Tied to Microsoft
There is no doubt about it; Unix and Linux based systems are catching up in numbers with Microsoft's mess of an OS. This is not saying all that much however, when you consider that Windows-driven computers still outnumber alternatives 10 to 1.
I am a Windows user through and through, as I have been all my computing life. However despite my profession I have still yet failed to make the transition to an alternate, more appropriate system such as Apple's Mac OS X. This is primarily owing to my reluctance to loose (or render unusable) large quantities of windows-compatible work that I have amassed over the past 5-10 years.
I find it a shame, not to mention extremely frustrating, to know that I am locked into a system Id prefer not to use anymore. I cannot possibly be the only person who is stuck in this apparently no-win situation either.
If any operating system is to replace Microsoft Windows as the dominant global OS I believe it must first bridge the all-important compatibility gap. Whether for business or personal use people are simply not prepared to endure the consequences of data loss, in addition to the costs and learning curves involved with transitioning away from Microsoft.
In response to Simon Kitson's article on the subject I do believe that if we are going to see a widespread change in computing for the better then we are more likely to see the release of an effective, stable version of Windows than we are to see Microsoft relinquish its crown.
And you can imagine the likelihood of that happening.
Article Envelope
- Dated: 04 October 2006
- Comments: 11
- Spam Blocked: 3
About the Author
Steve Tucker is a 23 year old web developer living and working in Huddersfield, England
Read more...
02/04/2007 
8 Comment(s)
On 05/10/2006 J Phill said:
Yeah I made the switch to OSX a couple months ago and i don't plan on going back to Windows, full-time at least. I am just way too satisfied with OSX and it runs like a gem.
I can completely understand the compatibility issue though.
On 05/10/2006 Elessar said:
I want a Mac, but i simply dont have the money. But once i [eventually] get one, i'll definitely dual boot so i can use OS X for personal use and XP/Vista for work or what ever OS X cant do...lets hope Apple can bridge that gap though.
On 05/10/2006 kitsimons said:
A partial solution on Macintosh is Virtual PC, and now Boot Camp (on the Intel-based Macs). While not exactly a pretty way to do things, it helps in the meantime.
I run Virtual PC with XP Pro just to be able to check websites in IE 6, though it runs slow as hell on my old G4. If you wanted to do more, a new G5 would be able to cope, but it'd hit the wallet hard ;-)
On 05/10/2006 J Phill said:
Well Parallels is better than both Virtual PC and Boot Camp because you don't have to restart your computer, and it's alot faster.
I think it will be hard for Apple to bridge the gap much more because with these new Intel Mac's, the ability to run both OS's is pretty big already.
On 05/10/2006 Steve Tucker said:
How does WinXP run on a mac, and what are the currect compatibility issues between XP and Mac OS X? Last thing I want to do is move to a Mac only to use XP all the time. May as well just use a (much cheaper) PC! Cheers in advance :)
On 05/10/2006 P.J. Onori said:
I have found Flash to be nearly impossible to use on a Mac which keeps me tied to Windows. I am looking forward to running both Windows and OS X on a MacBook at some point in the relatively near future.
It's going to be rad.
On 05/10/2006 J Phill said:
I briefly treid XP on a Mac and it ran great. As far as compatibility, you wouldn't have a problem. XP would run on a Mac like it runs on your PC right now, because of the fact that they are Intel now.
With you being a design, your money would be well worth buying a Mac, and it's pretty awesome to be able to run both OS's on a Mac. It's a win win situation if you ask me.
On 06/10/2006 Elessar said:
Personally, even if you use boot camp and dual boot, just use XP for work, and OS X for home...thats what i would do.
On 06/10/2006 kitsimons said:
I'm surprised to hear you have problems with Flash on the Mac P.J - I have no problem with it at all.
@Steve: XP runs fine under Virtual PC on my PowerPC G4 - it'd run much better on a newer G5, whether under Parallels (which is Intel-based Mac only), Virtual PC or Boot Camp.
Likewise, I have no problems with compatibility - things like dragging and dropping files from the OS X desktop to XP desktop works like a dream, accessing the Internet through Virtual PC, shared folders etc...
Even if you did need Windows for your development work, I'm sure you'd find yourself using OS X for graphics work and everything else in no time at all ;-)
On 06/10/2006 Steve Tucker said:
Thanks for all the feedback guys. Sounds like a mac is the way forward for me :)
Do they normally come with WinXP installed? If so, is it a straight foward process to install as a second OS (from a mac beginners point of view), like on a PC?
On 06/10/2006 J Phill said:
It definitely won't come with XP installed. I would buy Parallels if you get a Mac, and I'm sure it will will instruct you, since that's its main purpose. I wouldn't bother with Bootcamp, and DEFINITELY not virtual PC.