What on Earth is that graphic trying to say?

"I use Powerpoint, and it's made me insane."

You made a similar post to this over at your Apple blog, so I will just repeat my thoughts:
A friend of mine who is a recent convert to a MacBook Pro and an iPhone is switching back to a Windows based notebook. Why? He finds OS X unproductive (not from a features perspective), but from the point of usability. It slows down common task for him, he didn't specify what type of problems. But I have a good idea what they could be, the Finder is really a step back in comparison to Windows Explorer and many issues relate even to how users switch between applications and child windows. But that is just my opinion.

If Apple is so successful, why is there only one first generation MacBook Pro at my institution? People love value yes, but they want usability and features which the Mac offers. Yet I am seeing Vista based laptops popping up everyday. I am at home I will be carrying my camera this week to take some pics of the many Windows Vista notebooks I see everyday. Windows notebooks suggest that users are getting all the value they want that a MacBook or Pro would off and more. They don't need aesthetics or the fact that its a non Windows system to prove who they are.

People are enjoying their Windows based notebooks, a friend of mine recently bought one of those Inspiron notebooks with the built in Web Cam, Pentium Dual core, 2 GBs of RAM and Vista Home Premium. He called me over to check it out and I was impressed, we even ended up making a short movie. Thats just how seamless it was and Vista is at the heart of the experience. Perceptions continue to fester around Vista, but they are not affecting its adoption or consumers confidence in the many PC OEMs. Apple has a long way to go from 25 million to a billion, but I wish them all the best otherwise.

A poster using a MacBook Pro made a delightful comment about all those Apple laptops, here is what he had to say:

I'm using a MacBook Pro but run primarily Windows on it. The reason for buying it? Its one of the fastest laptops out there and with Bootcamp is a great Vista machine. A fair number of the folks I see in the airports using MacBook Pros are either running XP/Vista, or are using VMware Fusion/Parallels under OS/X to run XP/Vista and Office apps. So don't jump to the conclusion that just because we're using Apple hardware we've "defected" from XP/Vista...

Craig

P.S. The performance score for Vista on a MacBook Pro is 4.5; not many other laptops around that can post a number that good...

So, Apple going Intel is a major win-win for Microsoft. Keep them MacBooks coming, there is enough Windows Vista go around. ;)

"The company's strategy of higher absolute and average selling prices is paying off."
What a funny statement on consumers this is. Mac has truly become the Prada or Gucci of laptops. Sure they cost more than double than another option that is just as well made ... but we want the glowing apple symbol on the back, and for some silly reason we're willing to pay for it!

I bought an Acer laptop this month for $395.
Considering it had Windows Vista it should have been discounted further to $295.

@Andre Da Costa:
Yes, your observations generally match my own. What I've noticed is that for most people who are used to Windows, the Mac + OS X experience is very foreign and unproductive and frustrating.

However, for those who are long-time users of Macs, the Mac platform is every bit as intutive and productive for them as Windows is for others.

And for the relatively small percentage of people who posses the combination of desire to migrate, need to migrate, and ability to understand the differences, then moves among Windows, Mac, and Linux is easy and without pain or lack of productivity.

I think that a lot of the complaints about Vista are based on the fact that it's different enough from what most people are used to that they are initially frustrated and annoyed. But once they get over that, most don't have any further issues with the difference.

Apples (the computer!) have remained a relatively small niche because most people value consistency with their past experiences over advanced capability that they'll never need. But for those in advanced high-end graphics and video production, the ratio of Macs to Windows is much higher. And the cost difference diminishes due to the high price of the high-end software for those advanced applications and the income earned from the advanced integration of those applications on the Mac.

At one time, Adobe Photoshop was available ONLY on the Mac and on Unix (Silicon Graphics Indigo workstation running Irix) and NOT on Windows. Microsoft played catch-up to add enough basic color and font capabilities into Windows to allow Photoshop to function credibly on Windows. The advanced color and font capabilities of Mac and Windows have grown closer over the years, but Mac was clear leader and still has an edge.

I wonder how Apple sales will hold up in the weaker economy? At some point, unless things improve, the price premium has to have a negative effect.

