Tuesday, April 11, 2006
Latest MacBook rumors don't seem to add up
I respect the fact that it's a favorite pastime among many of my fellow Mac heads, but I've never been much of a rumors guy. Seems like every time I read a Mac rumor, I end up figuring that if it's true then it's hurting Apple's ability to stay ahead of the competition, that if it's fabricated then I've wasted my time reading it, and that either way nothing good has come from my reading it.
But because I have great personal interest in the future of the iBook and I'm a massive hypocrite, my ears invariably perk up when I hear rumors of what might be next for my beloved iBook line. I honestly don't care if the next release is called iBook or MacBook. They can call it "PhoneBook" for all I care, so long as it's A) Intel-based, and B) the screen resolution I want. The former is obviously going to happen, and the latter is my way of ribbing Apple one more time over the fact that the current 14 inch iBook has the exact same 1024x768 screen resolution as the 12 inch iBook, and therefore (unless your vision is failing) has no reason to exist.
The latest iBook/MacBook rumor to accidentally land in my lap says that we might actually see the new Intel-based MacBook by the end of this month. The specs of the week are stated as the popularly rumored 13 inch (or 13.3 inch, depending on who you want to believe) screen, a 1.67 Core Duo processor, and a 1280x720 screen resolution. And at least two out of those three sound off-kilter to me.
I'd love to see the MacBook sport a Core Duo processor so that I won't have to take speed into consideration when deciding whether my next laptop will be a MacBook or a MacBook Pro, but I can't imagine it would be a good move for Apple. For too long we've had a PowerBook line whose most distinguishable quality when compared to the iBook was its pretty silver paint job. I'm not denigrating the PowerBook, I'm just pointing out that it can't have been easy for Apple to try to promote the G4 PowerBook all this time when the iBook has been sporting the same processor at almost the same speeds (which is why I'm currently the owner of a G4 iBook and not a PowerBook).
Now that its processors are no longer at a dead end, I would think that Apple would want to use the dual core processor as an easily explainable reason why customers should consider dishing out the extra dough for the Pro laptop. And it'll be difficult to make that case if the MacBook is sporting the same dual core processor. I suppose it can be argued both ways. But I know that features such as monitor spanning and a card slot, while dealbreakers for a certain segment of users, aren't seen as advantages at all by everyone else. Making the MacBook a Core Solo machine would certainly provide mainstream motivation for upselling to the MacBook Pro.
But perhaps more unlikely than the Core Duo rumor is the supposed specs for the screen. I can buy the MacBook going from twelve to thirteen inches, but the move only makes sense if the resolution of the screen goes up. If I knew I was going to have to carry around an extra inch of screen just to have the same 1024x768 resolution I have now, that would actually be a significant disincentive for me to take the plunge. If you're going to make my laptop larger and heavier, be a pal and give me more pixels. So in that vein, I was pleased to see that the latest rumored resolution of the MacBook started with 1280...but dumbstruck to it followed by 720. They want to make my screen even shorter? I sure hope not. Here in 1024x768 land, rarely do I find myself running out of room left to right, but it sure would be nice if I had more pixels to work with top to bottom. Less scrolling, and well, less scrolling. After all, what is the internet these days if not one big scroll fest? Don't make my screen even shorter, unless you're looking to motivate me to stick with my existing iBook longer than I was planning to.
Come to think of it, this is precisely why I don't dig the rumor scene. Here I am on the verge of getting worked up over 720 pixels, when it could be a typo, or it could be something that someone just plain made up. Same thing goes for the dual core processor. I mean, a Moron in a Hurry figures out that it's going to be an Intel chip, and from there Duo vs. Solo is just a flip of the coin. Any one of you reading this could just make up your own rumors from thin air, and you'd probably have about the same success rate as the "official" rumors. Keep that in mind the next time you see a Mac rumor that just doesn't make sense to you.
On the other hand, I sure do like the idea that the MacBook could hit the market as soon as this month. Hopefully there's some truth in this particular rumor after all.
I respect the fact that it's a favorite pastime among many of my fellow Mac heads, but I've never been much of a rumors guy. Seems like every time I read a Mac rumor, I end up figuring that if it's true then it's hurting Apple's ability to stay ahead of the competition, that if it's fabricated then I've wasted my time reading it, and that either way nothing good has come from my reading it.
