brad's Experience - Mac vs PC, 2005

I think it is time for another installment of the examination of Mac versus Windows. Mac OS X Tiger has been out for some time now, and of course Windows’ latest edition has been out for several years. This will be a comparison of Tiger and Windows XP.

Inherent strengths of Windows XP: 90-95% of desktop operating system environment gives it incredible muscle with 3rd party software developers. As a result, there is a seemingly infinite amount of 3rd party software applications available for the Windows platform, to accomplish seemingly any task. This share of the marketplace also all but guarantees compatibility when trying to communicate with other desktop users on other networks.

Inherent weaknesses of Windows: once again because of the market share, those people who wish to cause problems in the form of vandalism or violation of privacy, tend to write applications – viruses or other malware – for Windows because it will cause the most collective harm and allow access to the largest group of users. Another major weakness of Windows is that its code is generally regarded as inferior, in terms of stability, when compared to other operating systems such as Unix or Linux. The base code for XP is “NT Technology,” which has largely grown to be very bloated and without a major overhaul since it originated.

Inherent strengths of Mac OS X: the operating system is based on a combination of Unix and open-source base code that provides a level of stability that Windows cannot approach. It is an industrial-strength base below a desktop user-interface that can be used by practically anyone. Mac OS X is tied to specific hardware configurations by Apple Computer, and so the operating system knows which hardware components it is working with and this helps to provide a level of stability that again, Windows cannot hope to approach.

Inherent weaknesses of Mac OS X: because the operating system is tied to Apple hardware only, it is effectively a closed system. Because Apple does not license its software to 3rd party hardware makers, fewer configurations are available to run the OS, which probably takes away some of the advantages of a closed system. As an example, it is generally regarded that microprocessors made by AMD or Intel are more powerful than those made by IBM or Motorola, the latter two of which are components of Apple’s hardware configurations and power Apple computers. Another of the inherent weaknesses is that because the Mac OS has only 2-3% of the desktop market, many 3rd party developers will not make or “port” their software applications for or to the Mac OS platform. In other words, it is not worth their time to develop for the Mac, because the Windows user base is practically a monopoly.

With the basics out of the way, how do the user-interfaces and OS features compare?

First off, I use each platform about half of my time. I am forced to use Windows XP at work, and that is around 40 hours per week. The remainder of the time, I use Macintosh computers that run Tiger. I switched personal computing platforms in 2002, at which time I moved from Windows 2000 to Mac OS X Jaguar. I have used every major version of Windows and I have used Mac OS X since Jaguar and also versions 5-8 during my years in junior high school and high school.

Well, what are some things I like about the Windows GUI (graphical user interface) that are not in Mac OS X?

The taskbar! Overwhelmingly, this is the most productive piece of the GUI for Windows. At any given time, and for most practical desktop applications, the application windows have a presence in the task bar. At any time, I can switch between multiple tasks simply by choosing windows from the task bar. And the task bar is above everything else, which is to say it is always present, and so it is very easy to access any open application. Please note that these are defaults. Of course, Windows’ GUI can be customized (and many people do).

Overall, Windows’ GUI is very straight-forward and relatively easy to use. My Grandmother, who had never used a computer in her life, was able to pick up Windows 98 and do essential Email and Web Surfing over the course of probably two-three months. The structure of presenting windows was well thought out and it is easy to navigate the system as to find files and to keep the desktop organized. The taskbar is the key to the GUI, in my opinion. But using an OS tool such as the “Windows Explorer” with the left pane being a tree-structure, hierarchial, or “drill-down” view and the right pane being the preview of what is inside what ever file or folder is selected in the left pane, is both straight-forward and powerful.

Unfortunately, Windows has not progressed much since the release of Windows 95. Most of the features of the GUI of XP are found in 95, including those I just referenced. Essentially, the only way the GUI has changed is probably some cosmetic changes and some functionality changes (USB support, Firewire support, Wi-fi support, the like). As for cosmetic changes, I don’t find them significant or giving the GUI any boosted functionality. A perfect example is the default skin on XP, sometimes known as the “Fischer Price” skin. All this does is give the windows a bit of a different default color scheme and tax the operating system because it is nothing more than a skin. I have always turned this off and returned to “Classic” mode, as I find the classic GUI far more functional.