I bought an HP laptop (AMD 1.9 Ghz, dual core, 160 GB drive, 2 GB memory, integrated wireless, and web cam) for $506, plus tax, one month ago. It came with 64-bit Vista Premium and runs great. I've been running 32-bit Vista Premium on a 2.0 performance scale for nine months with zero issues. With a weakening economy and $300M M$ marketing campaign under way, I would say it's more likely that Apple will start to loose some of its market share gains/mojo in the next 12 months, especially if Windows 7 (aka Vista 2.0) is released early, next summer. M$ biggest problem in the consumer space is they don't advertise their products. Everything I've read suggests the Zune's beat all but the Touch and even with that device it appears that the software side of the Zune has moved past what Apple has to offer. M$ needs to get Windows Mobile 7 out the door ASAP rather than delaying the product's launch as suggested last week.

Yes, Apple is a failed company, doomed. Their products are unproductive, overpriced junk and if everyone would just stick to Vista, our streets will soon be paved with gold.

LOL

@Andre, aside from the Automator. Which you haven't responded with a viable alternative to. I have to add that Windows Explorer on Vista is pitiful.

There are a few observations I'd like to list. On one side I have Windows Vista Home Premium and on the other OS X Tiger.

The views are split pretty much the same. Top nav bar, left block for links and folders and the file section from the center to the right.

OS X has a place for Volumes (drives) on the top left bar. Vista does not and that requires you to navigate back and forth to switch drives.

When you drag a file or folder OS X automatically opens a folder if you hold the item on it for a few seconds. This allows you to navigate with your drag and drop. Vista requires a cut and paste action aside from the navigation.

The left bar on OS X allows quick links to folders and files. Vista allows only links to folders. So quickly accessing files is not possible with Vista.

The top bar on Vista has a useless button called Open ("Abrir" in my Spanish version) which opens the selected file. Isn't that what the double click is for? There is also a Record button to burn a CD. OS X has one too, but it comes up only when you have a CD or DVD in the drive. What is the point otherwise?

OS X allows you to create a Burn Folder. A repository for files you'll want to put into a DVD or CD later on. When you actually have a CD on the drive. I don't know if that is possible with Vista and the menu options don't give any hit it is possible at all. Maybe if I recorded a Visual Basic Macro?

When you change view modes some labels stay on the top. Like column label for File Size or Date, when the view shows no date value. It is practical to sort by, but confusing.

OS X allows for expandable and collapsible folders in the file area (center to right). I find this better than having to expand another navigation tool on the left to do something I can do right there.

Vista's icons are set at fixed sizes just like OS X. An improvement would have been icons that could scale to any size through a slider not to a few preset sizes through a slider as it is now. In regards to icons Vista provides no added functionality than OS X.

Meanwhile OS X handles RAW images perfectly while Vista does not. Sure an extension can be added to Vista to support them, but I'm talking out of the box experience here to set a level playing field. OS X supports it without any user intervention.

In my opinion the Vista experience is functional, but lacking aesthetics. A bit of a Frankenstein of operating systems. Lord Victor F. must live somewhere in the Control Panel as that is probably the most convoluted tool I've seen to date. I may add that some tools there (like ODBC configuration) still use a file browser with the looks of Windows 98. Why are these old dialogs visible when we have newer ones in the OS? More to the perception of this OS as a Frankenstein.

PS, a few observations about the Burn Button.
Pressing immediately requires a disk in the unit.
I can create a folder called "Burn Folder" (manually) and drag files to it and burn it later. While OS X allows the creation of links to the files that will be later burned to the disk, Vista requires the copy of the files to this folder. Under Vista if you copy a link a link is burned, not the actual file. Arrgghhhhh.

Seriously though, what's with the graphic? It reminds me of an old Atari 2600 game: Warlords; only in reverse.

Anyhow, the age-old Apple v.s. Microsoft debate will continue beyond all our years. Our great-great-great-great-grandchildren will have their own opinions. Neither platform will disappear entirely and who knows what Google has up their sleeve?!?!?

Personally, I've decided to use what works best for me. You all should do the same. When people argue about things like this, it makes them look like a jerk. Deep down, most criticism is based on fear; and life is too short for that.

