Apple planning its own Windows 7 pitch: Buy a Mac instead
Despite positive reviews for Windows 7, the upgrade process for the
millions of people still using the older Windows XP won't be simple.
Unlike the shift from the newer Windows Vista, the move from Windows XP to Windows 7
requires a clean installation -- which means backing up data before
installing Windows 7, then restoring data and reinstalling applications
after the new OS is on the machine.
As we noted earlier this week, the Mac blogs have been having lots of fun poking fun at the process. And now Apple itself is looking to capitalize on the situation.
"Any user that reads all those steps is probably going to freak out," Apple executive Phil Schiller tells BusinessWeek's Peter Burrows in a story getting lots of attention in the tech world today. "If you have to go through all that, why not just buy a Mac?"
Apple is looking to build on the Mac's existing momentum. Numbers released yesterday by the IDC research firm showed Mac shipments rising to 9.4 percent of the U.S. market in the third quarter, from 8.6 percent a year earlier.
According to the BusinessWeek story, Apple is expected to highlight the complexity of the XP-to-7 upgrade process in upcoming advertisements. Burrows reports that the company also "will likely make the case that Macs are less susceptible to viruses and are best suited to its popular iPods and iPhones."
Dustin on October 16, 2009 at 12:10 PM
If you are unable to handle this upgrade process, then yes, you probably need a computer that is closer to an appliance than a personal computer. Same applies for people who don't understand the basic about viruses. Use a more obscure system if you can't understand the basics needed to run Windows without getting a virus (it's really not that hard for most people).
Macs are gratuitously easy to use. For people who are ready for the 21st century, though, Windows is certainly quite easy too. Apples don't appeal to the vast majority of the market because they are so expensive for what you actually get, and just not flexible enough for varied users.
Microsoft's OSs have deserved lots of criticism, and I honestly don't see why MS can't automate this installation process, but it just doesn't matter that much. Looking over the competing product lines, it's clearly Apple that is stuck and Windows that is evolving. I think Microsoft's business practices tend to be absolutely unacceptable, and I am proud of Apple's consistently proud craftmanship, but I don't think Apple has a good argument for the mainstream user, the user with an IT department, or the future user. Not that Apple will not remain an extremely successful company with its much smaller but more lucrative slice of the pie of users who either aren't ready for what I consider a full fledged computer, or don't want one.
Mario on October 16, 2009 at 12:20 PM
"Instead of wasting about 4 hours of your time to upgrade to a $100 software in these troubling times, spend a cool $2.5k on a Mac Pro instead!" That'll go over GREAT.
Mark on October 16, 2009 at 12:27 PM
I love the perpetual bitterness the emanates in the Apple v. Windows debate. Thanks Dustin for offending me. I am a Mac user and I am a Windows user. I know the ins and outs of Windows, I can build a PC from scratch. Still I prefer MACs. I am excited that Windows has a great operating system coming out, I will install it on my PC Laptop. I could easily handle the reinstall process from Windows XP to Windows 7. The only thing that sucks about it is the time involved. When I went from MAC OS 10.4 to MAC OS 10.6 (yes, 10.4), it took 45 minutes, and about a dozen clicks. That is it. That is what Windows needs to be able to do. Yes, MAC's are more expensive and not as customizable but just because you don't need a gamer computer doesn't devalue someone's knowledge of computers. I know a lot of former Windows users who are just tired of waiting for their Windows XP computer to start up. Tired of Windows Service Pac installs that take longer than MAC OS upgrades.
murgatroyd on October 16, 2009 at 12:30 PM
"Instead of wasting about 4 hours of your time to upgrade to a $100 software in these troubling times, spend a cool $2.5k on a Mac Pro instead!"
And Microsoft guarantees that after you spend those four hours, you'll never, ever have installation, compatibility, or malware problems again!
sanssoucy on October 16, 2009 at 12:30 PM
WTF is the problem? You blow your data onto your backup drive (you *do* have one of those, right?), install the OS, and put the data back.