But because I have great personal interest in the future of the iBook and I'm a massive hypocrite, my ears invariably perk up when I hear rumors of what might be next for my beloved iBook line. I honestly don't care if the next release is called iBook or MacBook. They can call it "PhoneBook" for all I care, so long as it's A) Intel-based, and B) the screen resolution I want. The former is obviously going to happen, and the latter is my way of ribbing Apple one more time over the fact that the current 14 inch iBook has the exact same 1024x768 screen resolution as the 12 inch iBook, and therefore (unless your vision is failing) has no reason to exist.
The latest iBook/MacBook rumor to accidentally land in my lap says that we might actually see the new Intel-based MacBook by the end of this month. The specs of the week are stated as the popularly rumored 13 inch (or 13.3 inch, depending on who you want to believe) screen, a 1.67 Core Duo processor, and a 1280x720 screen resolution. And at least two out of those three sound off-kilter to me.
I'd love to see the MacBook sport a Core Duo processor so that I won't have to take speed into consideration when deciding whether my next laptop will be a MacBook or a MacBook Pro, but I can't imagine it would be a good move for Apple. For too long we've had a PowerBook line whose most distinguishable quality when compared to the iBook was its pretty silver paint job. I'm not denigrating the PowerBook, I'm just pointing out that it can't have been easy for Apple to try to promote the G4 PowerBook all this time when the iBook has been sporting the same processor at almost the same speeds (which is why I'm currently the owner of a G4 iBook and not a PowerBook).
Now that its processors are no longer at a dead end, I would think that Apple would want to use the dual core processor as an easily explainable reason why customers should consider dishing out the extra dough for the Pro laptop. And it'll be difficult to make that case if the MacBook is sporting the same dual core processor. I suppose it can be argued both ways. But I know that features such as monitor spanning and a card slot, while dealbreakers for a certain segment of users, aren't seen as advantages at all by everyone else. Making the MacBook a Core Solo machine would certainly provide mainstream motivation for upselling to the MacBook Pro.
But perhaps more unlikely than the Core Duo rumor is the supposed specs for the screen. I can buy the MacBook going from twelve to thirteen inches, but the move only makes sense if the resolution of the screen goes up. If I knew I was going to have to carry around an extra inch of screen just to have the same 1024x768 resolution I have now, that would actually be a significant disincentive for me to take the plunge. If you're going to make my laptop larger and heavier, be a pal and give me more pixels. So in that vein, I was pleased to see that the latest rumored resolution of the MacBook started with 1280...but dumbstruck to it followed by 720. They want to make my screen even shorter? I sure hope not. Here in 1024x768 land, rarely do I find myself running out of room left to right, but it sure would be nice if I had more pixels to work with top to bottom. Less scrolling, and well, less scrolling. After all, what is the internet these days if not one big scroll fest? Don't make my screen even shorter, unless you're looking to motivate me to stick with my existing iBook longer than I was planning to.
Come to think of it, this is precisely why I don't dig the rumor scene. Here I am on the verge of getting worked up over 720 pixels, when it could be a typo, or it could be something that someone just plain made up. Same thing goes for the dual core processor. I mean, a Moron in a Hurry figures out that it's going to be an Intel chip, and from there Duo vs. Solo is just a flip of the coin. Any one of you reading this could just make up your own rumors from thin air, and you'd probably have about the same success rate as the "official" rumors. Keep that in mind the next time you see a Mac rumor that just doesn't make sense to you.
On the other hand, I sure do like the idea that the MacBook could hit the market as soon as this month. Hopefully there's some truth in this particular rumor after all.
Sony wants to meet with me. Heh.
So when I heard that NAB 2006 was going to expand to include podcasting this year, I figured I might go out and cover the event for iPod Garage. It's only two weeks away and at this point I've just got too much on my plate to make NAB happen (this year at least), as the event is just too far down on the relevance meter when it comes to iPod Garage's subject matter. But since I did sign up for media credentials, there are any number of vendors actively trying to find a time to meet with me, inviting me to luncheons, media receptions, private suites...heh, maybe I should have gone after all.
Anyway, the way it works (I suppose) is that the vendors all get a list of the members of th media who've registered, and they can go about contacting the ones that seem relevant to them. I've heard from lots of companies I've never heard of, trying to get me interested in products I didn't know existed, and it turns out most of them have very little if anything to do with the iPod universe (hence why I'm not going). But one company's invitation caught my eye today: Sony.
