1 Million Windows to Mac Converts So Far in 2005

UltimaGuy writes to tell us AppleInsider is reporting that according to one Wall Street analyst over one million Windows users have switched to Mac in the first three quarters of 2005. It is speculated that these numbers are a direct result of the popularity gained through the iPod and related technologies in addition to security concerns from Microsoft. From the article: "According to checks with Apple Store Specialists, Wolf also said a larger than expected percentage of Windows to Mac converts appear to be purchasing Apple's higher-end systems and that their transition is fueled by the epidemic of viruses and malware on the Windows platform."

Analyze this!

[Paska (801395)]

While I am sure this is probably random guesses and whohar from this one analyst, I actually somewhat believe him from my observations from down-under (Australia).

As a young man that works for a family owned and quite large computer business I've over the years seen people generally not ask very many questions, to now every day hearing people wanting details on Macs, and how they compare to standard white boxes.

Now bundle this in with the fact that our local, and only Apple store is constantly flourishing with business as compared to a few years ago when it was rare to see more then 1 person at a time in there, you'll understand why it's possible Apple have converted so many users.

Just in my direct experience over the last few years, it's converted myself, my brother, my mother and a few friends of mine - (2 to be exact).

It's also at the point, and while I am growing up and establishing my future that me owning and operating a Apple franchise is highly possible.

I've also seen the websites I manage, which are local to our area, sky rocket from 5-10 hits per week from Mac users, to now over 250-300 unique Mac users per week and raising.

Apple are on to something here, and Steve Jobs knows it!

Re:Analyze this!

[CRC'99 (96526)]

While this isn't the only reason...

My personal situation is that I have bought 2 Mac machines in the past 6 months (does that make me 2 'converts'?) because the underlying system suits my needs better.

I spend ~45% of my time using PuTTY on a Windows machine connected to a linux server doing things that I can't do on a windows laptop without a net connection. When you have this capability locally via the OSX terminal, I can do whatever I need to on the move and not be tied to an internet connection and SSH session.

The other benefits I get is that the OS is very solid, I get all the unix tools I need, and it 'just works'.

Re:Analyze this!

[CRC'99 (96526)]

Out of curiousity, what is it that you are doing via an SSH session to a Linux box and can be done on an OS X terminal but cannot be done with cygwin on Windows?

Most of this is working on CVS stuff (do a checkout when you have a net connection, edit away, then commit when you get back). I know it can be done on Windows, but it's damn ugly.

I personally don't see the point of running cygwin when you can have it native to the OS.

All the apps I used on Windows I found replacements for OSX.

Windows -> OSX
MS Office -> MS Office
Outlook Calendar -> iCal
Trillian -> AdiumX
Outlook Express -> Mail
Firefox -> Safari (yes I know you can run Firefox on OSX, but it's DAMN slow)
ActiveSync -> Missing Sync (to sync my Windows Mobile devices)
Canon photo capture -> Image Capture (to bring photos of my digital camera)

Then of course there's all the unix tools, which are mostly there (the only one I had to source and install was wget and ncftp from memory). It takes a while to find all the replacements, but when you do, it's pretty easy to not look back.

Re:Analyze this!

[jma05 (897351)]

>> Most of this is working on CVS stuff (do a checkout when you have a net connection, edit away, then commit when you get back). I know it can be done on Windows, but it's damn ugly.

Not really.
http://www.tortoisecvs.org/ [tortoisecvs.org]

Re:why don't you..

[Trelane (16124)]

So what you're saying is that we need a reliable Linux hardware vendor?

I agree totally.

Re:why don't you..

[TClevenger (252206)]

WiFi is a great example. When I open the lid on my Powerbook, it wakes up correctly EVERY time, and before I can even get my screensaver password entered, it has reconnected to my Netgear WiFi router, reestablished all my SSH connections to my Linux servers, checked my POP server for mail and reconnected my iChat to AIM.

