The Bizarre "Windows domination is 'bizarre'" of Apple's Mike Spindler.								Aaron Roll    Sep. 1994

After reading this quotation of Apple's Mike Spindler I do know now why apple computer resides on 10 percent of users desktops only.

For years Mac computers were leaders in terms of quality, user interface, graphics capabilities Etc. But "amazingly" sales of the lower quality : PC computers running Dos operating system were always ahead of Mac sales.

Intuitively I felt that whatever Apple company is doing,  they are doing wrong :  not taking any advice from their customers and worse yet, not taking any advice from PC users.  If that reminds you of somebody else, you are not wrong,  IBM Corp. used to take this approach just before all its PC operations collapsed, back in the early days of the mid eighties.

There is a good reason why the PC resides on about 85 percent of the users desktops.  Apple really do believe that its system is "open" , full of "freedom of choices" (that is a quotation of the same interview)Etc. 
So let me tell you - Apple guys - the "bare 'bizarre' truth" : Mac is very much a 'Proprietary System' and definitely not "open".  

For somebody that all his world summarized as Apple-Mac and refuses to see what is going on around him, Yes the apple machine is a kind of "open" system.  But for me - user of PC, Mac and Unix integrated into highly complicated networks,  the Mac is falling short compared to the PC or Unix systems.

More over,  it is a "state of mind" , and not without reasons, that leads people to buy PC over Mac.  No argument that DOS is pretty limited  compare  to  MAC  system  7.x ,  but  MAC  and  System  7.x  is  falling  short behind PC systems in five major aspects that are balancing the technical superiority of the MAC and the PC :
1) openness.  2) access behind the curtains.   3)price.  4) utilities and applications - availability and price. 5) Preserving the past investment.

The typical PC buyer knows that he can start with a very reasonable system - quality and price - and will be able to upgrade the system for a fair amount of money , later on at will.  Mac on the other hand having a comparable initial high price tag.  The prices of upgrading the mac is like a portion taken from a  nightmare movie for the end user.  Yes, the initial Mac machine contains more built in features than the average PC machine, but not all of them are desired by any user that is forced to pay for, like it or not.  CISC processor has its own drawbacks but it is another main reason why people buy more PCs.  The user knows he can trust the consistancy of the copmputer charasteristics that preserved his investment of software and hardware. 

More over and maybe the most important: PC users know and have a definite feeling of controlling the machine.  They can get behind the curtains of the DOS operating system and play around with TSR Resident programs, memory changes, assignments and so on.  The Plug and Play standard and Chicago operating systems are a radical step ahead for PC machines,  but I would like to remind everybody that new PC machines  sell to customers at a rate of 2-4 millions computers a month without the Chicago celebration yet.

On the other hand at the MAC side , at least for me and tens millions of users like me, we feel limited and dictated by the vendor and by his machine.  If something goes wrong in the PC machine, I can get yet to the root of the problem by interacting directly with the operating system and correct it.  After about ten years of dealing with and integrating computer systems I believe there is nothing that I can not do with the PC machine if something goes wrong.
MAC machines gives me a feeling of helplessness when it comes to resolution of a "mysterious" problem. 

Even Unix systems  that unarguably are less user friendly than PC machine, still maintain a much higher degree of helpfulness when it is comes to hardware and software problem resolving.

I am not trying to say that PC machines are better then MAC machine,  What has been said here until now is that from the user point of view, the PC machines have had overall more advantages over the MAC machine, inspite of the few technical advantage of the MAC machines.

And that return us to the first "bizarre " statement of Apple's Mike Spindler :  if MAC Company were truly trying to understand users desires and wills regarding the computers they are using,  MAC most probably was light years ahead of the PC platform, that should be pretty obvious no ?

That reminds me of some incidents I have had with Apple's people.  I was installing and operating Novell Netware Server for one of our clients in the PrePress arena.  This network is a combination of PCs, Unix SPARCS and MACs.  The server is Dell 486 XE running Novell 3.12 with NFS and MAC services, the network is a combination of ethernet and FDDI managed by Stackable hubs and a switching hub.  Data is moving into and out of the Server at the rate of  20-50 Gbytes a day.  Because of the AFP services,(Apple File Protocol)  the server used to 'Abend' (Abnormal End - hang up) every day and sometimes several times a day.  When I called Apple Tech. support to seek some help, the answer I got was very simple and typical: "you should use Apple file server and all your problems will be gone". no further discussion was allowed after that.

This statement was at least not correct and misleading.  Appletalk protocol is not stabler than IPX/SPX - TCP/IP protocols and most likely the other way around is the correct one.  Second, Appletalk protocol is significantly slower than the IPX/SPS - TCP/IP protocols.  Third, MAC platforms and servers integrated poorly with PC and Unix platforms and MAC machines are in no way stabler than PC platforms. My experience show a stabler PC over MAC platform in the File Server arena.

