The EduGeek on Tech: Using a Mac in a Windows Workplace

Brian the Education Geek writes an occasional blog with observations about life, geek stuff, politics, and just whatever strikes his fancy.

---

I work in an IT shop that fully supports both Microsoft Windows and Apple Mac OS. But like most IT houses, our enterprise software--as well as a good bit of the client applications we use--comes from Microsoft and was designed with Windows in mind. Apps like Microsoft Exchange, Sharepoint, Active Directory, SQL Server--you get the idea. So even though we support Macs at an end-user level, actually using a Mac inside of this decidedly Microsoft-centric has proven quite a challenge up to now.

But after many attempts over the years, I have finally achieved this goal. My 2-year-old Apple Macbook Pro is now my primary computer here at work, and I'm more productive than ever. I thought I'd briefly go over the mechanics and details of how I did it; if you're geeky enough, read on!

PROLOGUE--A MAC IN A WINDOWS WORLD? WHY NOT JUST USE A PC?

In the words of the great 20th-century philosopher Wile E. Coyote, a legitimate question. Deserving a legitimate answer. Simply put, Mac OSX just plain works better than Windows. That's been a hard thing for this PC guy to come to terms with, but I've used both Windows and OSX, on my own work computers and on probably hundreds of customer computers over the years. The past was one thing, but in this day and age, I must concede that OSX can multitask faster and better than Windows 7, with far less hard-drive activity to slow things down. Web pages render faster on the Mac than they do in Windows, regardless of the web browser. Programs load faster in OSX than they do in Windows, and in many cases they exit more gracefully as well (none of this force-quitting applications in Task Manager garbage!). OSX handles operating system updates more gracefully than does Windows (although Microsoft has made great strides in this area since the days of Windows XP), and BIOS/EPROM hardware updates on the Mac are streamlined right into the OSX update process (whereas PC users must manually download and install each hardware update separately). Last but not least, Apple OSX isn't subject to the spyware and malware that has plagued Windows users for years.

Speaking of hardware, Apple has made huge improvements to the design and quality of their computers over the last couple of years--to the point that most Macs are simply a better-quality computer than the typical PC that you'd find in the workplace. Macs now pack state-of-the art Intel processors, big hard drives and copious amounts of RAM memory. Apple video displays have superb illumination, contrast ratio and color representation, compared to their (generally) more mundane PC counterparts, and with most Mac desktop computer models, the video display is built right into the computer itself. Macs now use the same powerful computer-to-video adapters that PCs use, and they can run graphic-intensive applications like Photoshop with ease. Apple uses what are known as "Chicklet-style" keyboards, so-called because their keys are farther apart from each other than regular keyboards, making it harder to inadvertently hit two keys at once. And while PCs still use a mouse, Apple is rapidly replacing the mouse with a touchpad, where you move the cursor by moving your finger across the touchpad. Why? Because with a touchpad, you can employ multi-finger gestures to do things like zoom in and out, scroll the screen in any direction, and even switch between applications, things that a mere mouse can't do (at least not as easily).

In my book, though, the biggest advantage the Mac has over the PC has to do with how each platform behaves over time. Once you install OSX on a Mac, it will perform just as well two or three years down the road as it did the day you installed it; not so with Microsoft Windows. It's been my consistent experience that from the moment it's installed on a PC (even a high-end PC), Windows' performance degrades over time, as the user installs new software and updates the current software. Between the Windows software updates and service packs, the temporary files and DLL files that build up over time, and the buildup of system registry information, Windows literally slows down from its own weight, its own unsustainable code bloat. Until finally the computer's performance diminishes to only a fraction or what the computer itself is capable of. A Mac, on the other hand, gives you lasting performance throughout the life of the OSX installation, even if the user upgrades to newer, better versions of OSX during that time. Only if the user installs a very very high number of programs and utilities on the Mac, or if they make a habit of monkeying around with system files and Plists and other OSX nuts and bolts, will a Mac's performance degrade. (Which explains why my old MacPro G4 lasted me for years, in which time I went through numerous installations of Windows on my various PCs.)

The Mac vs. PC debate will probably go on forever. But like it or not, in the modern computer world, the reasons and benefits for using a Mac in the workplace are real. It's not like the old days, when the justification for using a Mac at work was  limited to bogus, intangible generalizations like "Macs handle graphics better" or "Macs are better for education". Today's users need fast, reliable productivity from their computers, and a Mac can give them that. Everyone has their own opinion about the aforementioned points above, and I can only say that again, I've drawn my own conclusions both from my computers and from customer computers (Mac and PC).

OK, I'M READY. I JUST NEED TO PLUG MY MAC INTO THE NETWORK AND AWAY I GO, RIGHT?

Well...not exactly. As stated earlier, a Mac is a pilgrim in a Windows world, in the professional realm at least. There aren't too many programs out there that have both a PC version and a Mac version. Why? Software developers have the monetary resources and the development cycles necessary to get their software working in Windows, but many don't have the additional resources that it takes to develop, maintain, and support their software in the OSX operating system. Either that, or they do have the resources but they just assume that there aren't enough Mac users out there to justify the expense. Same with web pages and web applications; most developers will certify them for Windows-compatible web browsers, but for other operating systems' browsers, it's No guarantees or warranties expressed or implied.

Network access and support software for enterprise systems are an issue as well. Much, if not most, of a company's work is created and stored on network resources, like servers and network-attached storage (NAS). Those resources have to be Mac-accessible in order for a Mac to be a viable computing tool. And if your job requires you to maintain enterprise systems like Active Directory or Microsoft Exchange Server, then you have to find Mac OSX software solutions for performing said maintenance. In most cases, the chances of finding such software are slim to none.

For what it's worth, here's how I addressed these and other issues.

ITEM 1: ACCESS TO A WINDOWS PC

If you're going to use a Mac in a Windows workplace, you're going to need constant, reliable access to a PC. Period. No matter how often or seldom you use a PC, eventually you're going to run into an application or web page that only works on a Windows machine. You may be saying, "If I need access to a PC, then what's the point of using a Mac at all?" The point is to use a Mac as your workhorse computer, leveraging the Mac's superior multitasking capabilities to do a much of your work as you can--using a PC only when absolutely necessary. There are three ways to access a PC from your Mac:

1. Use Bootcamp. Every Mac made within the last five years or so has the built-in ability to run Microsoft Windows, through a utility known as Bootcamp. Just run the Bootcamp utility in the Utilites folder on the Mac; it will ask a few questions about how you want Windows to be set up, then it will make a new partition on the Mac's hard drive. That partition will be where Windows is installed, and when you're done, the Mac will give you a choice of which operating system you want to use--Windows or Mac--every time you boot it up. (Note: Bootcamp requires that you have a licensed copy of whichever version of Windows you set up; I'd recommend Windows 7. Also, if you aren't that much of a PC person, you might want to get a more Windows-savvy person to help you with the installation. Bribe 'em with Starbucks if you have to!)