I also can apply patches and updates without worrying about breaking anything, and I can continue to get fully supported OS and application updates for years (yes, even with the Intels coming.)

Don't get me wrong; I love Linux. It definitely has its place (i.e. my servers.) I just don't have the time to play Russian Roulette with compatibility.

Re:Analyze this!

[timeOday (582209)]

Macs (just like linux) "just work" when you stick with supported hardware.

I'm a dyed-in-the-wool "linux guy," but unfortunately hardware support remains my one major complaint with Linux, even when you go our of your way and pay extra for something that's claimed to work. Just skip to the last paragraph if you get bored reading my laundry list of supporting examples:

• My WG511 wifi card is supposedly supported by the prism54 driver. In fact it locks up the machine in minutes.
• My All-In-Wonder card was supported by GATOS, but the drivers weren't good enough to be usable so I ditched it for the best linux-supported TV tuner card there is, the Hauppauge. Lucky me, I got one with a new chip revision so it didn't work.
• OpenGL 3d acceleration on my T40 laptop works, but the machine locks up if you suspend to ram while hardware acceleration is enabled.
• My webcam is supposedly supported by the ov511 driver, but the images are heavily tinged with red, and the compression module that enables decent framerates doesn't seem to be supported anymore. It works OK under Windows.
• My Lego Mindstorms kit has a driver through Lejos, but oops! it doesn't work because the usb lego tower is only compatible with one of the usb driver modules (I forget which), which isn't compatible with the usb ports on my laptop.
• My Epson 1250 scanner, purchased specifically due to Linux support, has horizontal artifacts under Linux but works fine under Windows. (And descreening works.)
• My Pinnacle IR receiver is supported by Lirc, but the lircd exits randomly and without warning causing the remote to stop working.

I could go on, but the point is there's a big difference between a green X in a linux hardware compatibility list, and actually having a stable, working driver that supports all the features. And you never really know until *after* you shell out the cash. Macs have limited hardware support too, but from what I've seen if it is supported, it actually works. I stick with Linux because I like its principles, and after you get stuff going it's great. But when my parents asked what to buy for my grandpa it was a no-brainer: iMac.

Re:Analyze this!

[mforbes (575538)]

I like the idea, but it seems to me this would work better as a community-driven organization.

I.e., draft the requirements for certification of a product (i.e., 'it works when called from csh, GNOME, and KDE!), get Mandrake, Redhat, Novell/SuSE, and a couple of the other big names in the distro world to each contribute the use of their names by the licensing organization, and get hardware vendors interested in certification.

By having a meta-organization certify a device as compliant with the major distros and the most popular desktop(s), and being completely inflexible on the certification requirements (so that the cert org can acquire a decent reputation), we'd be able to enforce standards on hardware vendors who want to do business with us-- and just as importantly, we'd avoid the balkanization of hardware certifications that might otherwise occur, as each distro vendor offers its own sticker ("It works with distro!" slapped all over the box.. bleagh!)

On a side note, wasn't that a beautiful run-on sentence?

Time Value of Money

[alexhmit01 (104757)]

What was the cost different to get a comparable Apple laptop. What do you value your free time at... for me its a lot, because I don't have much... Given the choice between an extra $200 for the machine (and generally, Dell charges the same as Apple for the same machine, but Apple only has limited options, so you buy more machine... i.e. to upgrade the screen, you get a processor upgrade, that kinda thing), and a few hours of tinkering, I reach for my Amex...

It all depends if you'd rather have two-four hours for yourself or a little cash in your pocket...

My point on the Apple vs. Dell... any time I took an Apple machine, then went to Dell and priced an "equivalent" purchase, the price was +/- $50... however, if you start with the Dell, and then price out the equivalent Apple, it is usually a bit more... but you get stuff you may not need, but that is because Apple has limited models...

The Mac Mini is a GREAT office desktop (we have 8, probably going to get 4-5 more)... and its dirt cheap... Once you price out the equivalent Dell and add in XP Pro (home is worthless for a business workstation), and a few other minor upgrades, the mini tends to be $25-$50 less, which is a great deal.

