustworthy in the public eye? If 5 million MS users have distrusted MS for years but are still using Windows, the survey doesn't mean anything.
Of course "Mass Defections to Apple are Possible". But they've always been *possible* and yet Microsoft still holds the majority of the market share. Too bad this article couldn't shed more insight than "Survey confirms what Slashdot already believes - people don't trust Microsoft."
Why not? (Score:4, Insightful)
After they get the hang of OS X, they will wonder why they ever tolerated Windows. . .
Re:Argh. (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah, but they were right.
that would be great, but improbable (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Argh. (Score:1, Insightful)
See other articles culled from the same press release:
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=apple+
Trust report? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sony?!
The public is either a mass of idiots waiting to be fleeced, or..uh...
I think I just answered my own question.
Trying a Mac (Score:5, Insightful)
Windows users who give MacOSX a try find that they like it quite a lot. Anand Lal Shimpi over at Anandtech.com springs to mind. Windows uber user Paul Thurott also couldn't review the CTP of Vista without saying "I have certain misgivings about Vista resembling Mac OS X. With its translucent windows, such comparisons are going to be hard to avoid. But Vista's similarity with OS X goes well beyond window dressing. Certain applications, such as Calendar, Sidebar, and Photo Gallery, appear to be directly, ahem, influenced by similar applications in OS X." This is an OS that geeks can't help but love once they use it.
The really amusing thing is now the Mac supports more software than Windows does. You can run everything that runs on Windows, everything that runs on MacOSX, plus quite a bit of the software that runs on Linux. It's geek nirvana.
There really isn't any reason not go give a Mac a chance anymore. I'm an MCSE (gee, did you guess from my handle?)and I like OSX quite a lot. I can't wait to see what they do in the next version of MacOSX since it looks like Vista is going to be used dog food.
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:5, Insightful)
Enough with the overpriced BS. Prove it to me. You show me any PC that can match every spec on an iMac or MacBook Pro that costs 60% less.
Re:Argh. (Score:5, Insightful)
I help people around my area with computer problems, advise them on software, teach them how to do things, etc. Every single one hates windows. To them it's a bit like gas. No one likes paying for gas, but your car won't run without it. When I mention they have an alternative (Apple) many are somewhat interested. None of them want to go out and buy a new computer just for the OS, but they are fed up with MS. Even with the cost of having to learn a new OS (despite the similarities which they don't know of), they are ready to do almost anything to get a computer that "just works".
When it comes time to buy a new computer, many of them will be considering Macs. That may not be for two years or so (due to recent purchases or just hanging onto a computer for a long time), but if they ask me I'll be steering them towards Macs. I use my Mac at home and at school, doing all sorts of stuff. Then I get a call to fix a printer and have to go through tons of hassle to fix the printer on Windows. Or to make the internet work again. Or to remove spyware. Or to fix some odd windows problem (DNS just dies, only on one machine) that seems to require a reinstall to fix.
Windows is a pain. It always has been. It's gotten better, but not nearly enough. If I could turn back time and give all those people who I help a Mac instead of a PC I can not tell you how much easier of a time they would have had of things.
You won't see 20 million switchers a year. But they will switch. They've been doing it and it's been accelerating. Remember that with MS's market share, if even 1% of home users were to switch that would be a HUGE number. If this story gets "debunked" later and they say "only 0.25% of Windows users switched last year", remember that would be about a 10% boost to Apple's market share.
People are fed up. The only people I know who are NOT fed up with Windows are those who love to constantly tinker. I used to be that way, but I got tired of having to tinker. They will too one day.
If you build it, they will come.
If you advertise, they will come faster. I can't tell you how much Apple's sales would go up if they brought back the kind of ads they had during the first iMacs ("My family needed to do X and with their windows computer they had to do this and that and... and it didn't work. We plugged in my Mac and it worked instantly.").
Slashdot gets it right (Score:3, Insightful)
*Some* defections are a pretty good bet, seeing as how people have been leaving windows for Mac OS for the last several years now. Of course, you're right that the macworld headline is fairly optimistic; to double market share would be quite an accomplishment. But does it really seem that far out? Apple has what, a 3.5% market share or something like it? To get to 7% seems very doable so long as Vista is delayed long enough, or just plain sucks. Just imagine if everybody who has an iPod bought a Mac MINI. That would far more than double their market share. Of course, I realize that's unlikely, but the iPod does make an excellent transition device. When people are exposed to the Apple interface, they often get hooked.
