In spite of Apple's switching claims, their USA market share is a miniscule 4.7%, and their worldwide market share is 2.4%. I don't see Parallels, or anything else, causing a dramatic increase in Apple's market share.

Wow- what an article! Actually, I'm not talking about the Mac (I'm tempted, but my clients don't use it yet), I'm referring to the impressive way Tom Yager put motion, even drama, into something as mundane as a PC OS question. Ask the man to write more articles! It isn't "24", but yeah-- I do want to know what happens next.

I used a Mac since I was in high school approximately 15 years ago and now I am thinking about purchasing one. The only factor that could influence my decision is the stiff price that comes with it. Can anyone tell me how to possibly get one at a reasonable price?

Thanks,

Mario
mjreme@msn.com

interesting angle to take - watching someone else's experiences of a different OS, should be interesting to see the outcome.

Many of my friends using Windows PCs, have recently started asking me (Mac user) lots of questions about Macs, and are telling me that the next computer they purchase will be one that runs OS X.

I see people switching to Mac, with parallels
everywhere these days. In my company, it's basically
happening as Macs end up being more productive
machines over the long run. Yes, they end up
being a bit more expensive. But, since OSX does not
provide the same level of frustration as Windows for
most users, the user ends up using their applications
and not needing to administer their machines. So,
you end up doing what you are supposed to and not
wasting time trying to make your machine simply
work.

Windows makes a great standalone machine. Just
don't plug it into the internet - it simply is
not secure. Now, within Parallels, Windows runs
as within an extra sandbox. OS X provides an
additional level of protection to Windows. So,
you end up surfing the web and using e-mail with
OSX. You run OmniGraffle to draw quick pictures
for presentations. Then, when necessary, run
Window applications within Parallels when you
just need to run some application that is not
available on OSX. BTW... the OSX software gap
is getting less and less every day. I rarely
have to go to Windows. I think MS Project is the
only reason I still use Windows these days.
But, Parallels is great as it provides the Windows
compatibility security blanket whenever you just
need to run something on Windows. Most days, I
never have to touch Windows and simply don't miss
it.

JohnJ
Your numbers are 1) outdated, 2) meaningless, and 3) ignore recent market trends. Installed base means much more, and your narrow analysis ignores significant factors such as overall market influence, the demographics of those who do choose Mac OS as well as comparative customer satisfaction with Vista vs. Tiger. Even if you ignore the future potential of Leopard, you've got to wonder who has been buying all of the computers that Apple is selling. How do you account for the fact that their computers are selling like hotcakes at a lumber camp?

How did he get her keyboard to work with the MacBook? In his article, he claims the MacBook sits closed on her desk, connected to her LCD. So can MacBooks take a keyboard and mouse that were originally built for Windows?

I don't like Apple peripherals (keyboard, mice), so can I buy a Mac but continue to use the peripherals I already own?

thanks,
J.

Remember even if your new mac is more expensive to buy, which is debatable you will save money in the long term.
Macs cost less to maintain, proved time and time again.
Macs also last longer, cheap pc's are replaced more often than Macs. My wife uses 10.4 on a 6 yr/old g3 imac, how many pc users are using xp on 6 yr old pcs and no vista users.
No virus software subscriptions, another saving.

All I can say is I have been using pc's since 85 and I finally made the switch to the Mac platform when I was able to dual boot into XP or Mac and also run parallels when neeeded. It has been awesome!

I am digging the Mac for all my church activities doing graphics, web development etc... and still have the pc when needed. But it seems I am booting less and less the pc side. Just my 2 cents

Wes

As someone who has used Apple IIe (ProDos), IBM PC (MS-DOS), Mac OS 6 through 9, Windoze 3 through XP, and Mac OS X, and all of them extensively, I have to say that putting Parallels on an Intel Mac is a GREAT way to show Microsoft users what they've been missing!

Apple simply GETS human interface... to an extent that is far, far, FAR superior to Microslop. I use Macs because I want to and like to, and Windows because I have to run my company's proprietary software. The Mac ALWAYS delights me with its ability to run for years with little maintenance and little confusing interface BS. Try it, Windoze users. You will like it.