Re:Analyze this!

[hackstraw (262471)]

I will also say that OS X has converted many UNIX/Linux people as well. With me being one of them. I still love UNIX and Linux for server "headless" lets get work done here stuff, but as far as I'm concerned, OS X is the best UNIX workstation and general desktop that has ever been around. Just about everybody I work with has switched from either Linux or other UNIX-like desktop or MS Windows to Macs. The only people that haven't switched were already Mac users.

I also think that current Apple software is very top notch. Apple Mail, Preview, Terminal, Soundtrack, and Keynote are all excellent. And there are others that I'm interested in trying Logic Pro. I've heard good stuff about Final Cut, and Aperture really looks nice.

Apple hardware is pretty top notch as well. Just about any notebook or desktop system looks dated or junky compared to a comparable Apple product. The same goes with software. When I see a Windows desktop or Linux one or UNIX one, it looks dated like a picture of people from the 50s or 60s with those funny glasses or a picture of a parking lot from the 70s.

I don't have too much insightful or informative to say, I don't think, but I think Apple has done wonders for computers in the past 5 years. I know they did innovate before that timeframe, but I simply did not like the pre-OS X operating system. I liked my Apple //c, but that was it until now.

I guess I could be considered a "fanboy" or whatever, but in my opinion, they have earned it. Apple is not perfect, but for many things they are the leader of how computing should be.

We feel exactly the same!

[Alejo (69447)]

Nike shoes are so much faster. I will never use Adidas again.

Re:As a Mac user

[wiggles (30088)]

Be careful what you wish for. The larger the marketshare that Apple has, the bigger the target their platform becomes. You'll not only see ports of your favorite apps, but crapware as well.

Re:As a Mac user

[Overly Critical Guy (663429)]

Thankfully, there's a culture of excellence in software design on the Mac (and a thriving shareware market you can actually make money in, unlike on Windows). If by crapware, though, you're referring to spyware, I dispute the claim that Windows' saturation is the cause of its woes. For instance, OS X has no open ports by default and doesn't even enable the root account. However, Windows users got to suffer through, for instance, Blaster as it took advantage of full access to RPC. Windows is a poorly designed system that everyone was hoping would get a rewrite with Longhorn. Unfortunately, that did not happen. It looks like the registry is never, ever going to die. That's too bad, because the consumers suffer because of it.

It's just that spyware and trojans just don't have anywhere to go on OS X, due mostly to built-in UNIX security measures. You can't even install something or have an app modify system settings without a quick password prompt.

Re:As a Mac user

[ComputerizedYoga (466024)]

on the other hand, if an app wants to write to your homedir/dotfiles instead of sticking itself in system locations, it can do it. How many of the "it just works, I like it" crowd have EVER looked at what dotfiles live in their home directory?

Most spyware comes from one of two places: renegade ActiveX or piggyback installations.

While the mac and *nix platforms don't have activeX to worry about, nothing's preventing people from bundling mac spyware with otherwise useful apps, and if the app brings something that people want, they'll ignore the stuff that comes with it. How do you think Gator operates?

It's just that nobody's decided to go after the mac market trying to turn shareware into adware or negotiating bundle deals, or even learning to write mac malware yet. Maybe that's the "excellence" you're talking about. But there's a big emphasis to be put on the "yet" part of that.

The mac platform is not without its security holes, and those things that compromise a high privilege process don't NEED to prompt you to install themselves everywhere.

Re:As a Mac user

[klubar (591384)]

Dell revenues are not growing as fast on a much larger base. Dell sales are $52.7 Billion. Apple sales are just shy of $14 billion.

It's a lot easier to have high growth on a smaller base.

Re:As a Mac user

[AKAImBatman (238306)]

Oh, I don't think most Slashdot readers hate modern Macs. That'd be kind of dumb, after all.. most of us are pretty into Unix.