If you haven't tried stepping out of your comfort zone, try it. If you don't like it, step back in.

Use a computer with a task in mind. It's a tool, after all.
If you have such problems with the interfaces, write the companies that make them and recommend. They DO listen to their customers.

When did Microsoft start selling PC's. I know Dell, HP, Gateway and countless others sell PC's with Windows OS. Their latest ad's are confusing to me.

@Sven Markinson:

Re: "Personally, I've decided to use what works best for me. You all should do the same."

Good advice!

Re: "Deep down, most criticism is based on fear; and life is too short for that."

I'm not sure about most criticism, but yes, a lot of it is certainly based on fear of change.

Tolstoy's observation was that all happy families are alike, but each unhappy family is unhappy in its own unique way. In the same way, criticism is made for very many and different reasons. Some criticism is out fear of change or becoming obsolete. Other criticism is out of meanness or just to get a reaction. And yet other criticism is perfectly objective and factually valid (such as a bug report or other observation of undesirable behavior or lack of capability).

Re: "If you haven't tried stepping out of your comfort zone, try it. If you don't like it, step back in."

This is (almost) always Good Advice. The human race would never advance if no one stepped out of their comfort zone.

One example that is widely derided is the attempt to create a credible mass-market desktop environment from Linux and FOSS. For sheer audacity, it's a perfect example of people who are stepping way outside of the established comfort zone.

Another example is for Windows to become a credible mission-critical server environment. If Microsoft had listened to those who said it couldn't be done, they wouldn't be doing it now.

And yet another earlier example is Microsoft's belief that it's tinkertoy tiled Windows 1.0 environment and fledgling Word application could possible compete against the widely popular, faster, and much more robust WordPefect and DOS combination. And yet they went way outside any reasonable comfort zone. In the process, they created a new comfort zone of their own and created a solid (and often much loved) desktop office software monopoly.

Therefore, I would add to your statement, "And if others wish to step outside their comfort zone, don't criticize and abuse them. Be happy that you enjoy your comfort and let others enjoy their daring." ("And don't throw chairs in fury just because others have different ideas of what comfort zones should be preserved and which ones should be stepped outside of".)

Thanks for the breath of fresh air and sanity!

And please don't take my criticism as being derived from fear!

Does this article have a point?

Most of the discussion has very little to do with the article itself.

John Davis

John Davis says:
"Does this article have a point?"
----------------------------------------------------
Yes, it does have a very specific point. One that I have been pointing out in my comments. That Apple is hurting the OEM's that sell computers in the USA. Not only that, but Apple is hurting the Laptop sales of OEM's in the USA. Specifically, Apple is hurting the OEM's sales of the more expensive laptop sales. And once you figure out why Apple is able to do this, you will get the point.

Nice to see that Joe has the actual figures here to back up what is going on. Very nice post Joe.

Andre's (the MS shill) point that Mac OS X is unproductive, is besides the point. So what is "unproductive?" While I do find the dock in Mac OS X Tiger is not to my liking, and find the user interface in KDE Linux and Windows up to XP, to be in my comfort zone, it does not make it "unproductive."

"Unproductive," is an operating system that crashes regularly, has to be rebooted every few days with heavy use, has memory leaks, uses an obsolete registry system that any program can change, this is some of what is unproductive. DRM in an operating system is unproductive, no doubt about that, and the extra cpu cycles it uses.

"Unproductive," is an operating system that has over 1 million forms of viruses and malware written and widely spread out on the internet, just waiting to attack it. "Unproductive," is an operating system that most people who use it need to reinstall it about every year. And that system is MS Windows.

When Windows users have problems getting their email, surfing, or just installing software, because of malware or just software incompatibility, then we get the the point, of why Apple is starting to kick Micro$oft butt. Users are tired of the problems of Windows, and want a secure operating system that just works, without all the crashes and malware problems of windows. For some that is Mac OS X, for others, its the freedom of GNU/Linux, both are Nix type systems, although different in many ways.

So the big question is, when will the pain of the PC OEM's that put Windose on their computers, realize, that Microsoft is not helping them sell their products anymore? In fact, its the other way around now.