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:2, Insightful)
Crappy? Hardly. Only Sony sells more expensive hardware than Apple. As for Apple computers being super stable, you're joking right? Here're some recent examples of "stability":
All computers are manufactured in Taiwan and China. Quality will depend on how much money Dell, HP, Sony, Apple, etc are willing to pay their manufacturers
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:5, Insightful)
Somewhat absurd (Score:3, Insightful)
Who cares about some brand recognition study? These people are all supposed to ditch their stock and steady income over an article on the web? Give me a break.
Last I checked Walmart sure has a lot of employees. Do any of you associate walmart with high quality?
No news? (Score:5, Insightful)
5.4 million customers? Such a staggering number, for Apple maybe. Really folks, how much revenue are these people going to generate for MS? A hundred bucks a pc, every 5 years?
If users need office they will have to buy it either way. In addition, it will be cheaper to buy the bundled version with a Windows based PC.
The salient point the article fails to make is that the real risk is to Apple. By not converting these people they miss out on revenue generated by hardware and software. Incidently, if you are a Mac owner, and you've paid for every major release of OS X, you've paid about $500 over the last 5 years for your operating system. Compare this with $120 (assuming 2k upgrade) for the last 5 years for an XP owner.
The article goes on to say that many people don't associate the iPod with Mac Computers. An interesting point - however it is going to be difficult for Apple to upsell people on a $3K computer, from a $300 purchase.
Admittedly (Score:2, Insightful)
After recent news, I know a lot of people that want to switch. I want to switch as well. However, it's cost prohibitive. Most of the people I know are students, and students trying to afford college at that. Apple hardware is just out of our small budgets.
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is true. It's also true that Apple lives in a different horizontal from Sony, Dell, HP, etc. and has NO competition in that horizontal. IBM clones - the modern PC - allow for competition amongst hardware manufacturers and hence that competition has driven prices down for new PC's. When they are put back into circulation on the used market, they have to compete with the fact that a new PC is priced dramatically lower than a new Macintosh. OTOH, Apple pretty much has a stranglehold as to how their PC's are priced, and because there is no competition in that horizontal to force apple to lower it's prices - you can put a used Macintosh up for sale at 60% or 70% of it's original value, and because there's enough demand for 1) Macs and 2) Used macs that are still a solid product and yet cost less than their newer counterparts, people will still buy them at a higher premium then they pay for a used PC. Apple has the benefit of being the only name in their game - they are allowed to price their new PC's the way they do because of that initial quality, but the retained value is almost purely a result of the lack of competition in the new Macinstosh market and a demand for lesser-priced macs. If you want to really entertain your brain, think about how wise apple would be to offer a trade-up program to keep used mac's off the general market. It's very likely that such a move would allow them to charge an even higher premium for a new Mac because then there is no price competition in their horizontal *at all.*
Re:Admittedly (Score:3, Insightful)
Who do you trust? (Score:5, Insightful)
Do I trust Microsoft? No way!
I would agree that (among my client base) there is a general uneasy feeling building towards Microsoft. So the idea that their ranking is lower does not surprise me at all.
Do I trust Apple? Not anymore than Microsoft.
The conspiracy theorist in me believes the real motive behind their switch to Intel has to do with standardizing DRM.
When all of the hardware is "Trusted" then who will you trust at all?
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:1, Insightful)
not to be a ms fan boy by any means, but... (Score:1, Insightful)
The main issue would be security but the only reason Mac's dont have this issue as much as Windows is that it isn't attacked as much. Take the hundreds of thousands of hackers chipping away at Windows and have them change their focus to Macs and we'll see how quickly OSX becomes "faulty" like Windows is.
I wouldn't blame MS for 1/2 of their problems.
Re:Somewhat absurd (Score:2, Insightful)
Peoples wallets make their decisions for them. People have windows cause the computers come with it. Now people are buying their 3rd and 4th computers and want their old stuff to work.
MS will lose market share when someone else TAKES it, it will not go away on its own.