That's right. Sony, one of the iPod's biggest competitors (in name, although certainly not in sales), looked down a list of attending media and decided that the guy from "iPod Garage" is someone they want to sit down and chat with. So what are they trying to sell me on, one of their lame-brained iPod knockoffs? No, as it turns out, they're actually pushing HD media equipment. But I got a kick out of the whole thing, as it's yet further evidence (at least symbolically) of just how disparate Sony's various interests are. It's not that the company's left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. It's that the left and right hands aren't even in the same area code.
Meanwhile, I feel as if I've been called to the principal's office. Who's next - Dell, Creative, and iRiver?
So when I heard that NAB 2006 was going to expand to include podcasting this year, I figured I might go out and cover the event for iPod Garage. It's only two weeks away and at this point I've just got too much on my plate to make NAB happen (this year at least), as the event is just too far down on the relevance meter when it comes to iPod Garage's subject matter. But since I did sign up for media credentials, there are any number of vendors actively trying to find a time to meet with me, inviting me to luncheons, media receptions, private suites...heh, maybe I should have gone after all.
Anyway, the way it works (I suppose) is that the vendors all get a list of the members of th media who've registered, and they can go about contacting the ones that seem relevant to them. I've heard from lots of companies I've never heard of, trying to get me interested in products I didn't know existed, and it turns out most of them have very little if anything to do with the iPod universe (hence why I'm not going). But one company's invitation caught my eye today: Sony.
That's right. Sony, one of the iPod's biggest competitors (in name, although certainly not in sales), looked down a list of attending media and decided that the guy from "iPod Garage" is someone they want to sit down and chat with. So what are they trying to sell me on, one of their lame-brained iPod knockoffs? No, as it turns out, they're actually pushing HD media equipment. But I got a kick out of the whole thing, as it's yet further evidence (at least symbolically) of just how disparate Sony's various interests are. It's not that the company's left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. It's that the left and right hands aren't even in the same area code.
Meanwhile, I feel as if I've been called to the principal's office. Who's next - Dell, Creative, and iRiver?
Wednesday, April 05, 2006
Has Apple lost its mind? Well, maybe not.
Let me see if I have this straight. By far, the biggest potential problem with Apple moving the Mac to Intel-based processors is the fact that some geek moron would figure out how to run Windows natively on a Mac and then publish a step by step process on how to do it, thus effectively allowing users to turn their Intel-based Mac into just another useless Windows box, and rendering the Mac platform nonexistent. But instead of finding an innovative way to keep this from happening and averting doom, Apple has instead released a software patch that allows you just go ahead and install Windows without batting an eyelash. Has Apple gone certifiably insane? Is it time to lock up Steve and the gang in a rubber room for their own safety and protection? Is doomsday upon us?
Well, maybe not.
It's tough to look at this one objectively, because I find the idea of this "BootCamp" software incredibly distasteful. So much so that the thought of it makes me literally want to vomit. And I know that most of you are having the same reaction. That's because it is distasteful. It's disgusting. If you don't find this offensive as a Mac user, then I don't want to know you. Starting soon, some people who "switch" to the Mac are going to continue using Windows, and I'm not talking about occasionally firing it up for this or that oddball software title. I'm talking about using Windows full-time, as if MacOS X weren't even installed, as if it didn't even exist. After installing Windows within minutes of first firing up their new Mac, some of them will never get around to going back to MacOS X for anything. Some of the stupider ones will even believe that they are in fact "using a Mac" by using Windows on Mac hardware, just because they bought the computer from Apple, mistakenly believing that Macs are Windows-based just like all the crappy computers on the market that they're used to.
Much as I'd like to think that there can't possibly be anyone on that planet that stupid, I'm reminded of the fact that some of the smartest people I know suddenly become some of the stupidest people I know, the minute the topic of computers enters the conversation. These people don't know the difference between Mac and Windows, they've managed to confuse themselves out of ever being able to understand the difference, and no amount of explanation will ever cure them of that. They're not going to buy a Mac because they already know that it's "not Windows." Except now they are going to buy a Mac, because they can continue to use Windows.
I find the whole thing patently offensive. And yet I have to applaud Apple for having the guts to do it.
I'm reminded of the landscape back in mid-2002, when Apple had to make the decision whether or not to officially make the iPod available to Windows users. At the time I didn't favor the idea because I was concerned that if Windows users no longer had to buy a Mac in order to get their hands on an iPod, it would be a disincentive for them to switch to the Mac. In fact, at the time I foresaw a number of problems in opening up the iPod to the Windows universe. I feared FireWire would eventually be pushed by the wayside in favor of the inferior USB 2.0. I worried that people would install iTunes on their poorly functioning Windows boxes and then improperly blame Apple when iTunes couldn't perform any better in that bed of quicksand than any of the rest of their installed applications.