High margins for Apple are very significant. This pays for the R&D that results in even better products in the future which make it even harder for Dell, HP, et al to catch up.

Future improvements are hard to estimate. This is a counter argument to the articles suggestion that Apple has peaked out.

Regarding price, I would point out that the price difference may not be as large as suggested. For students Apple offers education discounts. In addition, each summer they offer a deal whereby you get a $200 discount on an iPod when you buy a laptop. On the other hand, there is the Windows Tax on when you purchase a PC. A month or so ago someone documented the extra $400 or $500 they had to pay when they bought a cheap PC laptop. It involved various copies of anti-virus and anti-malware software, some application software, an extended warranty and an installation fee for the software. It turned out the install fee was worth it as the in-store geeks needed over a day to figure out how to install the software. Apple computers come with iLife installed, iWork is just $79 or so and is dead easy to install.

As for businesses, there was an AP story the other day about businesses giving employees a stipend and letting them buy their own computers. They said it costs businesses about $2600 or $2700 to buy and support a PC. Employees were given $2100. In one example the woman bought an Apple with software and extended warranty and was very happy about it.

I wish my company was that enlightened. They force us to use windows. I find it counter-intuitive and struggle with it every time I have to use it.

@chips b malroy:
Thanks for saying what I'm getting tired of repeating, and also for saying it rather eloquently and completely.

And since I don't use Windows much at all anymore, I've managed to put the pain of the Registry out of my memory. The Registry is the Achilles's Heel of Windows. It had so much potential to be a stellar design. It simply BEGS to be a properly distributed tree that is linked at run-time to look as if it is one tree, when in fact it should exist as several trees: one protected root for Windows itself, an individual subtree for each application, and dynamic links from the root to each subtree. Then if one subtree is corrupted, most of the tree remains usable. And if Windows is reinsalled, the application subtrees wouldn't have to be rebuilt. But Microsoft took a short-sighted view, either due to schedule pressure or else plain old ignorance, and ended up with the single global Registry abomination.

I only would exception to calling Andre a shill. Like you, I don't share his love of all things Microsoft, and don't share his disdain for all things non-Microsoft. But he's honest enough to post his real name and a link to his web site. To me, that link paints a picture of someone who is young and inexperienced, but willing to learn and grow and offer increasingly refined opinions. As he never takes offense to my opinions though they often greatly differ from his own, likewise I am drawn to respect his opinions even though they may differ from my own.

Philosopher says:
"I only would exception to calling Andre a shill. Like you, I don't share his love of all things Microsoft, and don't share his disdain for all things non-Microsoft. But he's honest enough to post his real name and a link to his web site. To me, that link paints a picture of someone who is young and inexperienced, but willing to learn and grow and offer increasingly refined opinions. As he never takes offense to my opinions though they often greatly differ from his own, likewise I am drawn to respect his opinions even though they may differ from my own."
----------------------------------------------------
Andre and I go back a long time posting comments here. While I call him a MS Shill, its not without reason. Yes he posts a link, which you can look it and find out its hosted by Live.com (Microsoft). While I have not been to his site in forever, it used to read just like a "just the facts" type of website run by a typical MS evangelist employee blogger. And there's more if you want to do a little investigation with google. As far as him taking offense to your opinions, keep posting, and if you post enough, critical of Microsoft, well, it has happened to most of us. Lets just leave it at I have not doubt that Andre is working for, or somehow benefits from promoting all things Micro$oft.

Windows takes forever to boot or reboot compared to Mac OS X. It's anoying compared to Mac OS X.

Apples are NOT more expensive, just limited to better models. I've seen Dells and HPs going for more, very similar hardware, and yet they can't run OS X, iLIfe, Mac Safari, Mac iTUnes, etc....

The Macs run EVERYTHING. They even run Windows bette than a generic PC.

"However, for those who are long-time users of Macs, the Mac platform is every bit as intutive and productive for them as Windows is for others."

Ha, priceless--I've never heard anyone refer to Windows as "intuitive" in the real world; and I've definitely never seen anyone "productive" on it compared with what they could be doing on a Mac. I'm a Computer Resource Specialist in a large school district. A lot of these comments just aren't real folks.