Voila! Insta Windows. Now you've probably already guessed the main drawback to this method: you choose the OS you want to use on bootup, which means that you either run Windows or Mac...but not both at the same time. If you need to use Windows more than once or twice a day, then having to reboot the Mac and boot into Windows each time is going to get real old.

2. Use a Windows virtualization program, like Parallels or VMWare Fusion. Virtualization programs work a lot like Bootcamp; you install the program in OSX, then the program installs Windows on your Mac. Except that you don't have to reboot the computer and choose which OS to run; you run Windows inside of the virtualization program. That way, you can use OSX all the time, and run the virtualization program only when you need to use Windows for something. You can even tell Parallels or VMWare Fusion that you want to use the Bootcamp Windows installation as the virtual Windows PC. How cool is that!

The only real downside to this method, apart from again needing to have a licensed copy of Windows, is that virtualization programs take lots of system resources on your Mac. Whichever program you use needs system memory and processor cycles to run itself, then more memory and processor cycles to run Windows. (Windows itself needs lots of system resources to run, which of course is what this blog article is all about.) This slows down the Mac; how slow it gets depends on how much RAM memory it has and how beefy the processor. Like I said earlier, my own MacBook Pro is a couple of years old and has 4 gigs of RAM, so I'd probably see some noticeable slowdown. Realistically, probably only a nicely-equipped MacPro or one of those brand-new MacBook Pro laptops (with the new Intel chip architecture known as "Sandy Bridge") could run a Windows virtual machine really well, with little or no performance loss. Fortunately, though, there's door number 3...

3. Connect to a PC remotely, using the Microsoft Remote Desktop Connection (RDC) program. For those using older Macs, or who don't want to sacrifice any system performance in exchange for using Windows, the best option may be to download the Microsoft Remote Connection Desktop (from www.mactopia.com). RDC lets you take over the operation of a PC right from your Mac; you can then use Windows on that PC as though you were actually sitting at the computer. That's how I roll in my office; I have an old Dell Optiplex 745 desktop computer that sits under my desk, and I connect to it form the MacBook Pro via RDC. Now the limitation for this method, obviously, is that you have to have a physical PC to connect to, and that PC has to be connected to the network. That can be a tall order in an office with limited computers and/or limited network resources. But if you can make it fly, you'll get the best of both worlds: Windows access without the performance pain.

Best of all, the computer you remote into doesn't even have to be all that beefy or all that new. My 745 is about 5 years old, yet it's more than fast enough to be a simple Windows terminal for my Mac. And keep in mind that you only need the computer itself, the "box" as it were. You don't need to connect a keyboard, mouse, or monitor to it; all the input/output takes place on your trusty Mac.

ITEM 2: A OFFICE PRODUCTIVITY SUITE THAT'S COMPATIBLE WITH WHAT THE REST OF THE OFFICE USES

Another thing you'll need to have on any Mac that you wish to use in a Windows office is an office productivity suite that's compatible with the suite that everyone else in the office uses. An office productivity suite is a set of programs used to perform common office tasks; it consists of:

--a word processor program for creating documents like memos, letters, and proposals, etc.

--a spreadsheet program for creating spreadsheet documents, like budgets, earnings forecasts, or even merely lists of information that you want to keep in a grid format.

--a contact management/personal information management program, for keeping information on the people you work with and for keeping track of appointments, meetings, etc. Many contact management programs double as e-mail programs, so you can read e-mails and keep track of the aforementioned information all in one place.

--a presentation program, for use in presenting information to others inside or outside the office. You use the program to put together the information you want to present, then you connect the computer to a presentation medium like a projector, and do the actual presentation.

Now, here's the rub: you have to be able to open the documents that your co-workers create using their office productivity suite, and they have to be able to open documents that you create. Nobody is an island unto themselves; everyone collaborates, and collaboration means that any user's computer can be used to open an other user's documents.

So if you're going to use a Mac, your OSX office productivity suite must be able to open the document files that your co-workers produce, and the documents you produce have to be usable and editable on other computers. I.e., Windows computers. Now, can't you just install an office productivity suite on your Windows PC--the one you obtained using one of the methods above--and use the PC for your memos, spreadsheets, etc.? Absolutely you can. But remember what we said earlier; the point of this exercise is to use the Mac's speed and multitasking abilities to chew through the majority of your work, and for most office workers, the majority of their work--or at least a good percentage of it--is done in their office productivity suite. If you can't even use the Mac for that, then it may not be worth it to use a Mac at all.

Now fortunately, the current standard for office productivity suites is Microsoft Office, and there's both a Windows and a Mac version of Office. In days past, documents saved in the Windows version of Office could not be reliably opened or edited using the Mac version, and vice versa. But with the latest iterations of Office for the Mac and PC respectively, compatibility between the two is virtually assured. That does mean, though, that especially on a Mac, it's critical to have the latest iteration of Office, Office 2011; using an earlier iteration of the program is not recommended. The only caveat here is that although the two versions of Office are compatible, the Windows version includes three programs that the Mac version doesn't: Microsoft Access, Publisher, and OneNote. (Access is used to create information databases, Publisher is used for desktop publishing, and OneNote is used for taking notes in meetings and such.) But again, no worries; if you need to use these programs, that's when you crank up your PC, right there inside OSX on your Mac, and away you go.

Not every business uses Microsoft Office; many are turning to online document creation solutions like Google Docs, OpenOffice, and Microsoft Office 365. But that's actually great news for whose who want to use a Mac in the workplace, since all of these alternatives are Mac-friendly (although Office 365 is still in its infancy, and only time will tell how Mac-compatible it will ultimately be, if at all).

ITEM 3: THE MOZILLA FIREFOX WEB BROWSER

Apple OSX ships with its own web browser, called Safari (just as Windows has its own web browser, Internet Explorer). Safari has come a long, long way from its decidedly humble beginnings, and most web pages load in Safari no problem. But some web pages don't work in Safari, and Murphy's law pretty much guarantees that one of these web pages will be the one that you have to go to. Regularly. So it's important to surf to www.firefox.com (yes, you can use Safari to do this) and download and install the latest version of the Mozilla Firefox web browser. Once installed, you use it just as you would Safari, typing the URL of whatever web page you want to view in the Address line. Firefox is the browser of choice for many (if not most) Windows users as well, so you'll be in good company.