Only an apple fan... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Apple Stock Price Hurting (Score:3, Insightful)
Funny, my picture tells a different story. [yahoo.com]
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:2, Insightful)
How do you know? (Score:4, Insightful)
What makes you think that? Why would a whole user population constantly under attack from viruses and spyware not fall into a dislike of Windows itself? That's what I have seen with a lot of people.
Upgrades (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes but OS X users are running the equivilent of Vista right now. How much is Vista going to cost, and wouldn't you be willing to pay a little more to be running it about two years earlier? You are ignoring the beenfit I get for my exta feature with reduced time spent on tasks and the ability to make use of new system features.
I think it's pretty funny that you've managed to spin Microsoft's lack of ability to deliver on Vista into a major price comparison plus for Windows!
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:5, Insightful)
Does the dell have a x1600 video card with 256m of dedicated memory or does it use shared ram? That is a pretty big difference in terms of price. You can play World of Warcraft and edit video on your MacBook. I wouldn't try that with the Dell.
Re:No news? (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm sorry, who exactly is putting a gun to the head of Mac owners and forcing them to upgrade their OS? Every non-techie Mac owner I know continues to happily use the OS that came with their computer, just like the non-techie Windows users do. Upgrade cost: $0.
Compare this with $120 (assuming 2k upgrade) for the last 5 years for an XP owner.
Let me get this straight. You're trying to turn the fact that Microsoft has been too inept to get a successor OS to XP out in the last five years into a plus???
An interesting point - however it is going to be difficult for Apple to upsell people on a $3K computer, from a $300 purchase.
Yeah, Apple really needs to come out with some entry level hardware to entice switchers. Maybe a small form factor machine based on those Intel Core Solo and Duo CPUs I've been hearing so much about. They could sell it for $600 or so and call it the "Mac mini" or something.
~Philly
Re:I am not expecting a rush. (Score:5, Insightful)
While it's true that there is less software available on the mac platform, a lot of people have a poor conception of the problem, and think there's more competition in the PC space than there actually is.
For niche stuff there's definitely an issue. This hits home with me in the games department, but I understand that for some really specific business-related tasks it's a big hurdle to adoption as well.
Then there's what normal people do with their computers:
That's about it. People who bitch about a big vaccuum of software on the Mac platform are still thinking in the 1990's, when the web was static and people published things like interactive, searchable Bibles and Microsoft Fucking Encarta. That stuff is like ice makers in a car: novel but totally unnecessary and easily replaceable by, say, getting ice from the freezer. It was an immature space and you had a lot of weird stuff out there, but now people realize it's less of a pain in the butt just to get it on the web for free or look at Wikipedia. Therefore, there are only five applications that people use:
IE - Office - Outlook - AIM - Quicken
Choice doesn't matter. Even though choices exist, 90% of people will use those 5 applications most of the time. It's a space where there's 31 flavors but everybody buys vanilla, and the clerk knows you want vanilla in advance so he starts scooping it and rings you up before you have a chance to say a word. In light of that, is it so horrible that on a Mac, you'll be using:
Safari - Office - Mail - iChat - Quicken
Oh noes! No ActiveX! Whatever shall I do? Furthermore, there are, in fact, alternatives to all of these. You could use Camino, Firefox, Shiira, OO.org, Opera, Thunderbird, Eudora, Fire, GAIM, Pages, or event Pine, Lynx, TeX, and centericq if you really, really like terminals. People have just been trained to think a certain way about the Mac/PC rift, and many of their ideas are sort of fossilized in 1996.
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:4, Insightful)
While I still think that Apples are priced highly, you do get alot of features built into the system.
Bad Survey (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Enough already! (Score:5, Insightful)
I can't see a gamer spending a crapload of money on a system that they can't slap the latest video card into every 6 months.
First, gamers are a tiny segment of the market. Second, many gamers now use laptops to make LAN parties easier, thus have no upgrade option. Third, why can't you slap a new video card in the Mac tower when it is released?
And I can't see a business spending crap tons of money on a more expensive machine to do all the same tasks they currently do.
