Archives
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- January 2004
- December 2003
- October 2003
- June 2003
- January 2003
- December 2002
- June 2002
- January 2002
- January 2001
- May 2000
- April 2000
Categories
Meta
Monthly Archives: April 2005
The Apple Learning Curve
Few people would dispute that the iMac has a better user interface than Windows, and having used the iMac now for over a month I agree with the proposition. However, I have to be honest – there is a significant learning curve involved in switching from Windows to Apple.
The iMac is different from Windows in many ways at a detail level. The keyboard is different, the mouse activity is different and the way that application windows behave is different. There are other significant differences too. The basic applications that most people use are different; email, address book, the browser and the file finder. They all work a little differently too. Even though the office software I’m using is Microsoft Office, it’s not entirely the same. And to this you can add a further point – that the fundamental administration and care of the PC is different.
You have to make adjustments in your acquired habits in every one of these areas. So for a time you become less productive on the iMac rather than more productive, while you plough through the learning curve. It is a fairly long learning curve and my guess is that any move to Linux on a PC would be similar.
For the home PC user there is a great deal of compensation for the learning curve. The iMac media applications are to die for. It is far better than Windows for managing music and photographs. In fact it is so much better that it is almost unfair to compare the two. I tried using a PC to manage my CDs and my fairly large collection of photos, but it was hopeless. Now I’m gradually putting everything on the iMac – because I can and it is truly simple to organize it all. I have little doubt that the same would be true of video files, but I don’t have any I care about.
It’s not just me that thinks this way. A survey by Morgan Stanley published in March suggested that iPod users were converting from Windows to the Mac at the rate of 19% – a rather amazing migration figure when you think about it, but not so surprising when you consider the difference in quality of music management.
But the question for me is whether I can recommend an iMac migration for the business user for their home PC and right now, I’m not sure. I’ll know when I’ve come through the learning curve completely.
Nevertheless there is one productivity gain that is very very significant. My iMac has a 20″ screen (i.e. it measures roughly 17″ by 11″ – like two sheets of paper side by side). This allows me to have two applications open together next to each other and this is awesomely productive. It really makes a difference in the way I use a PC.
However, wide screens are not unique to the iMac.
Click on the link for other postings on Apple Mac Productivity.
Posted in Apple, Campaigns
Tagged Apple, iMac media applications;, Linux;, Microsoft, Morgan Stanley;, office software;, Vendor
Leave a comment
Novell to SCO, With A Curve Ball
For me, the most confusing action of all the SCO legal actions (SCO v the rest of the world) is the one with Novell. I mean, I have little understanding of contract law in this or any other area, but I would have thought that when a company buys software from another company it’s kinda done along the lines of buying/selling a car. It was yours, now it’s mine – all of it.Not so, at least according to Novell, in the case of Unix. In its latest filing, Novell is countersuing SCO and demanding that the money SCO gained from licensing Unix System V to Sun and Microsoft be put in trust (to prevent SCO spending it) until the ownership of Unix is resolved. Novell maintains that it owns Unix copyrights and thus has a right to the money.
Novell may be correct or it may not – that’s up to the courts – but one has to wonder at the competence of the deal makers involved, if who got what from the deal wasn’t actually clear. As fate would have it, the two companies involved in the action (now) are utterly different from those that made the deal (then). In 1995, when the deal was made, SCO really was the Santa Cruz Operation located in Santa Cruz, to be acquired in 1998 by Caldera Systems (a Ray Noorda company that was actually distributing Linux by 1998). In 1995, Linux was only a rumor and Linus was the name of a character in Peanuts. In 1995, Novell, also a Ray Noorda company, was unable to do much with Unix and was living in the shadow of the newly emerging Windows NT.
By 2003, a complete reversal of roles had taken place. Novell acquired SuSE and became an Open Source friendly Linux distributor, while Caldera Systems (now renamed as SCO) stopped distributing Linux and started distributing law suits. One wonders which side of this Ray Noorda was on.
In any event, if Novell is correct, SCO has no case and is heading for the scrap heap in a startling way.