There are still quite a few, though. I'm thinking those are the people who haven't yet pulled their heads out and realized that OS X isn't the same thing as OS 9.

Being a Mac hater for most of my life, I can attest to the difficulty of pulling one's head out when it comes to the Mac. But with all the raving of fans (and $$$ pouring into the market) it became hard for me to ignore.

All I can say is, once you go Mac OS X, everything else seems inferior. And I mean EVERYTHING. :-)

"switched" or "also bought"?

[conJunk (779958)]

TFA:

"If we assume that all of the growth in Mac shipments during the past three quarters resulted from Windows users purchasing a Mac, then purchases by Windows users exceeded one million," the analyst said. "Indeed, the number of Windows users purchasing Macs in 2005 could easily exceed our forecast of 1.3 million switchers in 2006."

TFA seems to be using "switched to" and "converted" interchangably with "purchased", implying that every Windows user who bought a Mac was turning his or her back on PCs. I don't think that has to be the case at all. If we assume that TFA is right about the reason for such good Mac sales (derriving from the strength of the ipod), then isn't it reasonable to assume that a fair number of those are people who are buying Macs not as their exclusive computer, but possibly in addition or in complement to their PCs?

Maybe the real signficance of this (assuming the numbers are correct) is that it's no longer uncool to own more than one computer!

Re:"switched" or "also bought"?

[dave-tx (684169)]

Excellent point. I added OSX to my arsenal this past year, but did not "switch" from Windows or Linux, both of which still get daily use by me.

Re:"switched" or "also bought"?

[njfuzzy (734116)]

You're not the right person to trust anecdotal evidence from, in this case. None of us here on Slashdot are. The average user doesn't have an arsenal of machines, he has one. So, from a macro-sales point of view, each Windows user who buys a Mac is switching. (Even if 100% of them aren't actually doing so.)

Re:"switched" or "also bought"?

[plover (150551)]

I don't think the distinction between 'OR' and 'XOR' is important. That they chose a 'NOT PC' is really the telling factor. Ten years ago when "average" PCs were a thousand dollars, and "average" Macs cost more than that, very few people owned more than one computer. But now, it doesn't require a financially crippling investment just to try one.

If Apple wants to call them all "switched", well, that's fine for marketing. But just having their foot in one million more doors, that's huge no matter what. And unless Apple pulls a huge boner, I would suspect most of those million will actually switch and stay switched. (At least until they get tired of Super Breakout. :-)

Re:"switched" or "also bought"?

[nunchux (869574)]

He's right... Just an an example I have a Powermac desktop (mostly for Final Cut) and a cheapo Acer laptop for Office and a specialized application I need for work. I know at least two guys with tricked-out Windows rigs for gaming and Power or iBooks for everything else. I know a few couples who have one Mac and PC in the house-- in fact I'm sure there are hundreds of thousands if not millions of households and businesses with both systems, mixed and matched for need or personal taste.

We're well past the era where having a couple of systems at your disposal is a novelty, and this whole notion that an OS requires a pledge of allegiance is ridiculous. But I guess the Mac press would wither and die without endless self congratulation, and the PC trolls would do likewise if there was noone to hear their cries of why Macs are Teh Sux.

Re:"switched" or "also bought"?

[conJunk (779958)]

Outside of geek circles and people who have a dedicated work machine at home, I don't know one single household with multiple operating systems.

I sat here trying to think of counter examples, and failed. I haven't been in a house that *hasn't* had multiple operating systems in memory... but every single one of those falls in to your "dedicated for work or geek circle" categories.

would you say its fair to say that the number (or relative percentage of the peoplation) of people who travel in "geek circles" is significantly higher than it was 5 or 10 years ago?

No Suprise Here

[flakier (177415)]

I just wonder what the tipping point will be before we start seeing an exponential rise in Mac malware.

Then what, the masses start switching to BSD or Linux?

Re:No Suprise Here

[Kjella (173770)]

OS X is basically a BSD.