I am sure all this tale sounds very familiar to other professional systems integrators reading this article: First, the problems other operating systems are having being integrated with MAC file systems and second, the total ignorance of Apple guys of the majority of the computerized world.  
Things Came to the point that in some very large sites that run Mixed platforms and operating systems ,  administrators solved the AFP - 'Abend' problem on the Servers by assigning a separate Server for Apple computers.  This server still 'Abend's every day, but who cares, as long as it is not crashing the main PC - Unix network any more.

And to the 'Open' system issue: the only open system I now about is The DOS running over a PC machine and partially Unix system (which although more powerful than the PC, are not 'open' as PCs primarily because of wide disagreement and differences between vendors, yet).  I would like to clarify and sharpen up the term 'Open' that it seems a lot of vendors and apple specifically, are using it wrong.
True 'Open System' is like the name indicates : a "machine that is open for upgrade, add, subtract, change, connect, scaleable of any main-streams device either hardware, software or Operating System exist in the market and partially to the future".  That is what we need.  That is what we wish our computer would be.  And that is not how  most of them are.  

If Apple computers company thinks that being 'Open' is the ability to upgrade MAC computer with MAC replacement parts from a fairly limited and unreasonably expensive sources ?? so I am very sorry !! you are wrong and you are leading the users wrong!!!  If Apple Corp. thinks System 7+ should dominate the world, it is their right to think so but luckily most of the computerized world does not think that way.
It seems there is a common line that goes between Mac users : they do not mind being dictated and lede by others. And on the other hand all the other computer users which are the vast majority, are more free spirits, they do not like being dictated by others.  It is pretty common that PC users are more productive in terms of developing independent software products, while MAC users in general, are waiting for some other big brothers to develop software packages for them.

Even if the PC industry led us sometimes to the wrong directions, let not forget, this is an industry of more than 100 billion dollars a year and counting.  Millions of us are getting their living out of this industry.  The free competition that exists in our industry fuels and oils up the progress we are experiencing lately, we must resist the approach demonstrated by Apple Company to lead us towards proprietary direction.  On the other hand and for the same reasons the existence of companies like Apple Corp. are very important to fuel up the competition flame,  without it we are like stepping again and again on the same ground.

The very near introduction of Chicago (Windows 4.0), Daytona and next year Cairo, are to put all PC operation under new deferent light.  A new ball game has been created.  All that said above belongs to the pre 32 Bit preemptive Multitasking Multithreaded Chicago/Daytona operating systems.  For the first time, the Macintosh will not enjoy any technical superiority and in some aspects, will lag behind the new PC operating system,  specifically in Networking and Multitasking capabilities.
The rules of the game have been changed.   It may well be that in some point of time the MAC will enjoy short superiority that very fast will followed by PC superiority and vice versa.
The bottom line is : equal technical quality among the two platforms and operating systems.  That means : all that has been said above will start floating from  mid 1995 and will get stronger during 1996 - unless Apple company will change its traditional approach towards the users and the PC/Unix world.
What does that mean ? If up to now a lot of developments in the PC arena followed technical developments in the MAC world, that situation will be changed.  The MAC developers that systematically ignored the developments in the PC side will be forced to listen, compare and copy some developments in the PC world.  My advice to MAC users !! you should look forward to the new era.  For the first time somebody at Apple company will be listen to you seriously.

To what was said above we have to add that next year the expected introduction of the new Intel 686 (sextium ?) that is supposed to compete successfully with the new developments of (so called ) Power PC.  The future introduction of 786 during 1997 and the sure to come Risc processor From Intel sooner or later following the introduction of the 32 Bit windows operating systems, will shad new light on the PC workstation level.  
The near future is sure to position the PC as technologically equal if not superior to the Macintosh (Power MAC). On the Operating system side Microsoft should proceed and keep a "back log" of the PC features that appeal so much to users over the MAC technical superiority.  Rumours about the near to come Chicago, indicate: Microsoft is taking the approach expressed here.       

By the way I have a feeling that the name PC is not good enough any more. The PC (Personal Computer) is a wrong name.  Most of the File Servers all over the world are PC based and that does not sound right with the term 'Personal'.  Add to that the fact that more and more NT Pentium/ALPHA/MIPS PC are used as Workstations.  So, is someone out there that can come up with a different, more suitable name ??



Aaron Roll
Computer Systems Analyst
Compuroll
110 Promenade Circle,  Suite 1410
Thornhill, Ontario, Canada L4J-7W8
Tel: 905-886-8797
Fax: 905-886-8998



 



4