ITEM 4: A MINI-DISPLAY-PORT-TO-VGA ADAPTER

Apple has had a nasty habit in the past, of suddenly throwing away support for the standard technology that everyone uses, in favor of brand-new technology that hasn't yet been adopted by the computer industry at large. They've mostly grown out of this practice, but one hurdle remains: external video connectivity. For purposes of connecting video monitors, projectors, interactive whiteboards, etc., the standard for years has been VGA (for both Mac and PC). VGA is an analog technology, and it was eventually supplanted (if not necessarily replaced) by DVI, a digital connectivity standard. Then a new video connectivity emerged, called DisplayPort. And while the rest of the industry has been slow to adopt DisplayPort, Apple has now forsaken all other external video display connectivity standards, and gone solely with DisplayPort. (The only exception to this is the MacPro tower models; seems like they still have a DVI connector).

So if you're going to use any Mac at the workplace outside of a MacPro, and if you wish to connect that Mac to a projector or to a non-Apple external monitor (or a whiteboard), you're going to need a mini-display-port-to-VGA adapter. You plug one end of the adapter into the Mac itself, and the other end into a VGA cable, which is plugged into the monitor/projector/whiteboard. Once this is done, you have external connectivity. You can get these adapters from www.apple.com or from computer supply stores.

ITEM 4: KNOWLEDGE OF MAC OSX, AND/OR PATIENCE WITH YOUR IT TECHS

Remember that old mantra that Apple used to use to tout their computers? Think Different. They even made all kinds of wall posters with the photos of people known for going against the grain, like Pablo Picasso, Albert Einstein, Alfred Hitchcock, and the like--each poster containing the words "Think Different." If you use a Mac in a Windows workplace, that's exactly what you're doing; you're using a different kind of computer from everyone else.

That means, among other things, that if something goes wrong and you have to call your IT person/people to work on your Mac, they may not be able to fix it as quickly or easily as they can fix a PC. And chances are,  as they're working on your Mac, they're thinking to themselves, "Why can't this user just use a PC like everyone else?" Be as patient with them as you can, and of course bribery with food or coffee can smooth things along!

It would also probably be worth your time to get to know Mac OSX. It's an easy operating system to learn how to use, but there are a lot of nuances and "gotchas" and general troubleshooting factoids to learn. Doing so will make you more comfortable with the system, and potentially more able to fix problems that come up. For example, anytime you get an error message or you see wonky behavior from a program, it's a good idea to repair the permissions in the files on your hard drive, using the Disk Utility (found in the Utilities folder, under Applications). Little tidbits of knowledge like that can go a long way toward self-sufficiency in the journey that you and your Mac share in the workplace. A few books you might want to check out:

Mac OSX Snow Leopard: The Missing Manual
http://www.amazon.com/Mac-OS-Snow-Leopard-Missing/dp/0596153287/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1301285437&sr=1-1

Mac OSX Snow Leopard Bible
http://www.amazon.com/Mac-OS-Snow-Leopard-Bible/dp/047045363X/ref=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1301285437&sr=1-6

Apple Training Series: Mac OS X Support Essentials v10.6: A Guide to Supporting and Troubleshooting Mac OS X v10.6 Snow Leopard

http://www.amazon.com/Apple-Training-Essentials-Supporting-Troubleshooting/dp/0321635345/ref=sr_1_9?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1301285437&sr=1-9

And of course, there's a myriad of Worldwide Web resources at your disposal as well; the best way to find them is probably to do a Google search on "Mac OSX resources" or something to that effect.

IN SUMMARY...


I've really only scratched the surface on the subject of using a Mac in a Windows world, and there are countless other observations I've made since December when I first started doing so, that I just don't have room to mention in this article. But if you have a Mac that's two years old or newer, if you're sick of all the spyware and code bloat and general drudgery that plagues Windows users, and if you don't mind learning a few things and putting forth a little effort, you too can enjoy the Mac experience in this Windows world.

The EduGeek at the Workplace: Who's in Customer Service? Everyone!

Brian the Education Geek writes an occasional blog with observations about life, geek stuff, politics, and just whatever strikes his fancy.

---

Ever go to one of those training seminars for work? The kind that they have at hotels and last like 2 or 3 days? I've only been to one, back in '94 or so, called—get this—How To Deliver Knock-Your-Socks-Off Customer Service. Had a cute little logo of a pair of feet with the socks flying off and everything. Aww.

I didn’t mind going, mind you; it got me out of the office for a couple of days, and they had the good taste not to have it at one of those horrid downtown hotels where you have to drive around for half an hour looking for a place to park. And for the most part, it was pretty much as expected, just a bunch of Powerpoint bullets on what customer service means and what you would do in this or that situation. There was one thing they said, though, that actually stuck with me:

Everyone is in customer service.

Meaning that whatever it says on a given employee's business card--accountant, IT manager, teacher, whatever--that employee is in customer service. That employee has a customer base, consisting of the others inside and outside of the company who depend on them, hence that employee is in customer service.

It sounded pretty hokey at first, but since then I've often thought of how much more efficiently a company or government entity could function if they would take on this philosophy.

Pretty much every company or organization out there has a customer service department of some kind. It might be a full-on call center, or it might be the desk receptionist in a small business, or it might be the outsourcing company in India or Bangladesh. Anyone who holds a position in that department is considered to be “in customer service,” whether its someone who takes the phone calls, someone who goes out and works with the customer to get the problem solved, whatever. These folks are in customer service to serve the company’s customer base, i.e. the people who pay the bills. The company probably has many other departments—billing, marketing, fulfillment, executive management—and conventional wisdom says that the people who work in those other departments are not in customer service, because they don’t have customers per se.

That’s conventional wisdom. Now lets look at the benefits of taking this broader view of customer service.

Lets pick a random department of a company as an example, say the accounting department. The lead accountant has the daunting task of balancing the books every month. Does this involve dealing directly with the company’s customer base? No. But there are a lot of people in the company who need the lead accountant in order to perform their jobs. The company’s executive management—the top brass, if you will—depends on the lead accountant for information on how much money is in the company’s budget, so that they know whether or not they can kick off that new project they’ve thinking about. The department heads of each of the company’s departments count on the lead accountant knowing how much money is in their budgets as well. If the company uses an auditing service to periodically audit the accounting department, then the auditors need the lead accountant for accurate, up-to-the-minute information on their accounting practices.

The point of all this? The executive management, the department heads, the auditors—these folks (among others) are the lead accountant’s customers. They’re the people who the lead accountant serves, and that’s what makes them the lead accountant’s customers. Therefore, the lead accountant is in customer service!

This may seem like an oversimplification, but it’s not. Practically all businesses with 20 or more employees companies have accountants (or at least accounting services), and all accountants have customers who they serve. Their job titles may differ from business to business, but they still depend on the accountant to do their job, and that makes them every bit as much a customer as the people who actually pay the company for their goods or services.

The same goes for the IT department. This is a much simpler example, because pretty much everyone in the company needs the IT department for something. Department heads need IT to develop computer systems for their information processing. The marketing/advertising department needs IT to maintain the web servers through which they advertise the company’s product or service. And of course everyone with a computer needs IT for computer maintenance and for tech support when things go wrong. All these folks are the IT department’s customers, and just like the company’s paying customers, if they don’t get the service that they need, they won’t be able to provide the company with the things that the company needs. If a paying customer doesn’t get the service they need, they take their business elsewhere, which deprives the company of the customer’s money. By the exact same token, if the IT department’s customers don’t get the service they need, they can’t do their job, which deprives the company of their effectiveness. (Example: it’s pretty hard to create that meeting agenda if your word processor isn’t working!) One of these scenarios is just as bad for the company as the other, but most companies seem to only recognize the first one, the loss of paying customers.

I could go on and on with examples, but the bottom line: everyone has a customer base, regardless of their role in the company. That customer base consists of the people in the company who need them to get their own jobs done. No matter how low on the totem pole an employee thinks they are, someone else needs them. Often.

You may be thinking to yourself, “Fine, Edugeek; so what? I probably won’t be able to singlehandedly get my company’s top brass to adopt the philosophy that everyone is in customer service, so how is all this relevant?” Well, it’s relevant in how each of us does our job—or more specifically, how each of us interacts with our own customer base. If we all adopt an attitude of performing good customer service, whoever the customer, then the idea that everyone is in customer service will take care of itself. Here are some pointers:

If someone contacts you, get back to them. If you get an e-mail message from someone, reply immediately. If you get a voice mail message, call them back. If the person is asking a question of you or they need something from you, reply to them right away and let them know that you either have what they need, or that it will take time to get them what they need. Try not to leave them hanging if you can possibly avoid it, because when someone asks something of you, it’s usually because there’s something they have to do or some information they need to provide—and it’s contingent on your answer. Oh, and if you’d prefer that people contact you via e-mail rather than by phone, let them know that. Make an outgoing message (OGM) on your phone that says something like “For faster response, please e-mail me at ____.”

If someone asks you a question, get the answer yourself. This sounds obvious, but it’s all too easy to reply to a question with “I don’t know, you’ll have to ask ____.” When you do that, you’re basically giving that person the runaround, in their own office! You expect for someone to get the runaround when they call a state or local government office or something, but it shouldn’t happen in their own office, among their own co-workers. If someone asks you something that you don’t know, say “I don’t know; let me find out and get back to you.” Then go ask the person who you think might know, get the answer from them, and relay it back to the original person. Yes, that’s a lot of work on your part, but what you’re really saying to them is, “Your quest for this answer ends here; you can count on me to get you the information.” Now the answer may be more involved than you can easily relay to the person, especially if its in an area that you don’t know much about; in cases like this, you can say “OK, I asked Jane and she said _____. But she could probably give you a more detailed answer.” Nothing wrong with this; you still did the leg work, and you reaffirmed to the person who asked that you can be counted on to get them what they need, in the form of an answer or at least a referral to someone who can better help them. That’s what they really want, after all, just like it’s what you want when you need information.

Don’t tell yourself stories about people. This applies more to people who are in the actual customer service department than it does people in other departments, but to some extent, it holds true everywhere. For example, if someone needs something from you, don’t say to yourself “What a lazyass, why can’t he do it himself?” Because what you’re doing is telling yourself a story about the person, in this case telling yourself that the person is lazy. But in most cases you have no idea whether or not the story is true; you’re mostly telling yourself that story just to reinforce to yourself why you shouldn’t have to do whatever it is they’re asking you to do. In this example, yes the person may just be lazy, but there are a lot of other possible explanations as well. Maybe they need this thing from you because their computer isn’t working at the moment. Maybe getting this thing requires a key, or a system access password, or some other resource that they don’t have. You don’t know, and as in life, there’s nothing to be gained by assuming the worst. Now if someone asks you for something over and over again, at that point its time to show them how to get whatever it is they need, or its time for you to get with their supervisor and let them know what’s going on, or however you want to handle it. But in general, give a brotha or a sistah a fair shake; they’re your customer after all!

Be liberal with praise and gratitude. This isn’t really anything that you didn’t learn in kindergarten, but thank people when they do something for you. Many people know to thank their friends and their family when they do something nice for them, but don’t know to carry this attitude over with them at the workplace. Similarly, when a co-worker realizes some kind of achievement, like getting a degree or certification, give ‘em props. Publicly. There’s a lot of negative energy floating around these days, so its important to be a source of positivity if you can.

Follow up. This is closely related to getting back to people, but it’s more of a long-term thing. Like whenever I take my car into the shop and they work on it, about a week later I get a follow-up e-mail message, asking how things are going since the work was done. That’s what a good customer service rep does, and it’s a good thing to integrate into your own behavior at work. If you provide an answer or if you’re otherwise a resource for someone, follow up with that person and make sure that what you did or what you gave them was really what they needed and that it really helped them. This is a particularly good idea if you answered a question for them or gave information, because it serves as a verification for you that your answer was really the correct one, or that your answer wasn’t correct and the correct answer is ___, or that your answer was correct but also could have included ___. That’s how you make yourself an effective resource for your customers, whoever they may be.

There are probably numerous other good habits that you can adopt that would give that good-customer-service quality to your work; feel free to name some of them them in the comments section. Your customers will thank you!

The EduGeek on Tech: An iPad vs. a Netbook

Brian the Education Geek writes an occasional blog with observations about life, geek stuff, politics, and just whatever strikes his fancy.