While some companies do use Macs for the simplified management and lower security costs, you're right that most won't be switching anytime soon. Rather, expect a slow migration towards Linux in the business space. That trend, I think, may open some doors for Mac purchases, as environments will become more friendly to standards compliant OS's
Maybe they'll sell some upgrades to people who use an older mac and want the ability to dual boot, but beyond that...?
Mostly I see this as a way to sell more Macs to potential "switchers." People might want to use OS X, but be unsure if they will like it in the long term. This gives them the security of being able to "switch back" at a low price point. The real market for new Mac users, in my opinion, are those who would love to ditch Windows, but require some Windows-only software. I foresee a lot more migration in this space as virtualization/emulation/reimplementation takes off. Here at work we get to choose among a few particular models of computers; one of which is a powerbook (used by maybe 55% the company right now). I know when the time comes to pick an upgrade several people in administration, sales, documentation, etc. who are now using a Thinkpad will probably go for a powerbook combined with something to run those Windows applications within OS X.
For some it will be their first experience using a Mac (or first using OS X anyway). They have at this point only looked over the shoulders of others and said, "hey how come you can do that?" and "wow that is really cool!" Another interesting item of note, is I don't know people that switch back. Well, I know one guy who bought a powerbook, used OS X for a while, and then went back to Linux as his main OS. But, by and large, when people buy a Mac, they continue to do so from then on. It is hard to lose all that functionality, once you get used to it. This will probably influence their next home computer purchase as well.
In summary, I don't see that bootcamp will be used much, but I do think it will drive some Mac sales. Further, I think other technologies (enabled by the switch to new Intel processors) that allow Windows software to run will drive even more sales. I think this particular article was empty fluff, but I do foresee increasing market share, especially among power users.
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:2, Insightful)
--
"Overpriced" is in the heart of the $ holder.
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's like when people look to compare Mac minis to Dell Dimensions, and they note that the Dells are cheaper for the same stats... but then you have to look at the form factor. The closest thing Dell offers is the Ultra-small form factor Optiplexes, which are still bigger than the Mac minis. Suddenly, the minis don't look that expensive.
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:5, Insightful)
While I still think that Apples are priced highly, you do get alot of features built into the system.
A lot of which are useless for most people. Are laptop webcams in any danger of becoming standard-issue items? Are most people's homes wired for gigabit ethernet (heck, are most businesses)?
I think a big part of Apple's perception problem is that they focus so highly on the high end where you get diminishing returns for extra features and specs. A PC with exactly the same specs as the $2,000 MacBook Pro probably would cost close to $2,000, but a PC with 90% of the features specs of the MacBook Pro might only cost $1,000. In fact, I just went to HP's site right now and built a PC with everything the MacBook Pro has except the webcam and the gigabit ethernet, and with a 64 bit AMD CPU and a 1280x800 screen, and the total was $1,033.99. That's still with a DL DVD burner, ATI graphics card w/ 128MB dedicated, 1GB of system RAM, same hard drive, etc.
I mean the question is what are you paying literally 100% more for? Most people just aren't going to see it. Yeah, component-wise, maybe Apple is pretty close to what those specific components cost. But they could choose only *slightly* less powerful stuff and shave a huge amount off the price. They choose not to do that, and that gives them the perception of being overpriced.
I realize they have the iBook line, but until they actually update/replace that line, it's really a joke at this point. Nobody takes a G4 seriously anymore, and the $1,000 HP laptop I just priced absolutely blows the doors off the $1,000 iBook. (Again, I realize the iBook is smaller and lighter, but when you're comparing overall specs and features, it appears the iBook is way overpriced.)
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple may make better computers and may have a superior OS. That will not be enough to have consumers or businesses switching in numbers significant enough to threaten Microsoft's monopoly.
TW
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not discussing which is cheaper to the consumer. I'm talking about value to the customer.
Where did I get these incredible debate skills? It's called reality.
Reality: Dell has razor thin margins, because they can afford it, and it makes their computers cheaper.
Reality: Apple doesn't have thin margins, they have very fat margins. Then that's how they make their money.
Reality: Dells are cheaper systems than Apple
Reality: I still wouldn't buy a Dell unless I had to.
You're perfectly free to vote with your wallet to say that you want the cheapest hunk of metal on the earth, and a design that hasn't changed significantly over the last 5 years.