US market share doesn't mean as much as it used to, now that the US accounts for less than a quarter of the world market.

Worldwide, I think netbooks have already overtaken Apple's market share. And soon I expect Linux preinstallations will overtake OS X.

This is atypical Windows fan boy article. Yup, Apple cant keep growing they way they have been. Yup Apple is going to start getting viruses any day now. Yup, people wont pay extra for an Apple. The basic fact is that people do pay (and happily) more for an Apple as its a platform that works and is more productive than anything Windows has.

Comparing the productivity of 2 OS'es based on a file Explorer/Finder tool is disingenous at best and completely nonsensical. I run Windows XP, Linux (2 varieties), Windows 2K3 and a Macbook Pro and a Mac Pro - like many others find the OSX experience is superior and more productive than Windows or Linux. FYI - I use Photoshop, Lightroom, GIMP and a number of tools for photography but none on Windows. It's too slow and problem prone and the user interface sucks.

> It will be interesting to see how Microsoft's "I'm a PC"
> commercials will affect Mac sales.

The only effect that ad campaign will have is curing insomnia.

Those ads are completely pointless and forgettable....actually, they are pathetic given the basic message in them is "Hey! They're lying! We're not nerds!!! See???!!!!"

One thing that is left out of this article is the fact that PC laptops also get paid to put crapware on the machines. Sony for example charges a extra 50 to 100 bucks to provide a laptop with no crapware on it. Apple does not do this. This should be factored in on the pricing. Also so should software, such as iLife. Overall I find Macs are around the same price as Windows Laptops when you compare similar models with similar software, this includes bluetooth, wireless N, iLife, and similar sizes. A majority of cheap PC laptops are heavy lap breakers. It is hard to dismiss industrial design and cosmetics which also should factor in. And to be honest when comparing, it should be between Macs and machines that come with Vista Ultimate. All the crippled versions of Vista do not match OS X since there is only one full feature version of OS X. It really is the little things that add up, such as batteries, do the 500.00 laptops come with 4 cell batteries vs Apples 6 cell batteries? Those are important differences for price.

Interesting that epcs are going where Apple had great success with 12inch PowerBook G4s. I hope Apple reintroduce the more compact formfactor as it goes beyond Air.

But in relation to the price difference, those low cost notebooks are not really low cost - they are low in life expectancy. From experience of friends and my children (cut price school notebooks at inflated service/maintenance prices) you end up paying significantly more over time due to higher replacement rates. The apple notebooks tend to give very useful performance and life well beyond the extended three year applecare warranty (the phase out period for me has been MacOS version compatibility not product failure - 6 plus years of useful hardware life!).

I think many people bitten by the $ gouging PC industry with short product lives, vigorous and forceful upgrade cycle, and regular need to OS rebuilds are very happy to move to Mac, the longer Mac service life and the stability of the Mac experience that the price premium covers.

Cheers

Brian says:
"Apples are NOT more expensive, just limited to better models. I've seen Dells and HPs going for more, very similar hardware, and yet they can't run OS X, iLIfe, Mac Safari, Mac iTUnes, etc....
The Macs run EVERYTHING. They even run Windows bette than a generic PC."
----------------------------------------------------
The last sentence of Brian really says it all, as to why Microsoft's OEM's are taking a beating from Apple now in the USA marketplace in the high end laptops. Because of the licensing and patenting of Mac OS X, Apple has made it to run only on Apple products, even though will little work, it will run on many, if not most regular OEM's computers, but maybe not legally. This is a type of tactic that Microsoft has used in the past, to promote their software, and now Apple is turning the tables on them. Microsoft doesn't want Mac OS X running on OEM's computers, as it fears the competition, but at the same time, this delima, is hurting its OEM partners sales.

M$ would be better off taking Apple to court, and getting Mac OS X to be licensed on regular pc's, long term. And then setting up Windows, so that it can dual boot and play with other operating systems easily. I think they will find out that most people want to be able to run multiple systems, and those that don't will just buy the OEM system.
--------------------------------------------------

Lawrence D'Oliveiro says:

"US market share doesn't mean as much as it used to, now that the US accounts for less than a quarter of the world market."