If you consider two house that both have a full concrete cellar, where one built a very secure retail shop (BSD server) on top, while the other built a very nice reisdential house (OS X desktop), then your analogy is correct!

Re:No Surprise Here

[Laitment (724540)]

Actually, it's based off of the Darwin operating system, and uses the XNU kernel, which is based off of both the Mach and a customized version of the FreeBSD kernel.

Onlly reason I haven't...

[trib (184485)]

... is the prohibitive cost here in Australia. The 15.2" Powerbook I want (with a spare battery and 2Gb RAM as the only upgrades) will set me back in excess of AU$4200.
I get to play with a Mac a little at work for some of my app testing, and I have serious envy of the guy whose desk it sits on...

Re:Onlly reason I haven't...

[danrik (568865)]

Your mistake is buying 2GB of RAM from Apple. They overchage for RAM unlike anything i have ever seen. Save yoruself some money and buy from someone else.

Mac mini

[dots and loops (448641)]

Actually, it was the Mac mini which caused me to use the Mac as my primary home computer, not the iPod.

Re:Mac mini

[jsebrech (525647)]

Actually, it was the Mac mini which caused me to use the Mac as my primary home computer, not the iPod.

For me it was the ipod that made me seriously consider the switch, and the mac mini that drove my decision. The mini was priced at a point where I could try it out and abandon it if it didn't work for me. The plan was that if I didn't like a mac as my main desktop machine, I would use it as a server, running linux, and buy a cheapo windows system. I never did end up buying that cheapo windows system.

I'm just mad at myself for not having made the switch sooner.

Re:Mac mini

[booch (4157)]

I second that. I bought a Mac mini the day they were released. I'd said since OS X came out that I'd buy a Mac if the prices were reasonable. And to me, the $500 starting price was quite reasonable for a computer to hook up to my HDTV. (I spent nearly $800, including the upgrades.) I'd used Macs frequently before, but never thought they were worth the extra cost.

Just last week, I recommended a Mac mini to a small business owner whose PC got infected by viruses and spyware. I told them that it would be a lot easier to support a Mac, and wouldn't require all the anti-malware software. The owner ended up buying one for his receptionist as well.

I wasn't really interested in the iPods at all. In fact, I'm more interested in an iPod nano now, BECAUSE of my Mac. I'm more interested in the NeXT-based OS, because I used NeXTs in college; and the ease of use combined with UNIX underpinnings. For other people, I recommend the Mac mini because of the ease of use, reduced maintenance requirements, and lack of security issues that Windows has.

Certified A.S.S.

[k4_pacific (736911)]

Apple Store Specialists

Do you suppose these specialists abbreviate their title on their business cards?

Re:Certified A.S.S.

[Kjella (173770)]

"Apple Store Specialists"

Do you suppose these specialists abbreviate their title on their business cards?

Just be glad you didn't work as a Student Assistant (studentassistent) here in Norway. The abbriviation was stud.ass., I kid you not.

Kjella

Malware huh?

[Mkoms (910273)]

They must have not experienced the Adam and Eve virus... you know, the one that takes a few bytes out of your Apple. [Credit: somewhere on the internet]

Startup School

[pHatidic (163975)]

A few weeks ago I went to Startup School, a conference for hackers with entrepreneurial interests that was hosted by Paul Graham. I'd say 80% of the people there with laptops had macs. It was one of the most amazing things I'd ever seen, to look back from the front of the room and see an entire roomful of Apple computers. I think Paul is right that most of the new Apple users aren't switchers, but rather are switch-backers. I for one am extremely happy with my powerbook that I bought two years ago, switching back from XP, so I don't think I will ever become a switch-back-backer. The amazing thing is that even though this computer 22 months old it feels brand new, rechargable battery issues aside. I have never had to reformat the hard drive, remove a virus, or uninstall any adware. I know that it is theoretically possible to get viruses on an Apple and there have been proof of concepts, but personally I don't give a damn about theory. All I care about is my last two years of "just works" computing.

