Comments on: News.com readers weigh in on Mac zealotry

There's lots of reasons why Mac users are so passionate about their white boxes, ranging from style to usefulness to the simple desire to be different.

[QuickThinking]

Zealot = Fanatic

What I was hoping to see from this article was a Mac user explaining why they are fanatics. I mean Zealot basically means someone who is overly zealous, aka a fanatic. Fanatic means, and I quote, " a person with an extreme and uncritical enthusiasm or zeal, as in religion or politics.". That part about being uncritical is what I want explained. Ask a Mac user, "What does the Mac do wrong?", or better yet, "What does a PC do better than a Mac?" and you are liable to get clobbered. How probable is it that in absolutely every way a Mac can be better than every brand and model of every PC? Assuming it is not probable at all, then there should be at least a few honest answers to the above questions. Therefore, Mac users who can't give you a few honest answers to those questions are fanatics and should be disregarded because they've shown their inability to think logically on the matter. I am positive there are Mac users who can give me an honest evaluation of when a Mac or a PC is the better tool for the job, but they are quite obviously the silent minority. The rest of the Mac population seem to be made up of the 'I'm hipper than you, different than you, etc etc than you' crowd that doesn't notice that there are millions of others just like them. Here's another take on the matter. If I've got a better tool than you, I use it to do better work and gain a competitive edge. If I preach to everyone I know that they too need to use the tool that is giving me the competitive edge, then either I am completely selfless (unlikely) or I value the perception that I found / used / have a better tool than they do more than the actual competitive edge that tool gave me. Doesn't that sound like someone desperately needing some affirmation and at least hint at a needy personality?

[scannall--2008]

Why I like Macs.

I'm one of those Mac people. Let me see if I can explain this for
ya. ;-)

I use a Mac because for me and what I do it is just plain better
than the Windows platform.

Now does this mean 'Windows Sucks!'? Nope, not at all. It just
doesn't meet my needs is all. It may meet yours, and good for
you if it does.

I do have a few gripes about Macs as well. They really need to
slap the Open GL consortium a bit. All the bickering and infighting going on in that group is really slowing down progress
on something to compete with MS's Direct 3d.

Another gripe is their choice in video cards for the iMac. They
really should have at least made a better video card a BTO
option. And the lack of real choices in the Mac Pro for video
cards needs to be fixed as well.

Aside from those things I am quite happy with my Mac, and OS
X.

Do I pass the 'Zealot' test?

[Lee in San Diego]

Follow up story?

Okay, Tom how about a story on why people use PCs when they
have a choice between them or a Mac.

[rcrusoe]

All Mac users aren't zealots

As a "windows professional" (14+ years managing primarily
windows based networks, multiple certifications, etc.) I originally
chose a Mac for my home computer because I just wanted
something that didn't need constant support.

As Apple's popularity continues to grow I've been getting an
increasing number of requests for Macs from my users. Today
most of our executives and increasing number of our managers
run Macs.

A laundry list of Vista problems has forced us to make changes
that is allowing us to replace many regular user PCs with Mac (or
Linux).

The end result is our support workload is dropping as Macs
replace PCs in our company. Loving that fact doesn't make you
a zealot. It does, however, make you grateful.

[ohissa]

Apple v. Windows = Racism?

Why is that always the first place people go? The Apple v. Windows debate IS NOTHING like racism. What it is about, is people's choice to use one OS or the other. It's people choice to dictate which style and functionality they prefer. I use Mac and I use Windows (XP, Vista is CRAP), and I like them both for different reasons.

Never in a MILLION YEARS would I compare the differences b/w two operating system to the CENTURIES of STRUGGLE that humanity has faced on basis of culture, ethnicity, or skin color. Michael Walker, you are an idiot.

[Tom Krazit]

I think you missed his point

His point was not to compare the struggles of minorities for basic human rights to Mac users struggling to not get picked on in the library.

His point was that ignorance and unfamiliarity breeds distrust. And that those conditions can create a kind of hatred for something that's simply different from what you're used to. Not that Windows users are racist for harassing Mac users.

[tarrantm]

Human nature

When you spend so much money on the hardware and each different version of the software, you automatically develop an aversion to ever admitting you're wrong. Hence you have the outcry of the Mac users who need to shout out in their zealotry to not only annoy others but to convince themselves that they didn't throw their money away.

[rcrusoe]

I'm confused

Are you talking about Mac users or Windows users?

Because the Macs we are purchasing for our company are about
20% cheaper than a comparable Dell, and the cost of MS Office
is the about the same on each platform.

