Switch From Microsoft to Apple?

[5thwheeleroldma]

We've been using MS computers for 18 years now, but I'm thinking of switching to Apple. The reason is I get so many confusing software updates & problems. For instance, MS recently wanted to install a new IE Explorer. We said yes, then it said some other computer was using our address, to resolve it with our administrator. From past experience, I know this will mean hours on the phone and probably I'll still be confused. Seems like they can't leave us in peace.

My question is; do you get all this kind of bothersome******from Apple?
I suppose it would not be too difficult to learn how to use an Apple, and to transfer all my files?

[pulsar]

strollin wrote:

pulsar wrote:
... To me, the bewilderment with Windows starts with the various editions, which is just another way of referring to Microsofts subtractive business model. They produce a "complete" operating system and then they subtract features to sell different editions at lower (or higher) prices, depending on your point of reference. It costs Microsoft no more to sell you a pro system than a basic system, but they sure will charge you more. ...

This is a little misleading, it may not cost MS anything additional to sell you a pro system vs a basic system but it sure as heck cost them more to develop the Pro features vs the basic features. For instance, the Pro versions of Windows have the ability to connect to a domain whereas the basic version doesn't, that ability cost MS more to develop so it makes sense that the Pro version costs more. Why should a home user with no domain pay for that feature that they will never use? I won't say I completely agree with all of MS's editions but I like the fact that they don't have a "one size fits all" mentality. Additionally, MS has Server editions of Windows whereas Apple has largely ignored that market.

Microsoft will produce the pro edition; thus, the cost of that development will be incurred. They could sell that version to everyone at no additional cost. Instead, Microsoft incurs an additional cost to remove features.

Tom

[5thwheeleroldma]

Yeah, Strollin, I noticed that this has turned into a chevy vs ford, vs dodge type discussion. Maybe I'll stick with the MS computers another 2 or 3 years, then possibly replace them with Macs. I'm impressed that the IT guys say less maintenance with the Macs. They probably have more knowledge and less emotion in their comments.

[drillking]

Bill.Satellite wrote:
While you installed Apple 26 years ago and are happy, I suspect there are others (10x's as many others) who installed MS 26 years ago and are just as happy. You have had many updates and so has MS. It's nothing special, it's just what you get used to the software you like to use and you keep using it.

That and virtually virus free as opposed to MS. Each to his own of course, just like RV's and TV's!

[cleo43]

I have a HDD connected to my router.
I made the unfortunate mistake of letting my iPad accessing it.
Apple installed zillions of '.appledouble' on it. I googled and people said they were harmless, but I still feel uneasy.
Yes, the pictures might look better on the retina screen but is that worth it ?
For me if the OP want to jump ship, Linux (like Ubuntu, Mint) is no more difficult than Mac OS. The hardware is reusable from Windows (just don't use Windows 8 machines), and the software is free. Support is plenty and free (Ubuntu). Can you ask for more ? I jumped 5 years ago, by that time I didn't even know what 'sudo' mean.
If you know how to Google, copy & paste, you can Linux.
By the way copy/paste in Linux is the same (Ctrl C & Ctrl V).

[burlmart]

I recall having it and quicktime and realplayer and others like this forced on me years back, but not now.

I just watched a few vids on it and it brought back bad memories. If Apple cannot work well w/o iTunes (including linking to phone, pad, and TV), I would urge the OP to look carefully.

The interface looks very dated, and trying to make all different types of media come up in a common menu system seems a strain - separate apps are better.

[bwanshoom]

iTunes is like a virus with its tentacles spread throughout your system. In my experience, it's slow. buggy and difficult to get to do something outside the ordinary. I know many, including some very pro-Apple folks, who feel the same way.

[burlmart]

Thx, bwanshoom

Well, AFAI can tell, nobody really has anything noteworthy about iTunes, which nakes me wonder why it always comes up as an Apple stinky.

[1492]

I personally would not own a MAC mini, they're difficult and expensive to even self service, but they are quite popular for digital signage and kiosk purposes, especially in museums. In fact, they are almost perfect for this as there really is no practical PC equivalent with a similar size.

Their size makes the mini easy to tuck away in tight enclosures. And they have all that is necessary, hardware wise, for kiosk or signage purposes, many of which are IP based. We even use them for self running theaters(looped) as it's fairly easy to incorporate a captioning option - i.e. push a button on the wall for captioning.

However, the irony is that most MAC minis that I come across in museums, are running Windows 7 software.

[mlts22]

I have Macs and Windows machines. All are frustrating in their own right, and all have nice things about them.

The main rule: What do you want to run?

I'm pretty sure my next machine will be a Mac. The main reason is that iOS app development requires it, so I'll have an OS X partition for that, but will have a Windows BootCamp partition for a few games that require it, and a Windows virtual machine or two to browse the Web, and if the VM gets hit by malware, roll it back to an earlier snapshot, and go on.