PS: Even on a Mac or a Linux box, a clean install is much preferred over an "upgrade" attempt.
ern on October 16, 2009 at 12:32 PM
If Apple thinks this sort of campaign is going to work, then they seriously misunderstand consumer priorities right now. Apple already gets ribbed enough for its "upgrade" path (which usually consists of completely ditching an older system).
I'm a little skeptical about the XP upgrade path taking quite so long, but we'll see. If people can't back up their data, they're in trouble. And seriously, most people have so many apps they don't use on their system, that it's probably about time they do a serious spring cleaning of their system. Sure, it's a hassle, but think about what Apple is asking people to do: not just save their data and apps, but lose them altogether. How long will it take those users to recreate their user experience on an Apple after switching? A lot more than four hours (most of which will consist of them clicking a mouse and then walking away from the system).
Apple is good at what it does, but appealing to current PC users is not one of them.
Dustin on October 16, 2009 at 12:36 PM
Mark, don't be offended, and don't take your choice of operating system personally.
It's a simple fact that Macs are designed to be simpler, appeal to a much smaller audience, and that anyone who can't handle the basics of using Windows, from virus protection to installing upgrades, is not ready for the 21st century.
That doesn't mean you, that means the hypothetical person Apple is theorized as trying to sell Macs to in this and many other pitches.
You have to TAKE offense. It's not something I provided for you, and there's no real reason for it.
Larry on October 16, 2009 at 12:41 PM
I've owned Macs and PCs for years. I've been a software engineer working with PC's and workstations for two and a half decades. It comes down to 2 things:
1. I'm tired. I'm tired of running virus scans on my family's PC's and fighting with the printer configuration to 'allow' sharing, and discovering that it still doesn't work the way I want it to.
2. The cost difference is an illusion. The up-front cost of the entry level 13-inch MacBook Pro of $1199 is a screaming deal compared with a fully loaded Dell laptop running Vista (~$800). OK, you're going to say, 'there's a $400 difference!'. But you'd be wrong. Over the years I've learned to attach a value to MY TIME. I've attached a value to MY TIME and how I use it.
So, in addition to being the best computer I've ever seen (weight, display, functionality, reliability, ease-of-use ...) It's the easiest to work with. When I set up a printer to share on my Airport Express, the Macs on the network can see and USE it! When I have to virus scan, oops, I don't have to virus scan! I've learned that MY TIME is worth more to me than a couple of dollars up front. YOU HAVE TO FACTOR IN THE AMOUNT OF TIME YOU WILL SPEND CONFIGURING/MAINTAINING/FIXING the darned thing, as well as the upfront cost.
RELIABILITY is the buzzword you need to remember. That's why I now own Macs instead of PCs, and I drive a Honda instead of a Ford. I've always devoted time to maintaining my machines, but as I'm getting older, I'd like to devote less time to my machines, and more time to enjoying them.
So, if you're time has no value, then by all means, buy a PC. Me, I'm going to have a life that doesn't involve involuntary servitude to my machines.
Steve White on October 16, 2009 at 12:42 PM
Sanssoucy, I've upgraded many a Mac with the newest Mac OS X and have not had a problem. A few do, but the very large majority of Mac users have no problems, since Apple goes to great lengths to ensure that stuff like this just works. If I were upgraded 10.2 to 10.6, however, I'd do a clean install.
I use XP as well as Mac (most of my XP is on virtual boxes inside a Mac!) and suppose I'll upgrade to W7. If it works well I'll be pleased. I don't wish death and destruction on Microsoft (except when XP has broken again and I can't figure out why), but I don't see W7 as a Mac-killer. Please.
As for the Mac Pro, that's about 10% of all Apple sales. More than half of their sales are Macbook laptops, which are pretty sweet and start just over $1K, and most of the rest are iMacs, which also start just over $1K. If that's too rich for you then by all means buy a netbook or a Best Buy special. You get what you pay for.