Then the PCs need about $200 of additional apps
(Antivirus/Antispyware, etc) and support licenses to keep them relatively safe.

[rolandk10]

You got it.

"When you spend so much money on the hardware and each different version of the software, you automatically develop an aversion to ever admitting you're wrong "

Ding ding ding ding. You win!

This doesn't just go for MAC fanatics. This goes accross the board. Even though by and large, XP machines may be a little cheaper that Mac's, that doesn't mean they're necessarily cheap. And of course, who else besides us 'geeks' are going to come here and post our opinions? So the audience and the contributers here are already a small class of us that are overly zealot about the topics in which we respond anyways.

It depends on how you come down on the issue. Whatever youe currnet PC, if you love it, the other side bashing you is ignorant. If you hate it, you will bash right along side it.

My advice? Love technology in general and not corporations or specific products.

I mean aren't all arguments of perfection completly invalidated by the simple FACT that every OS has released subsequent updates and versions? If anything is perfect, why fix it, update it or change it? If it's not perfect, then why isn't it possible for a competitor to improve it? Simply stating that "it hasn't happened yet" isn't a fact. It's an opinion. It's always interesting to see what Apple comes up with but it's also as interesting to see what Microsft does next. Look inside yourself though. When you hear that Company A or M is releasing a new product, before you even see it or read about it or even know what it is, what's your prejudice telling you about it? History shmistory. Both of those two have had successes and failures over the years and even now.

I bet that an Apple fan know's in his mind that this secret product is going to be great unless it proves otherwise, and Microsoft is going to be crap unless proved other wise. Vice versa for Microsoft fans. Personally, I'll wait til I see what it is. If it's something that I want. Great. If not, why bash someone else for wanting it.

Do you honestly think the world would be better off with Apple as the monopoly? It would be the same damn thing the other way around. Green or not, innovative or not, Apple, like Microsoft, are not charities. They both want to sell as many products as possible.

[john55440]

Mac zealotry/cultism chases away some prospective buyers...

The obnoxious religious fanaticism of Mac cultists is a turn-off, that chases away some prospective Mac buyers.

(Right now, the Mac's USA share is only (IDC) 6.3%, and it's worldwide share is in the Others category, behind at least five other companies.)

[ppgreat]

Not in laptops

Think 21%

[TheDudeandHis360]

Not Really...

I think you are confusing the majority of the market with the
majority of people who post on message boards or comments. I
doubt the majority of the PC market at large cares or knows much
about Mac Zealotry.

And Apple market share has been growing pretty steadily now with
the Macbook / Macbook Pro line and the switch to Intel.

[blankexpression]

Mac Zealotry

It's funny because even the title of the article includes a negative word: Zealotry. It also means overenthusiasm or single-mindedness. As a Mac user since 1985 I've often compared being a Mac user to owning a Saab or a BMW. While the majority of people seem satisfied driving Chevy's or Fords, (ie. PC users) some of us prefer a more refined user experience. Not to say that PC's don't have their uses because they do. But as a long-time designer, the Mac just has a more elegant user interface and easier-to-use design. Personally it amuses me to see people go nuts over the iPod and more recently the iPhone. It's the exact same ease-of-use and "cool factor" that long-time Mac users have been talking about since 1984! It just took the majority a while to catch up.

[rolandk10]

Hard to argue

It's hard to argue with you if I accept your premises as stated. Your stating that it's a fact that saab and bmw are always better that for or chevy. That owning a ford or chevy will always give you a less refined experience.

Your statement that Mac has a more elegant interface is also stated as a fact.

Well I would say that if inded it is a FACT that the MAC is better, then the MAC is better.

[mike.gw]

The basis for why Macs were considered better

The reason Macs were considered better goes back prior to the introduction of Windows 95. Windows 95 was Microsoft's best effort to date of recreating the Mac GUI experience. It was still DOS based, however. I would say that real competition from Microsoft came with the introduction of Windows 2000, which finally fulfilled the promise of Plug and Play, along with a protected memory and true multitasking OS.

But before those days, Macs by design were better suited to handle graphics programs. Not in the sheer brute force manner that makes todays graphic cards such 3D powerhouses, but by building into the Mac hardware, a complete set of graphic routines/libraries to be consistently called upon by any application. The QuickDraw graphic library defined ways for creating objects, patterns and shading. Because these routines were burned into the custom ROM chip of the Macintosh, they ran very fast. Windows computers from that era (Windows 286/386, and Windows 3.11) had to call those graphics routines from a software library (.DLL) for applications to use. Think how much faster a ROM cartridge game loads up on a game console, compared to a game that loads from CD. This gave Mac graphics apps a significant speed advantage.