Plus, for a consumer with a machine critical to them, Apple's customer support is heads above everyone else, unless you buy a business-line Dell or HP, and pay for their gold level enterprise support.

You do get what you pay for. Believe it or not, a Macbook is expensive, but if you compare it feature to feature and CPU to CPU with new HPs/Dells, the Mac is actually a tad cheaper.

[bwanshoom]

burlmart wrote:

In undergrad times, I had worked a good bit doing Basic, PL1, and FORTRAN programming on the university’s Honeywell MULTICS Unix mainframe at nice terminals in the computer lab.

burlmart, MULTICS influenced Unix in both features and name, but it was not Unix.

[burlmart]

5thwheeler

In undergrad times, I had worked a good bit doing Basic, PL1, and FORTRAN programming on the university’s Honeywell MULTICS Unix mainframe at nice terminals in the computer lab.

Later, I fell in love w/ the Atari and its Basic programming ability, as well as its game cartridges and lots of early Applesque productivity apps. Commodore 64 was the Atari foil. Next, as a faculty member, I had to start using MS-DOS,

I think I’d consider paying a geek to do a one time fix on your network before leaving MS. I am haunted by bad juju floating about w/r iTunes on Apple, where things otherwise free in Windows will cost you in Apple – not sure, though.

[jpmihalk]

There are no right or wrong answers, it is a matter of preference and also a matter of what you want to do with it.

Microsoft Windows has been a target of far more hackers and is also the main computing OS used for business systems (as has been mentioned) and therefore has publicly been far more subject to patching and updates than Apple products. As also mentioned, Apple is not immune from these attacks and patching cycles. Their success with the iPhone and iPad has brought far more publicity of the bad kind and now there are more malicious attacks against Apple products than ever before.

I work in IT and support a 30,000+ seat Microsoft environment. At home, I have MacBook Pro, an iMac and a few Windows 7 laptops (along with iPads and iPhones.) I like the simplicity and user interfaces of the Mac (and I am also a graphics designer and photographer too) and I can tell everyone from years of experience that my Macs are much easier to give to the kids to use to do school projects, etc. With the Windows laptops/PCs they have always had to go download software and other utilities, and almost always ended up getting bogged down with unknown junk and I had to annually go in and slick them and start over. Other than doing the security updates on the Macs, I never have to do anything of the sort for them.

It's bad enough that I am the IT guy at work, I don't want or need to be that guy at home! I tend to lean towards Mac if you want easy, but there is a premium to pay for it as well as a learning curve.

[strollin]

pulsar wrote:
... To me, the bewilderment with Windows starts with the various editions, which is just another way of referring to Microsofts subtractive business model. They produce a "complete" operating system and then they subtract features to sell different editions at lower (or higher) prices, depending on your point of reference. It costs Microsoft no more to sell you a pro system than a basic system, but they sure will charge you more. ...

This is a little misleading, it may not cost MS anything additional to sell you a pro system vs a basic system but it sure as heck cost them more to develop the Pro features vs the basic features. For instance, the Pro versions of Windows have the ability to connect to a domain whereas the basic version doesn't, that ability cost MS more to develop so it makes sense that the Pro version costs more. Why should a home user with no domain pay for that feature that they will never use? I won't say I completely agree with all of MS's editions but I like the fact that they don't have a "one size fits all" mentality. Additionally, MS has Server editions of Windows whereas Apple has largely ignored that market.

As I said in an earlier post, it really boils down to personal preference. Whether you run OS X, Windows, Linux or some other OS they all can get the job done and each has its own strengths and weaknesses.

5thwheeleroldman - I'm sure you're confused because you haven't gotten a definite answer to tell you yes or no on whether you should switch from MS to Apple. If you're adventurous, make the switch and see if it's better for you. We can only tell you which we prefer and, as you can see by the many postings, there is no agreement. 😞

[5thwheeleroldma]

Burlmart, you have a point. Back in the early 1980's, the oil company I worked for tried both Apples and Microsofts. We all loved the Apple and wanted that. Then, as commercial programs came out, they were all on the Microsoft format. Pressure buildup analyses, mapping of oil field characteristics, etc. None of them were available on Apple. Apple came up with programs that supposedly converted those programs to Apple format, but they really didn't work. So we all reluctantly converted completely to Microsoft.

[burlmart]

Familiarity breeds sales. This point was not picked up on any of the 64 posts I read.

The reason I have microsoft is that my employer had microsoft. It seems this may be the factor for MS’s ubiquity.

MS is 90+% of all PCs, and Apple is 5+%. Also, MS is mostly software, and Apple is also hardware. MS likely works on a small profit margin per item sold but sells 20x as many products. Apple needs a higher margin per unit.

But not just familiarity, comparative price counts too, or else there would be no Ubuntu 🙂

I would like to know more about the issue of 'everything needs to go thru iTunes'. Whenever I read about Apple's downside, this is mentioned. I am not familiar w/ iTunes.