Since this thread has been hijacked anyhow
, a few more words.
I have posted a dozen times on various sites on how I believe that Windows is the worst operating system that was ever developed. (And there are very few people that have used as many OSs as I.) And yet, people claim that I am somehow prejudiced against Apple. The claim now is that I have “strident idiosyncratic anti-Mac biases.”
For some reason, people that like Macs need to explain to PC users that they are “wrong.” You rarely see PC users saying this about Mac users. We saw thousands of ads suggesting that PC users are fat, mendacious, ill-dressed nerds that could never pick up a girl. But, we don’t see PC companies stoop to this disgusting method of advertising. (Reminds me of the style of tobacco ads.)
You must evaluate a company and its products according to their current state and applicability to your current needs. Intel was a terrible performer a decade ago. Couldn’t do anything right. Now, it’s hitting on all cylinders. And, it has a lot of cylinders. AMD has gone from remarkable to not so good, comparatively, over the same period. MS is a terribly managed company. But, they make great server software, the standard in office products, and they seem to have finally put out a reasonable PC OS. To ignore this because of the past is self-defeating. That’s bias.
Apple makes a fortune by selling fancy designs. They are a marketing/design company, not a tech company. They have comparatively few patents, a low R&D budget and primarily assemble off-the-shelf hardware in Mexico and China. And they are really cool looking, and yes they are stable. But why?
Well, they are stable because they only support a tiny fraction of available hardware products. A PC enthusiast can upgrade to the newest and greatest video card as soon as it comes out. Faster disks, solid-state disks, all manner of new cards. That means that vulnerabilities will exist because of the openness of the OS and the willingness of PC hardware and software companies to include, indeed encourage, thousands of third-parties. So, there is a balance between stability and flexibility.
And yes, the Apple equipment is gorgeous. Partly because it is so thin. So, how do they take off-the-shelf parts and make the devices thinner? Simple. They ignore the device requirements of the parts that they buy. (Kind of like anorexic models that are also gorgeously thin, but ignore nutritional requirements.) They don’t provide for cooling space. And heat is the greatest enemy of modern hardware. Devices fail, and batteries can’t be replaced. What do they care? Just means they can sell new devices. (We called this “planned obsolescence” when US car companies did it and lost market share to Europe and Japan.) In one case, they had laptops that got so hot they could literally sterilize men that put them on their laps. Where are you supposed to put a laptop?
Apple has a very low product share outside the US. The foreign tech mags jokingly call Apple proof that Americans have more dollars than sense.
My point with all this rambling is that one should choose what makes sense to them for whatever it is that they do. Biases will only lessen your ability to make a correct decision. I don’t criticize people for buying Apple products any more than I criticize them for eating Brussels sprouts (yecch.) It’s a matter of taste and if it suits your needs, more power to you. I have been asked why I don’t develop for Mac, and have given my answer. Development is an entirely different can of worms. I think my rationale is clear, logical, correct and completely unbiased.