How is the Mac OS better or different?

Well for starters, I don’t have to use an “Add/Remove” function in a “Control Panel” to uninstall folders, files, or applications. I simply find the files and move them to the trash. Then they’re gone.

Applications don’t have traces of themselves all over the operating system. Application files are always located in one place. If I want to create an alias for the application launcher, I can do that (same as a “shortcut” in Windows). Otherwise, whether I want to find files of an installed application or would like to see if an application was deleted, I only need to look in one place.

The following point has to do with bundled applications. For example, Outlook Express versus Apple Mail and Internet Explorer versus Safari (email clients and Web browsers). Outlook Express uses a proprietary file system, so that any email downloaded into OE is pretty much stuck there. For example, I could not import OE messages to Apple Mail. I had to jump threw about five hoops. Apple Mail uses standard Unix mailbox files. These files can be imported or exported into or out to any type of email client on practically any type of platform – Windows, Linux, Mac, and of course Unix. As for Internet Explorer, it is not based on open Web standards nearly as much as Apple’s browser, Safari, or for that matter, Mozilla’s Firefox (all popular browsers). IE uses Active X, which is proprietary and not in Firefox or Safari.

Mac’s built-in search functions are far superior. This is especially true since Tiger. Before, the Finder was superior to Windows’ “find” files function. But now, Tiger has “Spotlight,” which at a moment’s notice, can find practically any type of file in a great number of areas and applications, including the use of metadata.

Expose’. Pronounced “ex-pose-aay.” Expose’ is a function that moves all open windows to the background so that you can see them all and choose which one you want to have in the front. This is useful if you have many open windows. Of course, in Windows this isn’t necessary, as all open windows have a presence in the taskbar. I prefer the taskbar, but Expose’ is very functional for the Mac.

Typically, whether I work on Windows or on Mac, I start an application from a short-cut on the desktop. Windows has a quick-launch bar, which is actually a section of the taskbar. The Mac has a “dock.” The dock contains shortcuts to applications and also includes a section for minimized windows. However the dock DOES NOT include buttons for all open windows, only for minimized windows. This is where the taskbar is superior in my opinion. But still, the dock is very functional as a starting point and helpful for containing minimized windows and providing quick access to them.

For the Mac, built-in mini-apps. These include so-called “widgets,” as well as the Dictionary. Mac has a built-in dictionary, which is very helpful for finding definitions or spelling. On Windows, I need Internet access and a link to Dictionary.com. “Widgets” are a new part of Mac OS, as of Tiger, and are accessible with one click on the “Dashboard.” The Dashboard contains several mini-apps, applications generally intended for a single use. Examples include a weather radar, sticky notes, a calculator, a language translator, a regional gasoline price monitor, a calendar, a local yellow pages, and plenty of customized third-party widgets available for download (I have a Wikipedia widget as well).

I could go on and on. This was intended as a more updated review of my thoughts of the two operating systems. I like to do this about once a year. As I have used the Mac for a more extended period (past three years now) and as the operating systems evolve (or don’t evolve), I like to take another look.

Essentially, I am leaning heavily towards the Mac at this point. I am more productive on the Mac, mostly because of how I am able to access information and able to manage my time using the system.

Apple has been relentless, in my opinion, since they first released OS X (version 10.x). Since OS X, Apple has released four major updates – 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, and now 10.4 (Tiger). With the exception of 10.1, every release has added significant functionality to the OS. And increasingly so with each release, in my opinion. Jaguar is leaps and bounds above the old Apple OS – OS 8-9 (“Classic”), but Tiger is leaps and bounds above Jaguar. Apple continues to push the envelope by adding new features that by themselves, are not significant. But as a whole, the Mac OS has become far more advanced than Windows’ latest effort, which is XP.

I will not dignify Windows’ proposed release of “Longhorn,” otherwise known as “Vista,” since this OS is not “scheduled” for release for at least another year, even though it was originally supposed to be out by now. As is the case, what does not exist cannot be compared.

I certainly did not do a comprehensive review of Mac versus Windows with this effort. But I tried to examine the parts of each OS that were in front of my mind, and those that seemed to differentiate the two operating systems.

Cheers, brad.