DealsOnTheWeb Daily Deal: J&R ComputerWorld's Weekend Sale - Save on TVs, Digital Cameras, Games & Tons More
Mossberg: Why PC Users May Not Want to Switch
by , 3:00 AM EST, February 17th, 2005
Walter Mossberg of The Wall Street Journal, who has consistently praised Apple's products and frequently recommends to readers that they at least consider a Mac, outlines the reasons a Windows user would not want to switch to the Mac in his latest column.
Cost and compatibility are Mossberg's most significant warnings. Accordingly, Mossberg suggests that the following sorts of Windows users think twice before dipping their toes in the Mac pool:
- those who are resistant to learning new ways of performing tasks
- those on a tight budget -- you'll need more than just the Mac, likely a copy of Microsoft Office as well or maybe a multi-button mouse
- those who rely on specialized business or financial software -- VirtualPC presents somewhat of a solution, but not an ideal one
- those whose company's IT departments support home computers
- those who must remotely link up to a Windows network
- those who love Microsoft Outlook
- those who play lots of games
- those who rely heavily on financial software -- Microsoft Money doesn't exist, Mac Quicken is a little different, converting Quicken data is "a bear," and many specialized financial programs don't exist
- those who want an ultra-light laptop -- the lightest Mac weighs 4.6 pounds
- those who use a music player other than the iPod -- Napster can't run on the Mac, for example
"Of course, you can overcome most of these obstacles if you buy a Mac as a companion to, rather than a replacement for, a Windows machine. But then you'd still be battling Windows viruses and spyware, and having to spend money and time to maintain dual platforms," Mossberg concludes.
"The bottom line is that the Mac is a great alternative for mainstream consumers doing mainstream tasks who are sick and tired of the Windows security crisis. But it isn't for everybody."
Observer Comments
Thu Feb 17, 2005 4:58 am Subject: He's right, you know.
"The bottom line is that the Mac is a great alternative for mainstream consumers doing mainstream tasks who are sick and tired of the Windows security crisis. But it isn't for everybody."
Not everybody knows nor cares that Windows isn't the be-all or clichй or computing solutions. We collectively do our bit to spread the word, hopefully in an unantagonistic way as possible, but often the seeds are spread on barren ground.
The 'don't care' is important. Plenty of people are perfectly happy with what they've got. They don't want any more. Their computing needs are few, or are complex enough that only XP will solve them. There's a reasonable chance that the soi-disant halo effect will improve the percentage of Apple users, but still the majority of computer users will continue to use *what we consider to be* an inferior product.
Apple's not going to go bust - hell, $US91/share is not to be sneezed at, whatever it may mean. The Mac may well take a large chunk of the market over the next few years. It may not. Realists like Mr. Mossberg are a moderating effect on the whole thing. Let's just hope that he doesn't get pissed off with Apple and continues to write from his current angle.
Thu Feb 17, 2005 6:24 am Subject: Apple needs just about 10% market share
Mossberg may be right, but who said Apple is looking for a 90% share of the market. They just need a reasonable share (I would say 10~15%) to keep software developers and stock holders happy.
I don't buy the BMW argument, but there will be consequences if we start seeing TOO MANY macs.
Thu Feb 17, 2005 8:10 am Subject: I always like Walts view.
Walt always shoots straight and I think he is on the money once again here. Not that this is actually saying much. I could predict that a majority of Americans will eat at McDonalds sometime in the next year and be just as entitled to a crystal ball.
I am wondering if this might not have some reverse psychology effect though. How many users are gonna read that column and decide that none of the negative categories apply to them and so conclude that they should probably switch?
Thu Feb 17, 2005 8:23 am Subject: Just read the whole column
QuoteGuest wrote:QuoteGuest wrote:
make that 20,000
hic!
Doctors say 8 hours of sleep is a MINIMUM for a good nights rest. Some of us survive on 2. hehe
Actually this doctor will state that the recommended sleep is betwwen 5 and 8 hours per night and will depend on habits, caffeine or chocolate intake and mood amongst other things. What is right for one person will not be right for another. More than 8 hours sleep will often decrease the amount of effective REM sleep which is one of the reasons over sleeping can leave you feeling fatigued.
ermm.. how to keep this on topic.. I'd dispute the issue over Microsoft Outlook as Entourage has most of the functionality and has others to compensate and it plays nice with MS exchange these days.