---

After careful deliberation and painful soul-searching, I decided to pick up an Apple iPad last July. (I couldn't really afford an iPad, but that's another story.) So I thought I'd share my thoughts and observations on it, specifically in the context of the question I get asked most often amongst the iPad skeptics who know me: why get an iPad when you could just get a netbook computer instead?


I don't think I need to explain what an iPad is; we've all seen the commercials, maybe even seen one up close or used one.

A netbook, for the uninitiated, is simply a very small-scale laptop computer.

Netbooks don't generally have a great deal of raw computing power, and accordingly are not very expensive to buy (usually in the $400 to $600 range, maybe a shade under); like the iPad, their use is generally limited to web browsing, e-mail, social networking, e-book reading, and light applications, with the occasional casual game or Youtube video thrown in, if the user is so inclined. Like the iPad, netbooks are very lightweight and portable, so they're a favorite among college students and the younger crowd in general. With few exceptions, most netbook computers are PCs that run some flavor of Microsoft Windows.

So let me run down the general areas in which I've found that the iPad and netbooks seem to butt heads, as well as my view of how each device stacks up in these areas.

Form factor. A computing device's form factor refers to the physical attributes of the device, and how the device is used based on those attributes. A netbook computer employs a laptop form factor; it has a QWERTY keyboard, a video screen, and a trackpad mouse, and all of these components are necessary for its use. An iPad employs a pad form factor; it's basically a flat, thin plastic or metal shell that encases a small video screen. You don't use a trackpad to move a cursor around the screen; you use your fingers to touch and swipe the screen itself. You don't use a keyboard to type; a virtual, graphic image of a keyboard automatically appears on the screen when you need to type.


To some, the difference in the form factors of an iPad and a netbook make the two devices so different as to render any comparison between them invalid. Apples and oranges, as it were. I can understand this viewpoint, but I don't share it. There are advantages and disadvantages to each form factor, and it's up to the user as to which form factor works better for them. For me, no matter how small a netbook computer you buy, you're still stuck with the laptop form factor, and you still need the keyboard, trackpad mouse, and video screen (along with their requisite size and weight). Additionally, if you're low on battery, you also need to plug in a power supply, and if you don't like using the netbook's trackpad mouse, you have to plug in a mouse.


To me, only a pad device like the iPad offers true portability, combining both input and output in a single screen. But I will admit, one thing I've found with the iPad is that holding a pad in your hands really pretty much sucks after only a few minutes of use. There's just no good way to do it; if you hold it in front of you like you're holding the steering wheel of a car, your arms get tired. If you lay it on a table, the viewing angle prevents you from seeing the screen, so you still have to hold it at the proper angle with one or both hands. If you cradle it in one arm, it's hard to keep the screen straight; your view of the device is tilted left or right. The only effective solution I've found is to use an iPad stand to support the device (there are stands of many varying types ands sizes out there). That gets it out of my hands altogether, and plus I'm free to type.

But then, that adds another component to the pad's form factor; now it's not just a pad, but a pad with a stand that I need to lug around with me. So my verdict on form factor: it's six of one, half dozen of the other. Neither device's form factor makes that device the hands-down winner in this writer's opinion.


Cost. It's hard to beat a netbook computer in terms of low cost, and the iPad can't. Like most Apple products, the iPad is marketed as a premium, high-end gadget; at $500 to start, there's little thought toward the iPad as being a bargain. As stated, a good netbook computer usually falls in the $400 to $600 range. But there's a big caveat here: that $400 to $600 price range is for base models. Most companies that manufacture netbooks give you the option to upgrade certain hardware components, like RAM memory or hard drive space. Some of them charge more money for these hardware upgrades than the upgrades themselves are worth, so it's very easy to go in with the intent to spend $400 on a netbook computer, and end up spending $700 or $800 or more. But...here's what you would spend on an iPad:


$500-iPad with 16 gigabytes of storage and Wi-Fi Internet (as in you need a local wireless network to access the Internet).
$600-iPad with 32 gigabytes of storage and Wi-Fi Internet (as in you need a local wireless network to access the Internet).
$700-iPad with 64 gigabytes of storage and Wi-Fi Internet (as in you need a local wireless network to access the Internet).
$629-iPad with 16 gigabytes of storage and 3G Internet (you can use the AT&T cell phone network to access the Internet, so you don't need a wireless network).
$729-iPad with 32 gigabytes of storage and 3G Internet (you can use the AT&T cell phone network to access the Internet, so you don't need a wireless network).
$829-iPad with 64 gigabytes of storage and 3G Internet (you can use the AT&T cell phone network to access the Internet, so you don't need a wireless network).


With those last three options, keep in mind that you also need to pay a monthly fee for Internet access.


Bottom line: as long as you're OK with the hardware specifications for the base model of whatever netbook computer you're looking at, you'll likely spend less money on a netbook. I should point out, though, that the quality of the video display--arguably the most important component of a computing device of any kind--varies rather widely between netbook brands and models, so some comparison shopping may be in order. iPads don't have that problem; you get a gorgeous, responsive 9.7-inch multitouch display no matter which one you buy.


Operating system. Like I said, most netbooks have some version of Microsoft Windows on them, where iPads use Apple's proprietary iOS. There are a couple of pad devices that run Google's Android operating system as well, but the pad market right now is overwhelmingly iPad/iOS. So which operating system is better? Well, again lets look at what a netbook and a pad computer are generally used for: web browsing, e-mail, social networking, e-book reading, and light applications. These are fairly simple and lightweight duties that don't require an overly sophisticated operating system, and in my experience that's what Windows IS. It's a highly capable and feature-rich operating system, and one that's accordingly big, complex, clunky, and fairly demanding of computer hardware resources (memory, disk space, processor speed, etc,) to run. Apple's iOS, on the other hand, was designed for phone and pad devices like the iPad, so it's not nearly as complex as Windows, its much faster and easier to use, and it doesn't need a particularly powerful device to run. Windows also suffers from malware and spyware, computer viruses, and the tendency to slow down the more software and/or hardware peripherals (printers, digital cameras, etc.) that are installed; iOS has none of these problems. In my book, this makes iOS the clear winner for pad/netbook-type duties.


