If the MacOS is so great, why do I need Windows…?

Windows, Windows Media Center Edition 1 Minute

Charlie Owen takes note of the buzz surrounding the Apple Boot Camp announcement and asks the logical question:

If the MacOS is so wonderful why do I need to even consider running Windows?

I can think of a couple of good, non-snarky answers.

Some people genuinely prefer the Mac interface (pick your reason: it’s better looking than Windows XP, it’s more secure, your friends like it). But given the demand to make a binary choice, they pick Windows because the productivity software they want or need is only available for Windows.

If you think the Mac OS is wonderful, but you’re also a gamer, you’ve got no choice but to live in two worlds.

Maybe I don’t think the OS is all that wonderful, but the hardware is slick and stylish. If I don’t care about paying a premium, I might be willing to buy, say, a Mac Mini and run Windows Media Center on it. (Personally, I think the AOpen Mini PC would be a better choice, but hey …)

Welcome, Macsurfer visitors! Be sure to also read these posts:

A better Windows than Windows?

Apple’s Boot Camp is just the start

Dual-boot, no; virtualization, yes

 

Published by Ed Bott

Tech journalist. Author of 25+ books. ZDNET Contributing Editor since 2006. Contact info: https://edbott.com/contact-me/

Published

15 thoughts on “If the MacOS is so great, why do I need Windows…?”

  1. It’s that old “knows the price of everything, and the value of nothing” argument. Having used both operating systems for many years, the difference between OS X and XP is a matter of convenience. OS X stays the frick-frack out of your way and XP very often is the impediment to getting things done.

    Still, I’m developing arthritis in my hands. The best software for “verbal typing” is made only for Windows, Naturally Speaking. I’m hoping for a virtual solution to run the program in an OS X window, but failing that, dual boot.

  2. Thanks for giving non-snarky answers, and lowering the hostility from both sides.

    For me the only reason to use Windows is that some people use MS Project and Access, and it’s really hard to read those from a Mac. For others, it’s Autocad or Framemaker. It’s simply that there are still a lot of file types that cannot be read by a good Mac program. (And it’s true going the other way as well but not as often.)

    For still others who recognize that it’s okay and good for both OS worlds to co-exist, it’s to see how their Web pages render in various Windows browsers.

    So there’s lots of reasons to run Windows that have nothing to do with how much better the Mac OS is than Windows.

  3. Frankly, I think this is part of a pretty smart strategy. It will get more people to try OS X, and the more people that try it, the more who won’t go back to Windows. It’s kind of like letting Yugo drivers zip around in a BMW for a while. Sure, the Yugo will go from A to B, but it’s noisy, annoying, and prone to breakdown. Frankly, I expect the marketing campaign to include that theme: “If you like Windows, go ahead. You’ll still have the best hardware in the world. But, we think you’ll like the safe, crash-free, virus-free world of OS X.” And let’s be honest, as well as non-snarky. I use OS X and XP on a daily basis. XP is infuriating in so many ways. Our office tech support guru knows that XP keeps him busy (and the rest of us aggravated), but is a decent enough guy that he tries to get the company to switch to Linux or OS X. Apple is going to take Windows on — head on — and its going to be in the consumer world first. And its going to be very interesting indeed.

  4. One thing that people seem to be missing is that this is just the next step after the Mac mini.

    The mini allowed you to upgrade the computer while keeping all the stuff you had before; keyboard, mouse, monitor. Boot Camp now allows you to keep Windows XP and all your PC apps as well. It just makes switching even easier because most of your prior investments can be carried over.

    With this philosophy, Apple may continue on to virtualization, but it won’t lead to them selling Mac OS X for use on PCs from other manufacturers.

  5. You may be willing to buy a mac mini “if you don’t mind paying a premium.” Note that the computer you referenced – the AOpen Mini computer costs $779 when outfitted comparably to the $599 Mac Mini (and this doesn’t include software such as iLife or Media Center not available for the AOpen) . I think it is time we realize that some of the assumptions regarding the costs of Apple hardware are a bit dated and inaccurate.