J:

All PC peripherals work with Macs. Since Macs are truly plug an play, PC peripherals will sometimes work with far less hassles on a Mac. Don't forget that you can also run Windows along with OS X, just in case you need to.

http://www.apple.com/getamac/peripherals.html

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/mac/2002/09/13/pc_peripherals.html

Yeager,

Excuse me, but I was looking for enterprise strategies in the column entitled "Enterprise Strategies". Please spare me the evangelical fluff as I can get as much of that as I can stand from the Prada crowd. Unsubscribe.

I'm impressed that this hasn't turned into a Slashdot-like flame war. It's treading the line, but hopefully will stay on the sane side.

I like the Mac, I think it's nice hardware and a slick version of BSD. However, I don't believe that running two O/S's is particularly efficient. If you have to run Windows apps, what is the benefit to running them inside Windows on a Mac?

Security? As a security professional I know that the O/S is typically only as secure as the user who's running it. There are vulnerabilities and malicious code for OS X, Safari, Firefox, etc. I can't remember the last time I had a virus or spyware infection on my Windows machines. Why? Because I don't trust everything that's coming to my computer. I use my Linux boxes exactly the same way, just because the likelihood of getting infected by a virus or worm is less doesn't mean I'm careless.

Cost? You still have to buy a license for Windows and all those applications, plus you've paid more for the hardware.

User experience? You still have to use Windows. And now you've thrown in an O/S which uses completely different theories as to how to go about completing the same tasks. So now not only do you have to contend with the same Windows apps, you have to remember how to make them run every time you switch.

If you're going to switch to the Mac, switch to the Mac. But don't just do it so that you can run Windows on more expensive, proprietary hardware.

Oh, and Tom; any time you replace a desktop computer with a notebook you're going to make your office neater and quieter. It isn't that way just because it's a Macbook.

Using the MacBook with the lid closed is easy and even works with a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse

http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=300562

As for the marketshare numbers referred to JohnJ ... umm, so what? The Mac is growing at 3 times the industry average and the company is hugely profitable. And unlike a certain software company, Apple gets a relatively quick return on its R&D investments.

Is your point somehow that a 4.7% marketshare will somehow doom the company? It's interesting how obvious your need to see Apple fail is...it's not like Mac sales aren't at record levels and growing at 3 time the industry average.

And you obviously aren't concerned that such a doomed company can somehow post $1+ billion in quarterly profits (which is about $400 million more than, say, Dell).

Now I ask, who is fixated on what? Frankly, someone should do a story on why there are so many Windows users who are extremely angry at Apple, even though they claim they would never deign to touch an "insignificant toy" Mac. By that reasoning, it's like blowing a fuse because a butterfly drank some nectar from a flower 1000 miles away.

Or maybe the Mac isn't so insignificant after all. What a concept!

I don't care about market share, except I wouldn't want Apple to go titsup.

Using Windows and Mac daily, the former not connected to the internet, or even my LAN, for that matter. Windows comes in handy quite often, and as long as you put the effort in, will do what you want. In fact, its greatest strength is that it *could* do almost anything, given enough effort, whereas the Mac just does the majority of things - certainly with less effort, and usually better.

I've used NextStep and OS X, but my last two Apple purchases were terrible experiences. A PowerBook was DOA, but for weeks Apple support would not consider any possibility other than a bad power adapter. Only thru the intervention of a dealer were they finally convinced to replace the unit. Recently I bought an iMac C2D for home (no high speed). It was nearly a month from placing the order until the unit arrived. Wireless and modem do not work properly. Apple sent a replacement modem (2 weeks after they were informed of the problem) that won't connect at all. I don't think Apple has mastered Intel technology yet. If you get a machine that works in your environment, Apple OS X will let you work more efficiently and (in part due to the tightly controlled hardware) with fewer software problems. Vendors selling Windows systems know that if the machine doesn't work out of the box, customers can return it and choose from 100's of alternatives. Apple takes the view that customers are hostages and knows they can take weeks or even months to resolve problems because the customer can't go elsewhere.

Great article. My parents are contemplating a Mac. So I am very curious how this switch turns out.

I am curious about effects on the switcher regarding the system maintenance, licensing, performance/troubleshooting, and data backups. Have the overall costs significantly increased and maintenance got more complicated? Thanks.