Meanwhile, I'm perfectly free to vote with my wallet, and say I don't just care about something being cheap.
To me, money isn't the most important thing in the world that drives every purchase decision in my life. Money just doesn't drive and control my life and purchasing decisions.
Again, you're entirely free to make your own choice, I'm not arguing AGAINST you, I'm arguing around you. Saying that the money isn't what's important to me. Apple provides things that Dell doesn't, and I like Apple more than Dell. That is why I buy Apples.
I just want people to understand that some of us are grounded in reality, and realize that Apple computers are more expensive. I'm just saying that that's not the only thing that counts.
It's the cost of software... (Score:5, Insightful)
The user experience would have to become very bad for me to move.
On the other hand the troubles friends have with the Windows machines seems to suggest that they have passed that line already!
From one closed system to another (Score:2, Insightful)
I'll readily admit that I don't know much about Macs and the formats that are used, maybe most are or are becoming open - I just know that every so often I get a file I can't open from a Mac user (yesterday, an AppleWorks file was the most recent). It was the same when I used Windows, so apparently little has changed over the years. That I can open MS files is just because the community has been so hard at work deciphering the formats and reimplementing them. If Apple becomes any more common, the community possibly would have to start over.
The way that Apple has handled any open source connections to their OS and other products quite clearly shows that they only want to take advantage of it, not contribute back [1] [daemonnews.org] [2] [opendarwin.org] [3] [com.com]. While open standards and open source is not the same thing, and standards is IMO more important, they share a lot of common attributes and philosophy behind. I don't think Apple is interested in either.
It's quite possible that Apple makes a great OS, and great hardware, but it is also quite clear that they are just as predatory and monopolistic as ever Microsoft - they just haven't had the numbers to make the same impact. And I couldn't care which vendor tries to lock me hard to their platform and their DRM, it's all bad in either case. Until Apple decides to play fair with the rest of the world I won't be thinking any better of them than I do MS - being the underdog does not excuse bad behaviour, nor does "but they are doing it".
Being pragmatic to me does not only mean "use what works" it also means looking at what "will work" - and what will continue to do so.
(PS, I can't get a new, open format copy of the cwk file I received until the end of April due to vacations - anyone know of anything that can read this format on a Linux system? Thanks. DS)
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:3, Insightful)
YES BECAUSE GIG-E RUNS ON CAT-5. heh. Read the spec sometime, they pulled out all the stops to get that thing running on 8 strands of copper rated at 100Mhz. At a casual glance, that would seem impossible, but it turns out that was the major design goal, to not rewire anything.
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:2, Insightful)
It seems that by moving the discussion to "value", you have created an argument that's impossible to argue for or against, because it's built upon an undefinable value (or at least a value that's impossible to get everyone to agree on).
What is "value?" It varies for different people. It could be price, looks, ease of ordering the product, tech support, etc.
I think you've touched upon the key disagreement between Mac and Windows apologists, in that there are often different definitions of value being used.
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:5, Insightful)
That's not a $1,300 difference.
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:3, Insightful)
In the 20th century, that was true. Modern operating systems now use the powerful graphics processors available to manipulate video frames in real-time [apple.com] without touching the CPU. This is the sort of stuff we used to buy $3,000 real-time video compression cards for only a few years ago (of course, they were always tied to particular software and codecs).
Windows has viable video editing applications
They are viable, but none are nearly as good/powerful as the Final Cut family. Premiere and even Avid look downright cro-magnon when compared to FCP. My only regret is that after nearly 6 years of professional video editing, I only got to spend the last year and a half of it on a Mac with FCP.
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:4, Insightful)
Name them.
All the web-apps I use have to work around the years old bugs of IE, they don't deliver because of IE but in spite of it. This is 2005 and MSIE can't even render PNGs properly or render CSS 2. Last time I heard that kind of crap was about 4 years ago, I thought people had stopped coming out with it, but obviously not. Web apps which have made news over the last few years have conspicuously not based on IE - gmail, flikr, delicious, rss, podcasts spring to mind. This is what MS was afraid of and why they crushed Netscape.