Also, back at that time, PC architecture could not effectively address all of the RAM that you could install in the Windows PC. Windows computers crashed frequently due to lack of "System Resources". Microsoft promoted the ability to open many programs at the same time under Windows, but the reality was that you often could not run more than 3 memory heavy apps at one time, before needing to restart your computer to free System Resources. Every time a Windows computer exited from RAM, it did not return all of the RAM it used back to the OS. Word might use 1,024k, and return 968k back to the OS. This was memory leak, until your overall pool of RAM was less and fragmented much like a hard disk drive. Rebooting freed the memory and made it all continuous again. Some of you young guys have never had to deal with config.sys files and issues of extended versus expanded memory.

Macs had access to continuous RAM. Applications could fully exploit that RAM. Users did not have to play with cryptic text files to use their computers efficiently. So while a Windows machine was slowing to a crawl as it thrashed it's hard disk with swap file access, Mac users were working with large graphic files in a more productive manner. They simply got their work done faster.

Many things that we take for granted were introduced to the public on Macs. Built in networking support. On the early Internet, Macs were the most numerous clients out there because networking was built in. Sharing files easily between desktops on a LAN without the need for a server was a Mac thing too, back with System 7 (OS/7). So, a small business could by 5 Macs and a laserprinter, hook them all up and share files without the need for an IT guy such as myself. And THAT is very empowering. It is only in recent times that Windows users can make somewhat similar claims for ease of use.

So the Mac people who defend the platform are simply trying to say, "this is what we've been telling you for years". I'm not saying that Microsoft hasn't introduced useful software innovations over the years. They have. But Mac users were being excluded, while having their innovations mimicked. Much like your supervisor taking credit and getting a bonus from his boss, for all of the hard work that was actually done by you... without even having the decency to mention that the project was a success thanks to your work. This is the position that Apple users have been in for years.

[blankexpression]

Re: The basis for why Macs were considered better

Excellent post Mike. I've been using Macs since 1985 (remember the Mac SE or the CI?). You really hit the nail on the head. I remember all of the issues before multi-finder (OS 6) and when 14mb of RAM was huge! I also remember when Windows 95 came out and Windows users finally had a "trash can" on their desktop. MacWorld magazine ran a headline reading "It's 1984 all over again!" to mock the "innovation". You're right about the comparison to a boss who takes credit for your work and then gets promoted. I used to be very assertive in my Mac advocacy. But after the dark days in the early 90's when Apple seemed like a broken company, I'm now satisfied that they keep making great products that I rely on every day. The iPod and iPhone have finally shown people what some of us have known for a very long time: that Apple makes amazing products. And that's the best advocacy of all.

[jowa64]

Mac vs. Windows

Like many others comments I've read, I think the choice came down to what you started with when there was something beyond command-line computing. Both are fine tools, I probably was swayed to Windows because of Excel. My creativity is in numbers, and while I'm sure Macs run a fine version of Excel, it was originally designed for Windows. If I had to say anything in defense of anything either way, I would say that I take issue with Apple advertising. Now that I actually do a bit of audio and visual art work, I am actually considering a Macas an option, but Apple's advertising never appeared to me to be calling to the engineers, accountants, business analysts of the world. It is a creative process to give numerical data relevancy and meaningfulness, just like any other creative endeavor.

[mike.gw]

This is THE problem right here

Excel was designed on a Macintosh first, as was Word. So was PowerPoint, by another company, and then purchased by Microsoft. I'm 41, and I started in the IT world first as a computer salesman at the young age of 18. While the MS-DOS world was using Displaywrite or WordPerfect, and Lotus 123, many new business apps came out to take advantage of the Mac GUI:

Microsoft Word
Microsoft Excel
PowerPoint
Lotus Jazz

And, as someone who's creativity is based in numbers, it may amuse you to learn that the first spreadsheet was Visicalc, which ran on an Apple II computer and predated Lotus 123 and Excel. So if you wanted to crunch numbers back then, the Apple II was your business computer. :)

[jscott418]

I don't understand it myself

I can't understand myself standing in line at any store. Right
now Apple is in and PC is out. Why stand in line knowing full
well that their is no new products being given away and no
shortage of products online or at any other Apple store. Apple is
the perfect example of brainwashing marketing as I call it. Yes,
they make pretty good products. But more importantly they
make artistic products. Right now form is over taking function in
its importance.
This could spell trouble for Apple in the long run. Because if
they cannot keep up with what people want in terms of looks.
They are gone. This could just be a fad computer? I give Steve
Jobs credit he knows how to make people get excited about a
computer!

