Preston Gralla has decided to tell us why Vista is better than Mac OS X. Let’s go through point by point.
First, Vista runs more software. Yup. You’ve got 300 varieties of Barbie’s playhouse that Mac users will never see.
Mac OS X is a very pretty operating system, but beauty runs only skin deep. An operating system by itself is a poor thing — it’s the applications that run on top of it that matter. And here’s where Mac OS X falls short. It can’t run much common software, including enterprise applications and games.
Right, because those two groups encompass all of the computing community. In fact, they’re the same group. Right after firing up that copy of Microsoft Project, users will be jumping right into Quake 4. They won’t be trying to use their computer to work on creative projects where OS X has a clear advantage. I’m surprised he didn’t just assert Mac OS X has no software available at all.
Virtualization software like Parallels Desktop for Mac won’t solve the problem. Parallels can’t run even the most basic Vista games such as FreeCell, Hearts, Pinball, Solitaire and Minesweeper, because it doesn’t support DirectX 9.
So Mac OS X is going to get penalized because Parallels can’t run simple Windows games in virtualization when there are native options available? That seems like a valid concern. The number of copies of Parallels sold to people seeking to run Notepad is mind boggling. For real. Let’s move on.
* Vista is safer.* In particular, because OS X was hacked faster in one security contest, Vista is safer on the whole. That’s all the evidence needed to make a complete, comprehensive assessment of the safety of two complex operating systems and the experience every day users will encounter. Sorry, someone hacked my sarcasm module. It got stuck on. Anyway, when in doubt, he recycles one security experts quote.
I have found the code quality, at least in terms of security, to be much better overall in Vista than Mac OS X 10.4. It is obvious from observing affected components in security patches that Microsoft’s Security Development Lifecycle (SDL) has resulted in fewer vulnerabilities in newly-written code.
We’re onto 10.5. It might be time to get an updated quote.
Next, It’s the money, stupid. Now we’re back into old myths that continue to be perpetuated.
If you’re got a lot of extra spare cash laying around that you don’t care about, then by all means, buy a Mac. But if, like most of the world, you’ve got to work for a living, then you’ll find that a Vista machine is far less expensive than a Mac.
The implication here is that I, and the rest of you slackers, don’t work for a living. Diamonds are standard equipment on the shell of Macs. Here’s the funny thing. Even some of the more diehard Windows users I know actually comment on the affordability of Macs, acting rather surprised by how fair the price is considering the hardware. I’m glad he can hold onto the classic myths. They still create FUD the best.
Laughably he asserts, The Mac is closed; Vista is open. Mac OS X is built on open source software. Vista is not. Confused? He’s not talking about the operating system. He’s now discussing the software/hardware platform. More specifically, Windows is happy to run on any hodge podge combination of hardware you pull together, except when Vista has driver issues with many hardware devices. But really though, the difference is that “Try to do that with a Mac, and you’ll be spending some face time with Apple’s attack dog lawyers.” Paranoid much? If one is really that concerned about open platforms, we’re really talking Linux.
Finally, * Two words — Steve Jobs.* Steve actually includes a standalone iSight to spy on users in every box of Mac OS X.
There’s no doubt that Steve Jobs is a master marketer. And he also knows good design. But he’s also vindictive, sends his lawyers after people who report leaked information about Apple products, and has hypnotized Apple users into drinking the true-believer Kool Aid. Don’t reward him by making him richer.
I challenge you to strip away all the hyperbole and find the actual argument here. Let’s change this a bit to expose what he’s really saying.
There’s no doubt that Steve Jobs is a master marketer. And he also knows good design. But he also protects the company’s proprietary information, sending his lawyers after people who report leaked information about Apple products, and Apple fans are slobbering idiots incapable of making decisions for themselves. I’m so insanely jealous of his money that I can’t sleep at night.
I think the real reason for this article is clear now.
Obviously he is on Microsoft's payroll.
This guy is such a tool. I especially like his last argument. So it's ok for Bill Gates to be rich, but not Steve Jobs? Ha Keep preaching the truth Brothers.
I like the way he talks about "code quality" as if he has personally inspected the source code of both OSes. Mac OS X code not functional or elegant.
I'm glad that Vista is more secure than Windows XP. It would be great if Vista were more secure than Mac OS X. Then, if Microsoft can convince anyone to buy it, it would seriously curtail the zombie networks which send most of the spam. Better security is important to everyone.
There are some pretty nasty anti-Mac blogs at Computerworld right now...David Ramel's is particularly loopy (I'm not going to bother posting the link)
BTW, VMWare Fusion has been supporting DirectX 9 for awhile now. Übergeek (and Mac convert) Chris Pirillo swears by it...(and not just because it's a sponsor. :-)
That would be one security expert's quote.
He has a weak point there. If Apple had a Security Development Lifecycle, updates wouldn't turn off the firewall. Certainly sandboxing and address space layout randomization were not implemented optimally.
It's a shame that everything else is so very, very wrong. My brother bought an iMac before Christmas because the equivalent Dell was more expensive without a monitor and he would have had to pay shipping on the Dell.
Obviously written by a Vista user, for Vista users.
His point is more like this : "hey guys, Vista doesn't suck, look how it kills Mac Os : "insert fake argument here"". Vista is so bad that Windows lover have to get back to old days Mac VS PC mythology to make their point... Well, c'est la vie.
I mean, I'm a convinced Mac user (got a Macbook 2 years ago, then bought an iMac and gave the PC to a friend) and I sometimes have to use Vista at friend's... Ok it's not that good, but you don't have to get that lame to promote it...
I really do despise these articles. It sounds like an attempt to confirm to Vista users that they've made the right choice, and that they'd be severely penalized for using OS X.
I also hate the argument that people make when they say "if you want to do artsy-fartsy things get a Mac, but if you want to do real work, use Windows". Tell this to my dad, who has been using a Mac to make a living since the SE.
You don't know what your talking about. Mac OS X is far superior
I believe we are all missing the point. The number of negative Mac articles has corresponded directly to the Mac's significant increase in market share.
Is it possible that these "PC experts" are just afraid of losing their source of income if the Mac continues to climb in market share?
I made some similar arguments, but with a slightly different approach, over at my site:
http://www.richardgoodwin.com/wp/2008/04/09/another-mac-vs-pc-in-this-case-vista-article/
Wait a second. Solitaire requires DirectX 9? Seriously? Next I'm going to need a discrete graphics card to run Word.
We run parallels / windows XP on a macbook pro and it works flawlessly as a way to view our CCTV and access our accounting info. Since we are a design company we're getting plenty of "real work" done on our macs without a lot of headaches. Say what you want, but we couldn't be happier.