I just really don't see the big deal. I've run OSX tiger Dual-booted with WinXP on my custom built PC(non-Mac). Yes it's possible. I did this because I didn't see the need to buy a mac machine just to experiment with OSX. Now with the hardware issue aside, OSX is nice. I still don't see myself converting until more software are available (mostly games). Right now Windows allows me to have one OS to do it all. OsX is getting there, but still not a reason for me to switch to just using it. If I was to switch because of function and speed alone, then I would just use Linux. For a user that's new to computers in general, I would highly recommend a Mac. Other than that, it's mostly just personal preference of the user. If anyone says otherwise, they are deluding themselves.

Parallels is brilliant - simple as that. As a web developer building inter-operable sites, I have to test against Windows browsers as well as mac browsers, and having the ability to test against the 5 major browsers, (IE6, IE7 and Firefox for windows & Safari and Firefox for Macs) all from ONE machine saves a huge amount of time.

Parallels is not designed as a dual boot solution - it runs side by side with OS X giving you the opportunity to run Windows in a separate OS X window, or integrate it right into OS X's desktop, complete with its start bar etc using Coherence mode.

One last point to remember - you can have multiple VM's, givng the Mac the ability to wear a Linux hat, a windows hat (3.1 right through to Vista), a Solaris hat, an OS2 hat - and an MSDOS hat - Good god, it doesn't get much better than this!

Its stable, and fast (it boots quicker than my 3.2 GHz pc), doesn't leak memory, and like the Mac - it just works.

Re Apple Market Share - its actually (by some calculations) up to as high as 6.3%

Apples notion of affordable hardware (slotless limited expansion systems) for me is unacceptable.
If apple offered their tower class systems at the same price of the Dell that I'm going to be buying, I'd consider buying apple.

That is exactly why I dropped Windows for Mac OS X. I don't want one machine that does it ALL, meaning of course All the viruses, spyware, adware... I guess if your main use for a PC is games then get a PC. Otherwise, get a Mac and boot into Windows when needed.

The statement "Parallels runs Windows applications": Does it mean you don't have to have a version of Windows installed? If so, this is great, since having recently purchased a Macbook, there are a couple of applications I use that just are not available for OS X, and I am not looking forward to installing XP, etc.

"How did he get her keyboard to work with the MacBook? In his article, he claims the MacBook sits closed on her desk, connected to her LCD. So can MacBooks take a keyboard and mouse that were originally built for Windows?

I don't like Apple peripherals (keyboard, mice), so can I buy a Mac but continue to use the peripherals I already own?

thanks,
J."

J, you will find that any USB mouse and keyboard will work on Macs just fine. However, on Windows-oriented keyboards, the Apple key called "Command" (who's symbol looks like a highway cloverleaf) most often translates to the "Windows" key (that one that brings up the Start menu), and the Apple key called "Option" (who's symbol looks like, well, something unique!) seems to translate to the "Alt" key.

Other than that, I have used many "Windows" keyboards and mice on my Macs, and have yet to find any that don't "just work".

Hope that helps.

-Doug

George,

"...my last two Apple purchases were terrible experiences..."

Normally, I'd agree with you, but after having completed my "switch" back in Jan. '06, I'd have to say that overall the CS folks @ AAPL have been very good to me. Of course, you have to get the right CS person on the other end. I just don't know if your hardware was made on a Monday or a Friday, though...(those of you in the mfg industries know what I'm talking about)...

If I were you, I'd head to the closest Apple Store as they tend to have better customer service people that are empowered to resolve issues like yours faster than by phone to wherever the heck they've outsourced CS to...

I cut my teeth on CP/M years before the introduction of MS-DOS. I have always thought the Apple looked like a toy and the desktop seemed cartoon-ish. Working in the industry, I have tolerated Windows annoyances in favor of a computer which I can customize, upgrade, downgrade, and much cheaper than a Mac - which had a cult following anyway. What's the good of having a nice 68000 platform which nobody supports?

Windows2000, however, was my last Microsoft operating system. With the introduction of XP I winced. With the introduction of Vista I wept. Then, Apple produced the Mac Mini for about 600 bucks, which runs Debian Unix as a file system, OS X for a GUI, and Parallels on the new Intel Dual Core can run Win2K and all my favorites as an application window on the Apple desktop. I kept my LCD screen, USB printer, firewire scanner - all work better on a Mac than a PC. Apple has redefined the "PC" while Microsoft has just committed suicide. The industry is going through the 7 stages of death. They're all in "denial," which will be followed by bargaining, depression and finally acceptance that Microsoft no longer makes any really useful software.