Thu Feb 17, 2005 8:46 am Subject: must also pay for Office for Windows!switchers would alrea..
Thu Feb 17, 2005 9:32 am Subject: must also pay for Office for Windows!switchers would alrea..
Thu Feb 17, 2005 10:38 am Subject: A new troll!
Thu Feb 17, 2005 10:59 am Subject: Walt forgot the biggest reason...
Which is:
- those who are cowards, terrified of change.
While similar, its different than merely being "resistant to learning new ways of performing tasks". I know one PC guy who's a big talker, but he's a coward that will never risk even the $500 for a mini, even though on his salary (6 digits) its a trivial expense for a toy. He's simply irrationally terrified that he might "miss something important" if he were to switch away from Windows. Go figure.
-hh
Thu Feb 17, 2005 11:03 am Subject: re: You've Got to be Kidding
Thu Feb 17, 2005 11:21 am Subject: Re: re: You've Got to be Kidding
Quotedhp wrote:
Calm down, dude. He didn't say *no one* should switch because of those things. He just said *IF* those things apply to you, you might not want to switch.
In fact, I don't even think he was saying "you might not want to switch." It's more like "these are reasons people don't switch," in which case, don't kill the messenger.
Are all of these reasons true? No. Are they reasons people don't switch? You betcha.
Thu Feb 17, 2005 11:48 am Subject: Smart Move - Lock Into 1 Proprietary Vendor
Thu Feb 17, 2005 11:58 am Subject: another reason for not switching
I know a few people who will not accept that a computer works allright when they have not had to spend quite a bit of effort and time in getting it up and running. They simply want to puzzle things out and need to take a lot of hurdles before they can accept a result. PC's fit their way of doing things perfectly and they will never switch.........
Doesn't the comment about forcing other developers out of business and force people to use your products sound like the business model M$ invented and perfected? Except Apple products, wherever they may have originated, tend to be terrific and M$ products tend to be, well let's avoid obscenities and just say "not terrific."
This guy has no sense of business history at all! The first person to maintain that M$ is a business ethics angel!
QuoteRealityCheck wrote:
I like monopoly pricing and quality.
you are talking about Windows here, right?
since when is a 2% market share evident of monopolistic practices
i think many of the intelligent people here realize that apple will not win out, and that in fact the computer will not even be a traditional computer in the next 10 years
we like apple computers because they simply work. whatever task, whatever time
there is a premium to pay for something to be reliable. in the 80's there was the option to go buy a Yugo for dirt cheap, or spend some more money and get something like an oldsmobile. here is a hint, the cheaper had a nasty habit of just not working
i think the people here would like to see apple hover right around a 10% market share-- enough users to warrant third party development without having to fear millions of pieces of crapware which infest it for merely visiting the wrong website
just like M$ is going to gain market share in the digital music market, so will apple in the home computer market because there is nowhere to go but up from the proverbial bottom
windows (and M$) can be compared to the village whore-- willing to get in bed with anyone for a price, but always coming out with another disease
TRO
Thu Feb 17, 2005 12:46 pm Subject: Re: Apple needs just about 10% market share
QuoteGood points. 10-15% is about the max Apple could garner if it continues on a creative/consumer/digital lifestyle focus.kwameaj wrote:
Mossberg may be right, but who said Apple is looking for a 90% share of the market. They just need a reasonable share (I would say 10~15%) to keep software developers and stock holders happy.
I don't buy the BMW argument, but there will be consequences if we start seeing TOO MANY macs.
IMHO: More than 80% who buy PCs don't read Wall Street Journal or similar financial news or technical news. They based their decisions on what they see are currently used or friends'/relatives'/colleagues' recommendations.
Apple has yet to launch any marketing effort at this 80%.
Btw, such guys are also not likely to be owning an iPod too.
Thu Feb 17, 2005 12:51 pm Subject: Re: Smart Move - Lock Into 1 Proprietary Vendor
QuoteRealityCheck wrote:
Sorry iLemmings but the BMW analogy is BS. BMW doesn't require you to use only BMW roads and BMW gas.