Applications. This is a tricky subject, and there's probably no clear winner here. Netbook users have a vast number of Windows applications to choose from, and iPad users have a vast number of iOS applications; to me, the difference is in the KIND of application that Windows and iOS have to offer. Windows applications generally seem to run more toward the productivity and utilitarian side of life. If you need office productivity and connectivity tools, or if you're going to college and you're required to have applications like software development tools, or if you need certain web browser plug-ins--you're much more likely to find these things in the the Windows world than you are the iOS world. iOS applications, on the other hand, tend to gear more toward the entertainment, leisure, artistic, and K-12 education side of things. There are certainly productivity and utilitarian applications to be had in the iOS world, but they're few and far between; iOS's forte lies more with educational applications like the periodic table of the elements, or with e-book readers, or digital interfaces for popular magazines like People or Motor Trend. Another example: Comcast cable television subscribers can download an application for the iPad that allows them to use their iPad as a remote control for their cable box. This is what an iPad is mainly for; applications that won't necessarily change the world or anything, but that are fun and handy to have around.


So when choosing between a netbook or an iPad, it's wise to consider the general type of application that you 'd use it for. An iPad is a great choice for casual users, where a netbook might be better suited for the more serious, productivity-minded user. It's worth noting, though, that even the more productivity-oriented user may be able to find applications in the iOS world to suit their needs. That's because iPads are flying off the shelf and are in very high demand, and software manufacturers of all manner of software are taking notice--even companies who once thought the Windows market was all they'd ever need to cater to.


Autonomy. That's a weird measure of a computing device; let me explain. A netbook operates autonomously, meaning that once you get it it, you plug it in, turn it on, and away you go. iPads aren't like that; in order to begin using an iPad, you have to connect it to another computer. It can be a Mac or a PC, desktop or laptop, doesn't really matter; it just needs to have Apple's iTunes program installed. Why? iPad users must occasionally connect their iPad to the computer for a process known as synchronization. The iPad synchronizes, or syncs, with the iTunes program on the computer, and in this process the iPad's software is backed up on the computer, and it gets updates to its iOS operating system from Apple. All well and good--but you have to have the computer to sync with! If you don't already have a computer, or if you don't know someone who would allow you to use their computer as iPad sync fodder, then you'd best skip the iPad and go straight to Best Buy or Micro Center to begin your search for a netbook.


Web browsing experience. Most people assume that web browsing is web browsing, whatever the device or operating system. Not so, however, due to a couple of semi-questionable choices on Apple's part (more specifically on the part of Apple's CEO, Steve Jobs). Mr. Jobs has decreed that iOS does not, and likely never will, support the Adobe Flash protocol for web page graphics, animations, and video. Most of the major web sites in the world use Flash for some or all of their web content, so no Flash support means that the iPad can't do all of the things in the average web page that a Windows-powered netbook can. Another thing on the iPad: of all the major web browser choices that Windows users take for granted, only the Safari browser is allowed on the iPad. No Google Chrome, no Firefox, no Opera; you can either use Safari, or install a no-name browser and hope that it doesn't crash.


As to the absence of Flash support, Jobs cites browser performance and security concerns. Fair enough; Flash can indeed consume a fair amount of system resources, and it is used by a number of spyware and malware installer programs on the Windows side to carry out whatever evil plans it has in store for infected computers. But how does the absence of Flash, in a worldwide web that uses Flash so heavily, affect the overall web browsing experience on an iPad? After 7 months with an iPad, I can honestly say, not as much as I'd have thought. I read reviews of the iPad when it first came out, describing the web experience as "broken," but I've not really found this to be the case. There's definitely functionality on some sites that does not work on an iPad, no question. (Try and watch video on www.g4tv.com using an iPad, and you'll see what I mean.) But most of the web sites that I've used on an iPad rely on Flash only for certain components of the site; the overall functionality of the site isn't affected. Take Facebook, for example; only when I try to play a Facebook game or watch an embedded video that one of my friends has posted do I get a Flash error message; everything else in Facebook I can do with no problem.


I do occasionally run into web functionality problems that stem not from the lack of Flash, but rather because of some weirdness or incompatibility that web site has with the Safari browser. (And I wonder aloud what would be so horrible about there being another major browser available for me to install on the iPad.) But this is proving increasingly rare; as stated earlier, the runaway success that Apple is currently enjoying with the iPad and with their OSX computers seems to be getting the attention of web developers these days. The message from more and more companies to their web developers seems to be, Make our site work with Safari! Same with Flash; whether Steve Jobs should start supporting Flash or not, many web site developers (Youtube, for one) are seeing the folly of relying on one content development company, Adobe, for so much of their content, and they're now moving toward open standards like HTML 5 to replace Flash content.


I'm not really all that concerned about how web sites look in Safari on the iPad anyway, because so many of the major web sites now offer iPad applications that provide the same content as the web site, but in a nice, tight, organized fashion that completely nullifies the need to use their web site for anything at all. NPR, CNN, BBC News, Twitter, Engadget, Ars Tecnica...all of these content providers now have iPad apps that work infinitely better than their web site counterparts. And the best part? No ads! So for an increasing number of content providers, I don't need the web and I don't miss it. To harp on the Facebook example again, there's already a Facebook app for the iPhone; once they roll out the iPad Facebook app, I'll promptly forget all about www.facebook.com.


So although netbooks win the web experience battle for now, the iPad web experience should more than suffice, if indeed you have to use the web on an iPad for your content at all.


Peripheral and network connectivity. Netbook computers have USB and VGA ports, through which users can connect peripheral devices like an external hard drive, a video monitor or projector if need be, a digital camera, pretty much anything that uses a standard port. Netbooks also have an Ethernet network port, so that users can connect the netbook directly to an Ethernet network if they want faster, more reliable networking than their wireless/cellular network has to offer. iPads, however, have exactly one connectivity port, an Apple-proprietary port on the bottom of the device that doubles as the electrical charging port. The only way to connect a peripheral device to this port is through a plug-in adapter. This gives Apple complete control over what kinds of devices can be connected to the iPad; if Apple doesn't make an adapter for it, you can't connect it. Period.


The only adapters available are a USB port adapter, an SD card adapter for accessing SD memory cards, and a VGA adapter for connecting an external monitor, projector, etc. This does cover most kinds of peripheral devices, but there's a catch: even once you get the peripheral device connected, you can only use it the way Steve Jobs allows you to use it. Those USB and SD reader adapters? All you can do with them is copy digital photos to and from the iPad. Forget about using an external hard drive with the USB adapter to augment the pad's storage space; not allowed. Oh, and no Ethernet network connectivity either; it's wireless or nothing. Netbooks don't have any of these limitations; once you get your peripheral device connected, away you go.