Denny, Alaska on October 16, 2009 at 12:43 PM
Macs: for people with more money than sense!
Krasnaya Zvezda on October 16, 2009 at 12:48 PM
WTF is the problem?
---
The problem is that then you have to reinstall all of the software you use. If you use a lot of different programs, that's A LOT of time.
W1ck3d on October 16, 2009 at 01:02 PM
Mac… Computing for stupid people.
Every time I hear someone pontificating on how Mac aren't inundated with viruses I want to tell them that Macs are just as vulnerable to viruses as any other operating system. The reason the hackers don’t bother writing viruses for Macs is because NOTHING OF ECONOMIC VALUE IS EVER DONE ON A MAC. The business is done an Microsoft, that’s where the valuable information is. No body wants the pretty pictures you took or your cool iMovie files. Macs aren’t worth the trouble to hack
Shannon Love on October 16, 2009 at 01:03 PM
Dustin,
It's a simple fact that Macs are designed to be simpler, appeal to a much smaller audience, and that anyone who can't handle the basics of using Windows, from virus protection to installing upgrades, is not ready for the 21st century.
That's something like saying that a modern care is "designed to simpler" in comparison to a Model T because modern cars don't require a driver to be a shade tree mechanic just to keep the car running as the model T did.
Macs are "simpler" because the design philosophy treats the end user's time as a valuable commodity to be conserved. By contrast, PC hardware and software design nearly completely ignores the conservation of an end user's time. PC hardware is designed to have the lowest out of box cost possible without regard to life cycle cost. Windows is designed around professionally managed large scale database connectivity. Everything else, especially conserving the time of ordinary end users, is secondary.
More to your point, Windows is the past, not the future of computing. Clearly, Macs and Linux have been the experimental platform for the computer world since more than a decade ago. Progressively, PC hardware and software look more and more like Macs, not the other way around. Microsoft is struggling to adapt its massive code and customer base while being forced to keep anachronism like the registry. For example, only now have they produced a usable permissions system more than decade after such systems appeared on Macs and Linux.
Most of the world will continue to use Window's PC's because they don't yet have choice. Linux is to hard to use and there is no way a single company like Apple can every produce more 20% of the world's computers. Window's superiority in enterprise is well earned and will anchor it in big institutions for many years to come. However, that doesn't mean that is where the cutting edge of computing is.
I like fiddling with cars and engines but I don't what to have waste time fiddling just to get basic transportation. I should just be able to get in and drive 99% of the time. Scheduled maintenance should keep the car running smoothly. Computers should be the same way. Even though I'm a computer geek and programmer, I resent any feature of a system that cost me money by making me spend time fiddling with the system instead of using the computer to do the actual work that pays my bills.
That is the future of computing.
Mark on October 16, 2009 at 01:09 PM
Shannon,
nicely put.
Mac41 on October 16, 2009 at 01:11 PM
Apple is right on with their promotion. Every IT managers nightmare is upgrading to Microsoft 7, they would prefer to have a complete office of Macs utilizing Apple's Servers, and network operating system, in addition to powering their Internet and intranet. This along with Apple's email server and client software and not forgetting Apple's Office suite. In an Apple world there are no problems, at least none that will be spoken.
Shannon Love on October 16, 2009 at 01:14 PM
Whoops, the first paragraph in my last comment was a quote from Dustin.
Bob Nolen on October 16, 2009 at 01:15 PM
Why not up grade to vista and them to 7. Would this work better?
Frew on October 16, 2009 at 01:19 PM
I don't understand Macs. Never did. Computers without command line user interfaces make no sense. I feel like I've been robbed of most of the functionality of the machine, or that it's a machine with no flexibility and less functionality.
But enough of these religious questions.
I use Windows because that's what they always had where I worked. Why do I need to learn another OS for the box at home? I can't even steal software from work that way.
Stan on October 16, 2009 at 01:24 PM
Larry,
I don't know what you are doing to have so many problems with your Windows computers.