Ah, but how many Linux to MacOS converts?

[Bazzalisk (869812)]

Me for one ... my new machine will be the first I've had since 1997 for which Linux is not the main OS.

Re:Ah, but how many Linux to MacOS converts?

[MoOsEb0y (2177)]

I actually switched from Linux to MacOS because I was sick and tired of fighting with my system configuration everytime I updated my packages or wanted to install new software. OS X allows me to run all of the same OSS apps that I loved on Linux (VNC, SSH, irssi, etc) while at the same time being a joy to use.

I first was exposed to OSX from the leak to x86. After that, I loved it so much I got a Mac Mini (the first mac I've seen which I could actually afford).

I'm a statistic.

[heresyoftruth (705115)]

My hubby and I are two of those converts out there. After the zillionth windows disaster, we saved up and got a set of powerbooks. I can't say the iPods had anything to do with it because we didn't get a set of those until after we got the powerbooks. I always hated the overzealous mac lover, but it appears I just bought my way into the cult. I can't be happier to have switched, as I haven't had one problem since February. That's definitely longer than I went without having to tweak my PC box.

And is anyone keeping track...

[Lead Butthead (321013)]

And is anyone keeping track of the number of people that switched BACK after discovering that they have to re...invest substantial amount of money into Mac version of software titles they already own for the x86?

ipods success

[oddbudman (599695)]

To me this increase in sales can be somewhat attributed to the success of the ipod. The ipod certainally has brought a whole lot more exposure to apple in general over the last 12 months. And it's not like OSX is a bad OS for them to be pushing, if someone is curious and checks it out they probably won't be too dissapointed. Couple that with the fact that Windows XP is a few years old and is starting to seem a little dated. Windows will probably strike back a little come Vista but I guess only time will tell.

Mini

[squison (546401)]

I'm sure a lot of those 'converts' were due to the Mac Mini. I know, for me, the #1 reason why I never even tried owning a Mac was because I wasn't willing to spend $1-3k to try something out. $500 is a lot easier to spend than $2k for a PowerMac.

Then you have an ever-growing application support for OSX. Large games like World of Warcraft coming with a Mac client at release surely can't hurt.

Plus, damn if the iBooks don't look a lot nicer than my drab, boring Thinkpad.

Mac Gaming

[Zobeid (314469)]

Blizzard have supported the Mac long before WoW, that hasn't changed. Game support for Mac is still crummy on the whole, that hasn't changed either. In fact, WoW is one of a remarkably small minority of MMOGs that run on the Mac. I can might near count them on one hand.

SWG? No. . . EQ2? No. . .

Does anyone remember when Bungie was first and foremost a Mac developer? We were all talking about how Halo was going to sell Macs. So much for that plan.

Does anyone remember when Connectix Virtual Gamestation was going to make the Mac an attractive gaming platform, because it could run most Playstation games? Then Sony bought CVGS from Connectix and buried it.

I understand Civilization 4 and Call of Duty 2 were recently released for the PC. How many months will it be before they appear on Macintosh? How many features (like editors) will be left out of the Mac version, while we still have to pay full price?

So . . . I really don't see any upswing in Mac game development, much as I might wish for it. Computer gaming still completely revolves around Microsoft (and DirectX), Macs aren't on the radar screen of most game companies -- and if the Mac platform does accidentally get something good, there are always entities like Microsoft and Sony standing ready to buy and/or bury it.

I'm really not trying to rip on the Mac here at all. I'm just being realistic and telling what experience has shown. Games are the one big area where the Mac is weak, and I don't see anything in the works to change it. Apple could do some things to change it, but gaming just isn't in their corporate DNA.

Never ass/u/me anything...

[dada21 (163177)]

TFA: "If we assume that all of the growth in Mac shipments during the past three quarters resulted from Windows users purchasing a Mac, Or Mac users wanted a second PC, or their kids or parents needed their first or new immigrant H1B workers bought them. How can they assume these numbers are ex-Win users?

appear to be purchasing Apple's higher-end systems They appear to be? So they might not be? Huh?

fueled by the epidemic of viruses and malware on the Windows platform. Based on what figures? Last year it was "fueled by better video editing" and before that "fueled by better graphics editing" as sales people only mimicked their pitches.

the firm on Monday downgraded shares of the company's stock to "Hold," saying it believes Apple shares are now "fully valued." Because the 1 million Windows converts are all that will convert? Not only shit can be pulled from an analyst's ass.

"During the past year, in response to the introduction of breakthrough new iPods and Macs and outstanding financial results, we've doubled our price target." And even $61 is a worthless number, offering no real income (profit dividends, interest, commitment sales, etc). Take your stock money, start your own business, and stop gambling.

Still, the analyst hedges his bets, explaining Apple's "frenetic pace of innovation" could present new opportunities,"The ship is not sinking, but it might. It could also fly possibly." These people are worthless.

I have friends who are analysts, and they're worthless, too. My Costa Rican bookie gives me good advice based on the pros. These analysts either give neutral advice, or just enough so that mom's stock will go up.

Portable data Vs Portable programs

[systems (764012)]

I think, as time pass by, and more developer and systems makers realize that as long as the data is portable (.pdf, .html, .jpg, .mp3, .ogg) the system used to access the data becomes less and less relevant, I think more ppl may switch to alternative platform as they learn that their data will move with them.

Re:Is it because I bought a Mac?

[k4_pacific (736911)]

I seriously hope that I'm not lumped in that 1 million figure.

According to the article, you were the 137,565th person to switch, sorry.

The Mac Demographic (Re:Is it because I bough...?)

[Anonymous Coward]

"I don't particuarly care for OS X at all... it's such a different UI for me that I'm just not all that comfortable using it."

Well, here's the problem. Mac OS X, and in fact the entire Apple experience, is intuitive for a certain kind of person. Artists, fashion mavens, leftists, and other creative personalities [atspace.com] can sit down with a 12-inch PowerBook running the iLife suite on Tiger and comprehend its sensitive, tasteful aesthetic [atspace.com]. It's a rare instinct, this appreciation for beauty and truth [atspace.com]; accountants and other such pencil-pushers haven't a prayer.

In summary, unattractive squares should stick to Linux [atspace.com] and Windows [atspace.com]. Macs are for different thinkers. [atspace.com]

* * * gallery updated 5 Nov. 2005 * * *

Re:Scanned

[general_re (8883)]

I just scanned the article but where did they get these numbers from?

Like many analysts, he pulled it straight from his butt. Or, more specifically, he gathered a few anecdotes from Apple salesmen and extrapolated them to cover the entire universe.

Slashdot OS X Typo award winner!

[Overly Critical Guy (663429)]

Hello, you've won the "Slashdot OS X Typo" award.

You see, in every Apple article on Slashdot, someone always makes a typo when writing three simple letters: OS X. Scientists are divided as to why it's so difficult for Slashdotters to correctly spell this very simple combination of letters (pronounced "Oh Ess Ten," the tenth version of Mac OS).

Common typo variations are:

1.) OS-X
2.) OS/X
3.) OSx
4.) OSX
5.) OSX86

Related typos include:
6.) MAC (instead of Mac)

Yours, sir, is the first insane typo of many in the comments to come when it comes to typing three simple letters: OS X. Be grateful in your glorious splendor! You are a scholar and a gentleman. Good day.

Re:Time to sell Apple Stock

[njfuzzy (734116)]

"Apple: Going out of business since 1984"

Re:The Mac Experience - not all its cracked up to

[MKalus (72765)]

Have you had a look at Pages [apple.com]? That may just fit your bill?

Re:Security is a poor reason to switch...

[phillymjs (234426)]

I guess some people just cant handle the minimal amount of work involved in staying secure...

Yes, we call those people "average users," and they are legion.