The iPad's connectivity issues prevented me from buying one for a long time; the inconvenience aside, I didn't like the idea of forking over hundreds of dollars for a gadget, and then being told how I could and could not use that gadget. And however much I may like my iPad, I would understand anyone's reluctance to buy one under these circumstances. But I'm nevertheless forced to admit that in the end, connectivity just isn't a big part of the whole iPad gig. If you want to copy picture files up to the iPad, all you have to do is import them into iTunes on the computer you use to sync it, and then...well, sync it! Voila, insta photos. And since the next version of the iPad will likely have a camera built-in, the photo upload issue soon won't be much of an issue at all. Yes, giving the iPad more storage space would be nice if I wanted to store all my pictures and music on it, but honestly, I have a computer for that. The iPad is for reading and surfing and geeking out on cool apps and such. A netbook can do all these things, though...and connect up to peripherals...so I must admit that a netbook comes out on top in this area.


The final analysis. Now that I've gone over the key comparisons between a netbook and an iPad, let me sum it all up. In then end, when I fork over a few hundred bucks that I don't really have (again, long story), I want to get a gadget out of it. I want a shiny new toy, something that's unlike any other gadget I have. I want to do mainly fun stuff on it--watch videos, play some Angry Birds, read a book or magazine, get caught up on the latest news...but I also occasionally want to be productive on it. Bottom line, what I don't want, is a computer. And that's what a netbook IS. A computer. Another Windows computer, like what I use at work. No matter where you go, there you are; it's still the same old, stodgy Windows that we've all been using for years. For my few hundred bucks, I want something more, and the iPad fits that bill perfectly.


My head tells me, "Geez Edugeek! Read your own blog for cripes sake! You can do so much more with a netbook!" But my heart says, "I don't want to do more. I want to do what I want to do, and do it in a fun, unique, cool way." There's also the portability factor. The smallest netbook out there, is still nothing but a laptop computer. Keyboard, screen, trackpad mouse, and possibly other components to boot. A pad  is nothing more than pad, period. I can take it with me anywhere, stuff it into a car's glove box or a bike's handlebar bag, wherever. I can take it when I go on vacation and not feel guilty, not feel like I'm taking technology with me to someplace where I ought to be trying to get away from technology. I can--and do--take it to the coffee shop, connect to the wireless network, and away I go...and I'm the envy of everyone around me besides!


But that's me. Leave your opinions on the matter in the comments section below!


UPDATE 2-20-2011: My stepson Kevin informed me that the prices I listed for netbook computers were not entirely accurate. He found netbooks on www.Newegg.Com that go for ~$250 to start. That's half the price of the cheapest iPad. I stand corrected! --Ed.

The EduGeek on Politics: Of Democrats, Republicans, and the Politics of Chaos

Brian the Education Geek writes an occasional blog with observations about life, geek stuff, politics, and just whatever strikes his fancy.

---

At the coffee shop yesterday morning, the headline on the newspaper's front page read "CAIRO DESCENDS INTO CHAOS." Chaos. A lot of that going around lately. In Egypt, in Tunisia with their popular uprising, in Greece with their debt situation.

Since about Y2K or so, I've seen a lot of ink/digital characters spilled about what all is wrong with American politics. So much of what I've read is merely partisan bickering, or is fuel to stoke the fires of partisan bickering, that it's been hard for me to put my finger on what it is that's gone awry in our political system. But the feeling is there--Morpheus in Hollywood's The Matrix described it as a splinter in my mind--the feeling that something is simply amiss, something larger than Democrats, Republicans, or anyone in between.

When I saw that word CHAOS in the newspaper yesterday, this feeling I speak of finally started to gel into something tangible. I think what's bothering me about politics in this country is the politics of chaos.

We in America generally don't think much in terms of chaos vis-a-vis our political system. And why should we? We've enjoyed centuries of the peaceful transfer of power in the White House and in the leadership of our states and cities. There's never been a war fought on our soil (save for our own civil war), and we have a system of checks and balances in our government (executive, legislative, and judicial), assuring that it's the will of the people that drives the laws and policies of the land.

But I doubt the countries of Egypt and Tunisia would have guessed a month ago that chaos would descend upon their governments the way it has. Personally, I share John Corbett's view on chaos, from his character Chris in the Morning on TV's Northern Exposure. He said, "No matter how much order you have in your life, chaos is always there. Waiting. Just beyond the horizon."

And now that I've actually been looking, I see signs of chaos in our political landscape all the time.

I see chaos in the form of political extremism. By extremism, I don't just mean politicians who lean far to the left or the right, mind you; I mean politicians like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush who didn't show one ounce of compromise in them during their respective presidencies, no give-and-take whatsoever. It was basically their way or the highway. Remember trickle-down economics? Remember Reagan's escalation of the Cold War? The war in Iraq? These things were going to happen, whether the people liked it or not. To me, that's extremism.

Yes, Barack Obama made this whole economic stimulus package thing happen (a stimulus that doesn't really seem to have helped the economy much, by the by). But the difference is that he at least sought public opinion on the matter before doing so. He met with grass-roots community leaders, had town hall meetings, he even made a blog on www.whitehouse.gov. That to me isn't extremism. Extremism to me is when a political leader says, "I've decided that X should happen, I have the votes necessary to get away with it, and to hell with anyone who says otherwise." Not in these words, of course, but that's the attitude. No debate, no question. And WOW have I seen a lot of that over the past 10 years or so.

I see chaos in the demeanor and the attitudes of more and more American voters, particularly after September 11, 2001. Nowadays, fear sells. And we're buying in droves. The news media, politicians, corporations, this Tea Party thing...they all seem to have an abundance of fear propaganda to supply the demand. We have to go fight the awful terrorists in Afghanistan, or someday they'll be beating down your door! We have to illegally wiretap some people in order to protect everyone! Vote Republican and you may lose your job to budget cuts! Vote Democrat and you may someday have to pay a few more dollars a year in taxes! EEK!

And all this fear is slowly manifesting itself in the voting booth, mainly in that more people seem to be voting for themselves now, rather than voting as a community. Health care reform, for example. Ten or 15 years ago, the need to reform our health care system would have been a no-brainer. For us, for our neighbors, for the common good. (Do you know at least one person who's had health care or health insurance problems?) But no longer. Now, even the most basic needs of the community at large seem to be overshadowed by our own personal concerns and fears. Now we cast the vote that we cast because we want to keep our gun. Or we don't want our taxes to go up. Or we don't want those carn-sarnded illegal aliens getting in! It's less about what's good for everyone, and more about what the voter is afraid of. Quite a chaotic situation if you ask me--for a country like ours that got to where we are today by sticking together and by celebrating our differences rather than fearing them.