While this is true, it is still the best market for higher priced laptops. The USA is a mature market for computers, except for laptops, which are in many ways, replacing the desktop computers in the USA. This is also the most profitable market, the USA higher priced laptop market, one that Apple has cut into at the expense of Microsoft's partner OEM's. The OEM's are hurting now, and the recession will further increase their pain. Most likely, if the recession is a bad one, or long one, some of the weaker ones will fail.

China is now selling netbooks with GNU/Linux for less than $100 US. That means the emerging markets will be able to afford a netbook with GNU/Linux at much greater rates than with that other OS. There are hundreds of millions of Chinese, Indians, Africans, Russians and South Americans who could join the 21st century of IT really quickly now. With a recession in the USA, every OEM of PCs will be looking for new ways of making money and selling huge volume of low-margin devices is the way to go. The M$ monopoly can disappear in a few years at this rate. The sub-$100 machines are not x86 and there is no version of that other OS for them, but they run GNU/Linux very well.

Re: "M$ would be better off taking Apple to court, and getting Mac OS X to be licensed on regular pc's, long term."

Hahahahaha! ROTFLMAO!!!!

"Your honor, we only have a 93% market share. But our predatory competitor, Apple, has 100% of their 4.6% market share. It's just not fair, your honor!"

Philosopher :

Re: "M$ would be better off taking Apple to court, and getting Mac OS X to be licensed on regular pc's, long term."

Hahahahaha! ROTFLMAO!!!!
----------------------------------------------------
While I would agree that licensing Mac OS X on pc's, by using court action to break that monopoly would actually hurt Microsoft short term. But consider this, Apple is the only computer that can legally run all 3 major operating systems, Mac OS X, Windows, and Linux. This fact is driving their sales, so long term, this is starting to have a bad effect on OEM sales. It cannot be long that the effect of this, and the recession, will cause some sort of a rebellion amongst the OEM's.

However, you want to look at it, Apple is hurting MS. Slowly as it is now, or it could be faster, but at least not take down the OEM's that MS depends on to pass on the tax. Forcing Apple to license Mac OS X for PC's would in effect turn Apple into more of a software company, like Microsoft. And we know that MS is at it strongest, when competing against other software companies.

@chips b malroy,
Please don't interpret my laughter as being directed at you; rather, it was directed at the image of Microsoft trying to convince a legal forum to force little ol' Apple to unbundle their software from their hardware.

I agree that Microsoft would more easily compete against Apple if Mac OS X was unbundled. Just as they were able to force Scott McNealy to knuckle under once Sun OS (in its various forms, such as Solaris) was unbundled from Sparc.

But the market forces that drove Sun to make the split don't seem to be as powerful as those that would drive Apple. And so Microsoft is left to convince a judge that teeny tiny Apple is a threat to their poor underdog juggernaut monopoly.

@Philosopher:

Of course, this is already being done?
Psystar countersues Apple on antitrust grounds
news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10028726-37.html

Microsoft's Real Problem: The Second Coming of Apple
alleyinsider.com/2008/7/microsoft-s-real-problems-cloud-computing-and-the-second-coming-of-apple

Quote from the link: "Apple (AAPL) shipped 1.4 million computers in the US during Q2, representing 8.5% market share and 38% year-over-year growth. Mac shipments grew 9 times faster than the overall U.S. PC market (4.2%) in Q2. Q2 U.S. Mac sales grew by 386,000 computers year-over-year, handily beating no. 2 HP, which sold just 222,000 more computers in Q2 2008 (4.17 million total) than it did during Q2 2007 (3.94 million). Dell outsold HP and maintained its top U.S. market share; it shipped 5.25 million PCs last quarter, up 557,000 units/11.9% year-over-year, and representing 32% of the U.S. market."
--------------------------------------------------
Does anybody really think that the new "I am a PC" commercials are doing anything but furthering Mac sales?

worst graphic ever.

the only part i can make sense of is Windows growth going up and Mac growth going down...which is completely backwards.

seriously, that's hilariously bad.

The Apple and Windows competition has been around ever since the dawn of personal computing. People tend to purchase PC due to lower cost while people belonging in the upper class opt for Mac. I wonder what would the market support if both companies agree to have similar price ceilings established.