  6. Chris, I’m not sure where you’re getting that price. Try this one:

    http://www.minipc4less.com/mp915bcombo1.html

    At $647, it’s about $50 more than the base Mac Mini. But it has a copy of Windows XP Media Center Edition, which would add $125 or so to the cost of the Mini. At 40GB, the HD is smaller, but I’d want to replace the drive in either system if I were using it as a Media Center, so that’s irrelevant to my calculations. And anyway, I have to carve out a partition on the Apple’s 60GB drive for Windows, so I can’t use the whole thing.

    The AOpen has a DVD burner, the Mac doesn’t. The Mac Mini has Wi-Fi, the AOpen doesn’t. But I would use a wired network anyway, so I don’t care about that.

    iLife and indeed the whole Apple suite are irrelevant to me if I plan to use it as a dedicated living-room Media Center device.

    Most importantly, the AOpen was designed to be a Windows machine. So from my point of view, it’s a better choice.

  7. If you’re defending Wintel, you don’t get it. But that’s okay. I will give up personal computing if I ever have to regress to Wintel. And that’s the name of that tune.

  8. Just looked at your $647 PC that has a smaller drive, uses a Celereon processor vs the Core Solo on the mini, does NOT have a DVD burner, has a smaller hard drive, and only one RAM expansion slot, less USB ports, is not wireless or bluetooth, does not come with a remote (as the mini does) has an inferior graphics chipset, the list goes on and on…and yet it still costs more.

    Even having to partition the Mini’s drive you would still have more space available for the Windows partition for some reason you wanted to run Windows on it. AOpen obviously tried to copy the Mini but could not compete at the same price point with lesser hardware.

  9. You’re right about the DVD burner. I read that wrong.

    As for the rest, you mentioned the smaller drive twice, ignoring the fact that neither a 40 nor 60GB drive would be sufficient for a Media Center PC. And 512MB is enough RAM, so I don’t care about extra memory slots for my intended use. And it includes a copy of Windows Media Center.

    The Celeron M is an excellent processor for a Media Center PC, and the Mac remote would be useless to me.

    For my intended use, the AOpen is a better deal. YMMV.

  10. Juan, I’ve seen all the demos. I use Media Center for more than just music, most notably its TV-tuning capabilities. FrontRow doesn’t do that. Media Center does.

  11. Thank you for trying so hard to save me from myself, Juan.

    After I buy that third-party hardware and software to add TV-tuning (and recording? It has to record, too) to my Mac Mini, will I be able to operate it using the Mac Mini remote? No? I’ll need another remote?

    For the record, the Media Center remote is very easy to use. It passes the Spousal Acceptance benchmark with flying colors. The Logitech Harmony 680 universal remote controls every device in my living room, and despite the fact that it has more than 6 buttons it’s really, really easy to use.

    I have a hard time understanding how I can control my DVD player, AV system, TV, and Xbox 360 using a 6-button remote. Maybe I need a private tutorial from Steve Jobs.

    It’s obvious you really hate anything related to Windows, but in this case it happens to work very, very well.

  13. I agree with Ed Bott that if the use of Mac OS specific applications are of no use to him, then it may not make sense for him to buy a Mac computer. My only point is that the Mac is very comparably priced (see below comparisons).

    http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/03/06/aopen/index.php
    http://www.systemshootouts.org/shootouts/desktop/2006/0325_dt0600.html

    For those of us who prefer the Mac OS environment, applications, and security – as well as hardware esthetics (appearance, decreased noise), of course the Mac Mini is the obvious choice. Now that Windows applications are available for the mere cost of the software, there is no doubt that the Mini competes well with other intel hardware.

    I would just like to put to rest the “paying a premium” argument as no longer valid.

  14. I cracked up when I saw this:

    Wouldn’t you save almost as much space with a flat screen monitor, either way? If you look at the amount of space that mini saves compared to just the tower, it’s a little ridiculous. Reminds me of those cosmetic ads, where in the “After” shot, the lighting, music and beaming smile of the model makes a wee bit more difference than whatever beauty cream they’re shucking. 😉

  15. That is pretty silly. I’ve got lots of desk space, so the advantage of a Mini (AOpen or Mac) for me is using it for media in the living room.

Comments are closed.