Just about everything I predicted that would go wrong ended up coming true. But what I didn't see at the time was that none of them would add up to be enough of a collective minus to cancel out the net positive gained by putting the iPod into the hands of millions of Windows users. In hindsight, it was a messy decision, one that cost us Mac users some things, but one that on the whole worked out really well for the Mac platform. Unless you think that the Mac's resulting 35 to 40 percent year over year unit growth is a bad thing.
And the kicker is that most CEO's would be perfectly willing to sit back and let the Mac grow at that impressive rate for awhile, seeing as how it's three times that of the rest of the computing industry. The Mac is in fact gaining marketshare, after all. But with today's move, it's clear that Steve Jobs is not willing to just sit back and collect new users one at a time in a clean and sterile environment. He wants them all, and he doesn't care how he gets them or just how messy it might get. Talk about aggressive.
Let's be clear here that there are two different potential types of Windows users who will be more inclined to buy a Mac when they find out that they can easily run Windows on it. There's the group of people who have been wanting to switch for awhile, but their workflow depends on one specific piece of specialized or otherwise obscure software that can only run on Windows. When they find out that they can run that one piece of software through Windows on a Mac at full speed, they'll go ahead and pull the trigger. But we know that this is a very small group of people, as there are just so few mainstream software titles that aren't available on the Mac. We're talking about a few small niches here, and to those folks I say hey, you know what you're doing, welcome to the Mac platform. You want to fire up Windows ten percent of the time, more power to you. I don't care.
But then there's everyone else. Windows users who use Windows because it's all they know, or in many cases because it's all they know of. Literally everything they're doing on Windows could be done at least as easily on a Mac, and their reasons for not considering a Mac boil down to a combination of misconception and fear. Tell these people that they can buy a Mac and keep using Windows, though, and now you've given Linus his proverbial security blanket. Nevermind that not a single one of them will ever have any legitimate reason to ever even think about defacing their Mac by installing Windows on it. They'll move to the Mac just because they know that they've got a safety net in place in case they can't figure out how to use a Mac. After all, most of what's wrong with (Windows-using) computer users is that they're too insecure about their potential inability to figure out how to do anything new.
Clearly Apple is banking on most of these folks feeling more secure in switching, and then once they've brought the Mac home and spent ten minutes with it, completely forgetting that the "revert to Windows" option even existed. This notion is helped in large part by the fact that even those who buy the Mac with the intention of downgrading it to Windows will suddenly realize that they're going to have to buy a retail copy of Windows XP in order to make it happen. And after shelling out for a new computer, turning around and going back to the store to spend another hundred-some bucks on unneeded software is about the last thing most folks want to do.
But man, there are going to be people who are going to insist on doing it anyway, just because they've been brainwashed into believing that you simply can't succeed on a computer unless you're using Windows. They'll misguidedly surf the web within Windows, check their email within Windows, pretty much continue functioning as a computing retard, despite the fact that they're using Mac hardware. Apple is setting itself up for a scenario where after having convinced these people to buy a Mac, Apple will then have to go back and convince those same people to switch to the Mac again by actually using it as a Mac. And despite the plain as day superiority of the interface and applications on the "Mac side" of their Mac, some folks never will be convinced to leave the "Windows side" of their Mac.
In other words, some folks will just be a lost cause. They'll throw away their money on a Mac just so they can run Windows a hundred percent of the time, having gained literally no advantage by having bought the Mac at all, other than having some pretty hardware to look at.
But let's forget about them, as those types are hopeless no matter what they're using. Instead, let's focus on everyone else in the middle, those folks who are trying to have a brain about it all, but they're simply torn between common sense and widely held misconception. They'll buy a Mac and then they'll wonder whether they should go back and buy Windows for it. Or they'll install Windows and then they'll wonder if they should keep using it as a crutch or take the leap to the Mac stuff. And Apple's marketing efforts aside, it's going to have to be people like you and me that help all these new switchers figure out their newly complicated landscape. Just when we thought maybe the world was just going to all quietly switch to the Mac at a nice trickle and we could all just sit back and wait for it to happen, the game's gone and changed, and suddenly we're perhaps more needed than ever.