1a. Printers. In my experiences, PC printer configuration has been easier. Printing on my home network or at work has never been a problem. But printer PDF on my MacBook Pro on a Xerox printer didn't work for quite a while. I asked our Mac-centric IT guy and it took him months to figure out the issue.
1b. You can always have virus scans run automatically. Microsoft's new Windows Security Essentials is quite nice and it's free.
2. The cost difference is no illusion. I agree that time is important, but why are you spending so much more time working on Windows computers? My Windows computer were as easy to configure as my Mac. I agree that the MacBook Pro is fantastic hardware and as far as I've seen, it is the best laptop on the market.
I don't see any difference in maintaining or configuring my Windows computer and my Mac. In the past year I reinstalled OS X and XP. I reinstalled XP because it had been a couple years and was started to slow down and I reinstalled OS X because even though the computer said I was the Administrator, it didn't give me full Administrator access.
All operating systems have issues, but my experience with Macs and PCs doesn't show me that OS X is head and shoulders better in terms of maintenance and reliability.
Scott on October 16, 2009 at 01:24 PM
I just recently switched to Apple with a macbook pro, 13. Hands down this is the nicest computer I have ever owned. And I mean that both from a physical and software perspective.
It gives you the power of a unix underpinnings, the most refined GUI I've head the pleasure of using, and a very good free development environment.
I've run the windows 7 RC on my pc laptop since it came out. I like it... works well, easily the best windows OS. The search functionality works pretty well compared to Vista... it's light weight, looks nice, compatible, and gets the job done. I use it in a VM right now for photoshop, since I don't want to fork out the cash for a cross-grade.
OS X everything linux ever wanted to be, and what microsoft seems unable to envision.
I have to give Apple a big thumbs down on their warranty support. Dell has them smoked on that front.
murgatroyd on October 16, 2009 at 01:27 PM
> Why not up grade to vista and then to 7. Would this work better?
Heh. Bob, you're cruel!
Bruce Rheinstein on October 16, 2009 at 01:27 PM
"Even on a Mac or a Linux box, a clean install is much preferred over an 'upgrade' attempt."
Exactly. You're almost always better off backing up your data and doing a clean install. And if you're paranoid about viruses then switch to Linux.
ern on October 16, 2009 at 01:36 PM
It's amazing how quick this devolved into a PC vs. Mac battle. Fact is, both systems appeal to different people. Get over it.
I think the real question was whether it's any value to tell people to switch to Macs because of the time required by an upgrade from XP to Windows 7. I'm not seeing much more debate over that point. Fact is, most people who are using XP aren't the kind of users that will switch to Apple just because of a few hours inconvenience (it it's really that, which I doubt).
I'm not seeing many Mac people here defending that. They're making the broader argument of Macs over PCs. So, any Mac fans out there want to try justifying the actual argument made by the Mac guy that it's easier to simply switch to a Mac? I didn't think so.
Macs are great for what they are. But I'm tired of Mac fans. This BS about difficult to configure printers, for instance: sorry, you must be doing it wrong. You plug in the printer. You turn on sharing. That's it. It's not complicated.
Josh on October 16, 2009 at 01:40 PM
Mark,
"I can build a PC from scratch"
I am guessing you mean you can assemble one from pre-made components easily bought at fry's...
(sorry, couldn't resist, I said the same thing to a friend the other day and he pointed out that I couldn't actually build a motherboard or processor...)
I love my PC for the Oracle/C++/Java work I do daily for work... and I love my Mac for photos/basic surfing/letting kids play without worrying about viruses.
George B on October 16, 2009 at 01:40 PM
Easy solution: Don't spend money either "upgrading" an old computer by installing Windows 7 or buying a Mac. Windows XP is a pretty good operating system with a huge base of users. Wait until Windows 7 becomes the dominant operating system and you have some need to change and then just buy a new faster, cheaper computer with Windows 7 already installed. The early bird may get the worm, but with computers, the early adopter gets the bugs.