Bad analogy.
Apple applications = Engine Parts...which ARE put in by BMW.
Roads and gas would be, I don't know, keyboards and electricity, or something, and you're free to get those on your own.
Thu Feb 17, 2005 1:11 pm Subject: Mierda del toro
When it comes to BS your the expert
The Macintosh doesn't require you to use Apple internet, TXT and HTML files, blank media, etcetera, so the BMW analogy is NOT BS. Sure you need to use some Apple hardware for repairs, but try fitting a Yugo transmission onto a BMW engine.
I am not STUCK using OSX and Apple applications, no more than a Windows user is STUCK using MicroSoft stuff. I can use UNIX if I want to as well as 3rd party software that runs under OSX, hell I even have Virtual PC installed and use it occasionally.
QuoteRealityCheck wrote:
Sorry iLemmings but the BMW analogy is BS. BMW doesn't require you to use only BMW roads and BMW gas. With Macs you're stuck the Mac OS and Apple applications. Apple's done of good job of forcing developers out by stealing their ideas and incorporating them into the Mac OS or freeware that once the developer is gone becomes payware. Not the kind of company I want.
Whenever you see the words "iLemming" or "iDisciple" in a post, it is a sure indication of a troll. Im surprised people even respond to them. I think I remember people like them.. they were the big bully in school.. you know the one's that resorted to name calling and if that didn't work then they'd beat you up because they liked the controversy and attention.
Thu Feb 17, 2005 1:49 pm Subject: "Afford" is an important word
A family friend doesn't have the money to update computers very often. She was on a ODS PC for years (I fixed her Y2K problem by changing the system date to 1989) and upgraded when her sister sent her a replaced PC - now she is on 95. She's also on a dial up internet connection and is rather happy that she can do email - which is about all she can do. If she ends up having to buy a computer it'll probably be a Mac mini. While she "could" order one now she would rather set the money aside for vacations, etc.
RC is still mentally out to lunch. Except for buying iWork to give it a try everything I have bought for our Macs are non-Apple apps. Look around RC as there are a lot of OS X apps available from other companies/developers. Around 14,000 if I recall.
QuoteRealityCheck wrote:
Let's see, I'll pick an OS that requires me to buy computers and most of my applications from one vendor.
Steve Jobs recently stated that there are over 10,000 native Mac OS X applications, of that less than 20 are offered by Apple. Even your beloved Microsoft makes several applications for the Mac. Why would they do this if Apple forced it's users to use only Apple software?
Don't blame Apple because you're too stupid to figure out how to install software. I'm sorry to hear that you can't work your Mac, but the problem is definitely at your end, everyone else with one can figure it out.
QuoteI like monopoly pricing and quality.
No $#!%. That's why you like Windows so much.
QuoteSorry iLemmings but the BMW analogy is BS. BMW doesn't require you to use only BMW roads and BMW gas. With Macs you're stuck the Mac OS and Apple applications.
*yawn*
QuoteApple's done of good job of forcing developers out by stealing their ideas and incorporating them into the Mac OS
What exactly are you talking about? It's hard to refute points when you allude to things instead of talking in specifics.
Quoteor freeware that once the developer is gone becomes payware.
That doesn't even make sense, why did you waste time writing that?
QuoteNot the kind of company I want.
Then why are you constantly trolling message boards about their products?
You're obviously jealous. Is it because the rest of us Mac users that can figure out how to install 3rd party software are smarter than you? or because we have enough money and commonsense not to buy the cheapest thing on the shelf?
Fri Feb 18, 2005 2:27 am Subject: Lookin cool in his Joo-Janta 2000 Peril-Sensitive Sunglasses
Fri Feb 18, 2005 2:39 am Subject: Re: Lookin cool in his Joo-Janta 2000 Peril-Sensitive Sungla
Mossberg means well but he doesnt know what hes talking about really. With this article hes just trying to 'please all parties'.. the reasons he gives for sticking with PC are all voided in the long run IMO, for example, you will still save money buying Macs, even if you do have to buy a version of MS office. Anyway most people will be fine using Appleworks - which comes free.