Because there's going to be a whole lot more Mac users now than any of us could ever have predicted. Despite the fact that having Windows on your Mac in most cases actually makes for a significantly worse experience, the security blanket of having the Windows option there as a fallback is going to push Mac sales through the roof. Nevermind that there's nothing logical about it. None of these people used logic when they made the mistake of choosing Windows in the first place. But now that they know that they have the option of continuing their mistake on a Mac, they're going to come rushing in like nothing we've ever seen. Forget forty percent year over year growth Ð think four hundred percent. Think about a fourth of the people around you using a Mac within four years.
But try not to think about how messy it's going to be. Try to ignore the patently offensive advertisements you'll see on TV in which Apple explains that you can now run Windows natively on your Mac. Try to be gracious when the people around you begin asking idiotic questions about running Windows on a Mac. Just hold your nose to block out the offensive odor of it all, and keep in mind that a lot of these folks are going to be using a Mac, and real soon. And once they go ahead and buy their Mac, start thinking of ways to help convince them to keep it Windows-free.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go vomit, and then go buy a whole lot of Apple stock.
Let me see if I have this straight. By far, the biggest potential problem with Apple moving the Mac to Intel-based processors is the fact that some geek moron would figure out how to run Windows natively on a Mac and then publish a step by step process on how to do it, thus effectively allowing users to turn their Intel-based Mac into just another useless Windows box, and rendering the Mac platform nonexistent. But instead of finding an innovative way to keep this from happening and averting doom, Apple has instead released a software patch that allows you just go ahead and install Windows without batting an eyelash. Has Apple gone certifiably insane? Is it time to lock up Steve and the gang in a rubber room for their own safety and protection? Is doomsday upon us?
Well, maybe not.
It's tough to look at this one objectively, because I find the idea of this "BootCamp" software incredibly distasteful. So much so that the thought of it makes me literally want to vomit. And I know that most of you are having the same reaction. That's because it is distasteful. It's disgusting. If you don't find this offensive as a Mac user, then I don't want to know you. Starting soon, some people who "switch" to the Mac are going to continue using Windows, and I'm not talking about occasionally firing it up for this or that oddball software title. I'm talking about using Windows full-time, as if MacOS X weren't even installed, as if it didn't even exist. After installing Windows within minutes of first firing up their new Mac, some of them will never get around to going back to MacOS X for anything. Some of the stupider ones will even believe that they are in fact "using a Mac" by using Windows on Mac hardware, just because they bought the computer from Apple, mistakenly believing that Macs are Windows-based just like all the crappy computers on the market that they're used to.
Much as I'd like to think that there can't possibly be anyone on that planet that stupid, I'm reminded of the fact that some of the smartest people I know suddenly become some of the stupidest people I know, the minute the topic of computers enters the conversation. These people don't know the difference between Mac and Windows, they've managed to confuse themselves out of ever being able to understand the difference, and no amount of explanation will ever cure them of that. They're not going to buy a Mac because they already know that it's "not Windows." Except now they are going to buy a Mac, because they can continue to use Windows.
I find the whole thing patently offensive. And yet I have to applaud Apple for having the guts to do it.
I'm reminded of the landscape back in mid-2002, when Apple had to make the decision whether or not to officially make the iPod available to Windows users. At the time I didn't favor the idea because I was concerned that if Windows users no longer had to buy a Mac in order to get their hands on an iPod, it would be a disincentive for them to switch to the Mac. In fact, at the time I foresaw a number of problems in opening up the iPod to the Windows universe. I feared FireWire would eventually be pushed by the wayside in favor of the inferior USB 2.0. I worried that people would install iTunes on their poorly functioning Windows boxes and then improperly blame Apple when iTunes couldn't perform any better in that bed of quicksand than any of the rest of their installed applications.
Just about everything I predicted that would go wrong ended up coming true. But what I didn't see at the time was that none of them would add up to be enough of a collective minus to cancel out the net positive gained by putting the iPod into the hands of millions of Windows users. In hindsight, it was a messy decision, one that cost us Mac users some things, but one that on the whole worked out really well for the Mac platform. Unless you think that the Mac's resulting 35 to 40 percent year over year unit growth is a bad thing.
And the kicker is that most CEO's would be perfectly willing to sit back and let the Mac grow at that impressive rate for awhile, seeing as how it's three times that of the rest of the computing industry. The Mac is in fact gaining marketshare, after all. But with today's move, it's clear that Steve Jobs is not willing to just sit back and collect new users one at a time in a clean and sterile environment. He wants them all, and he doesn't care how he gets them or just how messy it might get. Talk about aggressive.
