> Arguments resorted to by increasingly beleaguered Windows users to
> support their choice to remain on Microsoft's OS have been panned as
> "fudge".

> Discussing the Mac/Unix alternatives, LinuxInsider's Paul Murphy
> asserts: "You'll see that the underlying reason in almost every case
> where the Mac lost out to Wintel doesn't have anything to do with
> rational arguments based on cost, performance or functionality.
> Instead, Wintel proponents are shown as consistently fudging such
> arguments as rationales for decisions already made."

> He describes the common Windows user argument that they have never
> used any other OS as "odd", and asks why those who have used multiple
> platforms are forced to defend themselves against an argument based on
> ignorance.

> The commodity-based PC industry model that survives on Microsoft's
> effective OS hegemony forces Windows users to upgrade their computers
> more often, which accounts for the way sales figures look, Murphy
> implies.

> "If PCs remained usable as long as Macs do, industry-wide total
> revenues (aka customer costs) would be nearly two-thirds lower," he
> writes.

> He also casts a glance at the difficulty of eliciting a desire to
> embrace change among IT professionals, who profit from failure, he
> says: "The other argument you see people make all the time is that
> consultants and IT staff make money on failure, not success, and are
> therefore motivated to push Wintel," he declares.

> Windows users would be a "lot happier and more productive using a
> Mac", because they can focus on what they are good at, rather than
> Windows administration.

> "Sometimes rationality and goodwill just aren't enough, and you have
> to walk away because you can't talk to the willfully deaf," he
> concludes.

> I've had two friends this week switch over to Macs based on their
> previous experience with Vista.  I have a feeling this is going to be
> a very strong quarter for Mac sales.  Even though reviews of Windows 7
> have been very positive, I think it still going to drive more Mac
> adoption.   XP upgrade = pain, Microsoft wants me to buy a new Windows
> 7 machine, I'll just spend a few hundred more and get a quality
> product with great software.  I know that "thoughtsinmymind" will jump
> on this post and call me names but the fact remains that Macs are just
> more stable than Windows PC.  They really do just work and if you want
> you can run Windows 7 on them.   PC vendors want you to turn in your
> disposable PC every 2-3 years while a Mac can last 5 years or
> longer.   In fact, Macs hold their value much better than PCs.

> On Nov 6, 2:48 pm, Ima Ufo <thetruthaboutm...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Arguments resorted to by increasingly beleaguered Windows users to
> > support their choice to remain on Microsoft's OS have been panned as
> > "fudge".

> > Discussing the Mac/Unix alternatives, LinuxInsider's Paul Murphy
> > asserts: "You'll see that the underlying reason in almost every case
> > where the Mac lost out to Wintel doesn't have anything to do with
> > rational arguments based on cost, performance or functionality.
> > Instead, Wintel proponents are shown as consistently fudging such
> > arguments as rationales for decisions already made."

> > He describes the common Windows user argument that they have never
> > used any other OS as "odd", and asks why those who have used multiple
> > platforms are forced to defend themselves against an argument based on
> > ignorance.

> > The commodity-based PC industry model that survives on Microsoft's
> > effective OS hegemony forces Windows users to upgrade their computers
> > more often, which accounts for the way sales figures look, Murphy
> > implies.

> > "If PCs remained usable as long as Macs do, industry-wide total
> > revenues (aka customer costs) would be nearly two-thirds lower," he
> > writes.

> > He also casts a glance at the difficulty of eliciting a desire to
> > embrace change among IT professionals, who profit from failure, he
> > says: "The other argument you see people make all the time is that
> > consultants and IT staff make money on failure, not success, and are
> > therefore motivated to push Wintel," he declares.

> > Windows users would be a "lot happier and more productive using a
> > Mac", because they can focus on what they are good at, rather than
> > Windows administration.

> > "Sometimes rationality and goodwill just aren't enough, and you have
> > to walk away because you can't talk to the willfully deaf," he
> > concludes.- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

> lol here i come...i dont want to say anything becuase you dont
> understand anything logical...lets wait until mSFT reports 4th quarter
> earnings???? if windows 7 beats the crap outta mac will you leave this
> board forver ??? if it does not i will leave forever ??? how does that
> sound ???

> what do you mean by mac's are more stable ?? please lets start a
> thread ..just you and me RFPMN ....lets just talk a few facts about
> "OS" and not BS....by the end of that hopefully you would stop your
> continous yodder....Its on RFPMN and lma ufo...

> On Nov 6, 4:13 pm, RFPMN <robertfpe...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > I've had two friends this week switch over to Macs based on their
> > previous experience with Vista.  I have a feeling this is going to be
> > a very strong quarter for Mac sales.  Even though reviews of Windows 7
> > have been very positive, I think it still going to drive more Mac
> > adoption.   XP upgrade = pain, Microsoft wants me to buy a new Windows
> > 7 machine, I'll just spend a few hundred more and get a quality
> > product with great software.  I know that "thoughtsinmymind" will jump
> > on this post and call me names but the fact remains that Macs are just
> > more stable than Windows PC.  They really do just work and if you want
> > you can run Windows 7 on them.   PC vendors want you to turn in your
> > disposable PC every 2-3 years while a Mac can last 5 years or
> > longer.   In fact, Macs hold their value much better than PCs.

> > On Nov 6, 2:48 pm, Ima Ufo <thetruthaboutm...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > Arguments resorted to by increasingly beleaguered Windows users to
> > > support their choice to remain on Microsoft's OS have been panned as
> > > "fudge".

> > > Discussing the Mac/Unix alternatives, LinuxInsider's Paul Murphy
> > > asserts: "You'll see that the underlying reason in almost every case
> > > where the Mac lost out to Wintel doesn't have anything to do with
> > > rational arguments based on cost, performance or functionality.
> > > Instead, Wintel proponents are shown as consistently fudging such
> > > arguments as rationales for decisions already made."

> > > He describes the common Windows user argument that they have never
> > > used any other OS as "odd", and asks why those who have used multiple
> > > platforms are forced to defend themselves against an argument based on
> > > ignorance.

> > > The commodity-based PC industry model that survives on Microsoft's
> > > effective OS hegemony forces Windows users to upgrade their computers
> > > more often, which accounts for the way sales figures look, Murphy
> > > implies.

> > > "If PCs remained usable as long as Macs do, industry-wide total
> > > revenues (aka customer costs) would be nearly two-thirds lower," he
> > > writes.

> > > He also casts a glance at the difficulty of eliciting a desire to
> > > embrace change among IT professionals, who profit from failure, he
> > > says: "The other argument you see people make all the time is that
> > > consultants and IT staff make money on failure, not success, and are
> > > therefore motivated to push Wintel," he declares.

> > > Windows users would be a "lot happier and more productive using a
> > > Mac", because they can focus on what they are good at, rather than
> > > Windows administration.

> > > "Sometimes rationality and goodwill just aren't enough, and you have
> > > to walk away because you can't talk to the willfully deaf," he
> > > concludes.- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -