What are the two main reasons PC people state over and over why the Mac isn't a good option? In my experience, they boil down to:
1. Not enough software for the Mac 2. Macs are too slow With probably "Macs are too expensive" coming in third. And what do we get with Macs moving to Mactel: 1. Large software choices - Macs running Windows software at around native speeds as well as X11, unix and ported linux software and of course Mac software.(1) 2. Macs running processors with the same number of GHz as the competition at last.(2) And with the possibility of somewhat lower prices (though one would assume there will still be something of a premium for Apple quality) In other words the two main arguments against Macs by the uninformed will finally have vanished. (We can argue the merits of Gflops, Altivec etc all we want but average Joe only sees numbers) (1) Craig posted earlier the following comments arguing quite rightly that there are good reasons why developers wouldn't stop developing for Mac - but it is useful to look at these options in the light of how they could sway Switchers into realising there would actually be more usable software available to Mactel users vs Wintel users: > From: Craig Ringer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2005 11:32:14 +0800 > > It sounds like current options for running win32 on the new macs might > be: > (a) dual boot (install and run windows as well as MacOS/X) - best, but > most intrusive; can't use both Mac and Windows apps at once. Requires > Windows license. And of course this is exactly the security blanket switchers would want to have as an option even if they never end up using it. > (b) Windows in a virtualized environment - fairly good, but slow for > some things such as video, may not support Direct3D/OpenGL, etc. > Requires Windows license. If Microsoft doesn't leap on this as a golden opportunity to release a new Virtual PC for Mactel with far better support for video and Direct3D/OpenGL in order to sell many more copies of Windows XP or Longhorn and other Windows-only MS software to all those Mac users out there, I'd be very surprised! The cheaper third party virtualisation options will surely improve significantly as well. > (c) API translators such as WINE. Least reliable, will only run some > Windows apps without specific effort by WINE or the app developers to be > compatible. No windows license required. Considering that Mac users are more than happy to actually pay for software (unlike many Linux users), I'd also be surprised if WINE and other API translators don't improve significantly for this whole Mactel market segment. Here's hoping anyway! > I don't know about you, but none of those sound too fantasic. However compared to our current limited options of sloooow emulation of Windows using Virtual PC and the like on PPC, I think these sound like a huge improvement with many more options for those needing to "run the odd Windows program fast". As previously stated, Mac users will of course always demand well written Mac software, not cludgy Windows-ports so it still shouldn't be an excuse for developers to go Windows only. (2) It'll be interesting to see if there is a significant performance overhead which results in OS X running slower than Windows on the same GHz Pentium chip. With all the Quartz eye-candy this is a possibility, but of course Longhorn with it's own eye candy will be out sometime along in that timescale so it may end up being a wash. We'll just have to wait and see. Here's another interesting take on the subject: http://timcoughlin.typepad.com/tim_coughlins_blog/2005/06/mactel_the_best.ht ml -Mart (who is now into the 5th Stage - Acceptance) :-)