Let's be clear here that there are two different potential types of Windows users who will be more inclined to buy a Mac when they find out that they can easily run Windows on it. There's the group of people who have been wanting to switch for awhile, but their workflow depends on one specific piece of specialized or otherwise obscure software that can only run on Windows. When they find out that they can run that one piece of software through Windows on a Mac at full speed, they'll go ahead and pull the trigger. But we know that this is a very small group of people, as there are just so few mainstream software titles that aren't available on the Mac. We're talking about a few small niches here, and to those folks I say hey, you know what you're doing, welcome to the Mac platform. You want to fire up Windows ten percent of the time, more power to you. I don't care.
But then there's everyone else. Windows users who use Windows because it's all they know, or in many cases because it's all they know of. Literally everything they're doing on Windows could be done at least as easily on a Mac, and their reasons for not considering a Mac boil down to a combination of misconception and fear. Tell these people that they can buy a Mac and keep using Windows, though, and now you've given Linus his proverbial security blanket. Nevermind that not a single one of them will ever have any legitimate reason to ever even think about defacing their Mac by installing Windows on it. They'll move to the Mac just because they know that they've got a safety net in place in case they can't figure out how to use a Mac. After all, most of what's wrong with (Windows-using) computer users is that they're too insecure about their potential inability to figure out how to do anything new.
Clearly Apple is banking on most of these folks feeling more secure in switching, and then once they've brought the Mac home and spent ten minutes with it, completely forgetting that the "revert to Windows" option even existed. This notion is helped in large part by the fact that even those who buy the Mac with the intention of downgrading it to Windows will suddenly realize that they're going to have to buy a retail copy of Windows XP in order to make it happen. And after shelling out for a new computer, turning around and going back to the store to spend another hundred-some bucks on unneeded software is about the last thing most folks want to do.
But man, there are going to be people who are going to insist on doing it anyway, just because they've been brainwashed into believing that you simply can't succeed on a computer unless you're using Windows. They'll misguidedly surf the web within Windows, check their email within Windows, pretty much continue functioning as a computing retard, despite the fact that they're using Mac hardware. Apple is setting itself up for a scenario where after having convinced these people to buy a Mac, Apple will then have to go back and convince those same people to switch to the Mac again by actually using it as a Mac. And despite the plain as day superiority of the interface and applications on the "Mac side" of their Mac, some folks never will be convinced to leave the "Windows side" of their Mac.
In other words, some folks will just be a lost cause. They'll throw away their money on a Mac just so they can run Windows a hundred percent of the time, having gained literally no advantage by having bought the Mac at all, other than having some pretty hardware to look at.
But let's forget about them, as those types are hopeless no matter what they're using. Instead, let's focus on everyone else in the middle, those folks who are trying to have a brain about it all, but they're simply torn between common sense and widely held misconception. They'll buy a Mac and then they'll wonder whether they should go back and buy Windows for it. Or they'll install Windows and then they'll wonder if they should keep using it as a crutch or take the leap to the Mac stuff. And Apple's marketing efforts aside, it's going to have to be people like you and me that help all these new switchers figure out their newly complicated landscape. Just when we thought maybe the world was just going to all quietly switch to the Mac at a nice trickle and we could all just sit back and wait for it to happen, the game's gone and changed, and suddenly we're perhaps more needed than ever.
Because there's going to be a whole lot more Mac users now than any of us could ever have predicted. Despite the fact that having Windows on your Mac in most cases actually makes for a significantly worse experience, the security blanket of having the Windows option there as a fallback is going to push Mac sales through the roof. Nevermind that there's nothing logical about it. None of these people used logic when they made the mistake of choosing Windows in the first place. But now that they know that they have the option of continuing their mistake on a Mac, they're going to come rushing in like nothing we've ever seen. Forget forty percent year over year growth Ð think four hundred percent. Think about a fourth of the people around you using a Mac within four years.
But try not to think about how messy it's going to be. Try to ignore the patently offensive advertisements you'll see on TV in which Apple explains that you can now run Windows natively on your Mac. Try to be gracious when the people around you begin asking idiotic questions about running Windows on a Mac. Just hold your nose to block out the offensive odor of it all, and keep in mind that a lot of these folks are going to be using a Mac, and real soon. And once they go ahead and buy their Mac, start thinking of ways to help convince them to keep it Windows-free.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go vomit, and then go buy a whole lot of Apple stock.