[ankur394]

Quantity vs Quality

There is a major difference in the Apple and Microsoft cultures.
Apple has probably 2 to 5 hardware architectures at any time. Microsoft operating systems get the fun of running on thousands of architectures.

When your programmers and designers spend less time bug testing hardware, writing drivers, and making things compatible, they have more time to improve quality.

You can do one job well, or 100 jobs half assed.

PC users complain about the lack of variety and upgrade solutions in Apple land. But that's precisely what makes Apple products so good.

[Buckeroo]

mac users= set up for another Microsoft

Windows 3.1 & 95were received with exactly the same enthusiasm.

Let's not forget that Apple is just another company only interested in profits. No, they don't care about the users--they only use 'better than windows' as a sales catch-phraze. And forgetting all the alternatives (linux, pc-bsd, desktop-bsd, zeta, opensolaris) most Apple users do "free advertising" for apple. Think about it: it's a great business model!

PS. Let's not forget about the alternatives. Apple is no alternative when they lock you into ONLY THEIR OS and ONLY THEIR HARDWARE.

I smell another MSFT.

[Lee in San Diego]

WTF

"Apple is no alternative when they lock you into ONLY THEIR OS
and ONLY THEIR HARDWARE"

WHAT the hell does that mean?

[schming66]

Brilliant Idea!!

Why doesn't everyone (mac & pc) just stop caring so much
about what others think and just use whatever platform you
choose. Every 20 minutes you talk about making up for your
shortcomings macs, you're losing valuable alone time with the
one you defend so ademently. Spend that time with the one
you love instead of wasting pc's time used to have a life. A life
that would be infinitely more enjoyable if macs would accept
themselves and shut up.
(note: I am a mac user, and I have a life)

[direvarg]

Bloody knuckles

Bear with me on this, I will get to the Mac vs PC point. I used to
work with a guy who used to sell Snap On tools. Though he had
moved on he was still passionate about Snap On tools. He
explained to me that at only a slightly higher price people could
buy superior tools to your Craftsman level of tool. I asked what
he meant. He explained that when he went to mechanic shops
he would look for the guys who had bloody knuckles. Those
knuckles, he explained, were bloodied by the mechanic gritting
his teeth and putting his weight into his cheap wrench and,
when the tool (due to loose manufacturing tolerances) slipped
the mechanic's thrifty nature was penalized by his knuckles
getting bloodied by whatever he slammed them into. My friend
explained that for a slightly higher initial investment the
mechanic would make a ton more money because of greater
productivity (not much productive happens while hopping about
and cursing), and be a generally nicer guy (your hand being in a
regular state of agony because of stupid work place mishaps
would probably put you in a surly mood), and the shop where
the guy works making more money while reducing Workmans'
Comp claims and premiums. He then explained his frustration
with these guys who wouldn't believe that they didn't have to get
as many bloody knuckles while believing that my friend was an
idiot (or, worse, a snake oil salesperson) for representing a
company that was so obviously selling a bill of goods. The sad
thing, he told me, is that of all people mechanics should
understand the value of quality workmanship but so many of
them were not only ignorant but willingly so that he just could
not believe it. He still winces when he sees bloody knuckles.

Having been a long time Windows User before I opened my mind
and then switched to Mac 4 years ago, I look at my scarred
knuckles and then look up to see so many people with freshly
bloodied knuckles and I can't understand why....

[rolandk10]

Good point

I actually used Snap-On for years along side other tools. My argument was a little different than your friends though. I worked third shift. While both has lifetime warranties, I could hardly get a tool replaced at three in the morning. I needed a tool that was less disposed to breaking in the first place.

As a tech, I work on bith Mac and PC often. It seems to me, that if you just use a computer for your work, you either like or dislike what you have. Since I fix these things, I have seen problems with both and I have seen both run flawlessly. I can't tell anyone with certainty that no MAC will ever break. Obviously. I would say that it may be less disposed to break. But by how much, in reality, I couldn't say.

I say buy what you like. The dangerous part (that word may be an exaggeration) is when a company develops such a blind following that they can do no wrong. It stumps the very innovation that fans tout. I've seen minor complaints retaliated to with such fervor it's scary.

There may actually be features that people want or aren't happy with. Fans stomping on them hurts the fans. I say push these comanies even harder to come up with more features, better reliability and for less cost. Buy the products, then push them harder for more.

Many people see on the news how many customers stand in line for products like the iPhone. To me, you are basically telling Apple, "Thank you for giving me the opportunity to buy your product." Kinda seems like borderline insanity.