It's hillarious that people are arguing which is better. Which is better is not relevant
On the contrary, it's relevant for a lot of people. If everyone had attitudes like yours we'd still be living with DOS (Windows was a direct reaction to Mac OS). Hell even DOS was bought from someone else and was a poor copy. Things like a global spell-check (try it on your post) or address book make a lot of difference in some peoples' computing life.
Are you as satisfied as you sound with the pitiful state of OS software and browsers over the last few years?
2 things keep MS dominant
Their aggressive (often illegal) tactics, OEM contracts, bundling, buyouts, embrace and extend
Ignorance amongst the buying public
Thankfully the last of those is starting to change - it's something to be welcomed, but feel free to keep your head in the sand and sneer at alternatives like it's 1999.
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:5, Insightful)
Programs available for OSX are simple to install and are GUARANTEED to run on all Macs without any special user knowledge about specific flavors or configuration settings needed. Same is true for Windows. Can ONE binary program run on EVERY flavor of Linux on every computer that can normally run Windows? If a developer were to make a Linux program to sell at CompUSA, would it run on the same wide variety of computer that Windows runs on? When Linux can equal Windows or OSX in this ease of use, the Dells of this world will have an incentive to abandon MS.
Re:This is very correct. (Score:2, Insightful)
In other words, you know the price of everything and the value of nothing.
If you folks really couldn't care less about Apple, then you wouldn't swarm to these Apple discussions to vent your frustrations.
Re:Trying a Mac (Score:3, Insightful)
Lately ive been using macs instead. Now I have layered windows all over the place, and either use expose, which, by the way is the greatest thing ever invented, or, I just leave little spots of windows here and there so I can click on them to switch tasks that way. Its *a lot* easier to work in a lot of applications on a mac then it is on windows, something I have realized since Ive started to use them.
I noticed the expose type thing with vista and it doesnt look very slick. It kinda organizes all the windows at like an isometric view type of thing and I guess you use the scrollwheel to cycle thru them. With osx, I just flick my wrist to the top right of the screen and I have every open window available to me. Anyway, osx has made me realize that windows is very clunky.
Re:Are we reading the same data? (Score:3, Insightful)
What are you talking about? [nongnu.org] Installing xine is as easy as launching the package manager in your distro and selecting the package that is described as 'plays DVDs you n00b'. =)
Don't mistake the CLI way as the only way, although it is the fastest way to do it.
About the naming: I never saw anyone having a problem with winamp, or Nero, although their names don't make sense immediantly.
I don't know about SuSE, but the rest are as easy as two clicks to install, or worst case senario, click add and write in a repository [winehq.com]. Still we are talking about Dell preinstalling some distro, so all this 'linux cannot play DVDs' is bullshit. So is all the 'I need to go CLI to install my nvidia drivers'. Dell will ship with an image of linux that does this right out of the box. Last time I checked, windows XP doesn't play DVDs out of the box either. I just tried it yesterday and was searching for my PowerDVD CD all over the place...
Lastly, the lack of games is a problem for gamers. So is lack of some professional software like photoshop. But linux really does have to offer alot to a user that is not in need of niche applications or games.
Software and prices (Score:3, Insightful)
Aren't most of the apps for those purposes the same? But Windows probably got more of them, and the hardware is cheaper and perform better.
"When you get high end hardware with high end software and couple it with a system that you do not haveto hire a company every 2 months to clean it out you get the general public looking at it very closely. The mac-Mini entices them further as it's cheap and will use their monitor. (Actually a Dual G5 tower will use their PC monitors, just the FUD surrounding the apple products leads them to think otherwise.)"
Two letters: BS
"Also faced with dropping $300.00 for Vista and the requirement to double ram, speed,etc... people will really look at apple closer as their current system ages."
Yeah, because it's much better to pay $120 or whatever for each "upgrade" of MacOS X? All the time?
Also MacOS X uses a lot of resources, and you pay a premium for the hardware. So this doesn't make sense either.
"Other than games or wierd business apps from the vertical market, there is no real reason to not switch to a more stable, secure and user friendly platform like OSX."
Except that I do belive I would like MacOS X more than Windows there are no reason to switch either. Windows is stable, and what says MacOS X would be much more secure? User friendly depends on what you like I guess, the GUI are probably less retarded on MacOS, but the lack of some apps and the fact that it's "different" will make many people think it's harder to use.