I see chaos in the petty and ridiculous actions of our elected leaders lately, and in their abuse of the power we've given them. Like when the governor of South Carolina up and disappeared on us last summer, and we found out later that he was using his taxpayer-funded jet to go see his chickie friend in Argentina or wherever it was. Or when Representative Charles Rangell (D-New York) stepped down as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee last March amid accusations of taking corporate-sponsored trips to the Caribbean and of failure to pay income taxes on some of his real estate. And the hits just keep on coming:

"Geithner's Senate Confirmation Hearing Delayed By Republicans." That was for Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner in January 09.

"No Further Delay of Liu Confirmation Hearing". That was was for 9th Circuit Court of appeals judge Goodwin Liu, whose confirmation hearings were delayed for months by Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Alaska) and others, before finally proceeding last spring.

I found other incidents of such behavior, and the reasons given for creating these delays were many and varied, but of what I found, they had one thing in common: they had nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not the appointee was qualified to do the job.

The best may be yet to come, however; many of the newly-elected Republicans in congress have hinted that they'll sabotage the allocation of the funding necessary to implement health care reform. To me, this is chaos incarnate: Congress and the President pass a law, more than half of the American people support the law, yet dozens of our elected officials are apparently planning to use their political office to keep the law from happening.

Yeah.

I see chaos in the form of the vitriol and rudeness and general ugliness taking place in our government institutions. For example, remember the Joe Wilson thing a couple of years ago? This Joe Wilson (R-South Carolina) interrupted a speech being given by President Obama in the Capitol, by shouting "You lie!" This wasn't during a debate or a press conference; it was in the middle of the President's speech. The guy later apologized, but chaos--however slight--had been visited upon a proceeding that heretofore had known only order. White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel would later point out that "No president has ever been treated that way. Ever." Now, are the words "You lie" particularly venomous? Hardly. But could they have waited for a press statement by Wilson later on? Duh. I imagine he simply wanted to say them where they'd have the most effect, with no thought toward maintaining simple respect and decency for the president that his country elected.

At the time, I thought this was merely an isolated incident, but I've seen stuff like this on a regular basis since then. Not so much outbursts directed at the President, but just general nastiness and infighting between politicians in general. Even between the people themselves. Whichever political philosophy holds sway at any given time, the other side is no longer merely indifferent or disgruntled about it; they're download nasty about it. They're angry. And folks, that's not what made America the great country that we are.

What it is, is very possibly the first baby steps toward a newspaper headline like the one I saw in the coffee shop...but one that reads "AMERICA DESCENTS INTO CHAOS."

---

Editor's note: I'm now on my third rewrite of this post, and its taken a ton of my time, so needless to say I won't be doing any more political posts for a while! Comment if you want, but I'll only read the non-political comments. Time to move on! There's too much cool tech stuff to write about...

The EduGeek on Tech: Should Your Next Home Computer Have An Apple On It?

Brian the Education Geek writes an occasional blog with observations about life, geek stuff, politics, and just whatever strikes his fancy.

---

In my line of work, many of my customers ask for advice about their home computers. The most common of these questions: My home computer is old/slow, and what would you recommend for a replacement computer?

The answer I've been giving them, for about a year now, has been one that I never expected to give. Honestly, for most users, I recommend that their next home computer be a Mac.

A Mac.

Those of you who aren't as familiar with personal computers probably don't get why a Mac recommendation from me is so hard to believe. So, a little background if I may. There are two main kinds of personal computer out there, Mac and PC. Macs run Mac OS, and PCs run Microsoft Windows. Techno-geeks like myself generally are either in the Mac camp or the PC camp. We have what we believe to be sound reasons why we chose the personal computer type that we did, and once we start down one of these paths, in my experience it's rare that we switch to the other...or even speak favorably of the other.

It's kinda like Democrat or Republican. Ford or Chevy. Smooth or ribbed. Once you make your initial choice, never the twain shall meet.

The most die-hard of Mac people and PC people are known as fanboys of their chosen camp. They take every opportunity they can get to trump the advantages of their camp, and every opportunity to bash the other camp.

I am a PC person. I am not a PC fanboy, though I used to be. Nevertheless, for a PC person to recommend the purchase of a Mac, or vice versa, is almost unthinkable in the computer world. Yet there but for the grace of God go I, telling folks who want to know what computer to get for home use (most of them anyway) that they should get a Mac.

How did it come to this, you ask? What makes the EduGeek, a lifelong PC nerd, recommend a Mac? Long story short, it happened when I learned to put myself in the shoes of the person asking the question.

I haven't run across very many computer nerds--support techs, salespeople, developers--who can do that. I certainly don't claim to be the only one who can, I'm just saying that in my experience, it's rare. But objectivity is the thing that non-technical people need from technical people, even more than technical knowledge itself, when they ask for computer advice. Objectivity demands that I put aside my prejudices, put aside what I perceive to be the advantages of the PC platform over the Mac--so as to determine the needs of the particular customer who I happen to be working with at that moment.

So for example, even though I'm equally adept in Mac OS and Microsoft Windows 7, I have to concede that most of my customers would do better with the easier to use of the two, which at the moment is still Mac OS. Windows 7 is great and I love it, but overall it's still not quite as intuitive as Mac OS.

Macs are by and large more expensive that the equivalent PC--regardless of the PC manufacturer (with the possible exception of Sony)--so a given user can usually get a new personal computer for less money if they get a PC. On that basis alone, for years I told people, "Get a PC!" I've since learned, though, that of all the areas of life in which people want to save a buck, computer purchases aren't generally one of them. A home computer, once considered a novelty, is now an essential part of most households, and its something that most users seem willing to pay some extra for.

And although I may end up having my geek card pulled for this, I firmly believe that Mac computers...well, feel more expensive. By that I mean that when you use a Mac, you really get the feeling that you're using a high-end piece of hardware. From the sculpted aluminum computer case and keyboard, to the bright, crisp video display, to the highly-functional multitouch trackpad mouse...it just feels like a computing experience that's more worthy of the money you spend--however much money that is--than would a typical PC. There are exceptions, of course, but all in all it seems to me to be the Mac that delivers the more solid-looking and solid-feeling computer. It took a long time for me to understand that from the perspective of the user on the other end of the phone, the look and feel and overall experience of a computer is usually more important than is that extra few megahertz of clock speed or that extra few gigabytes of hard drive space.

Let's see, what else... ah yes, computer video games. My inner geek wants to tell users, "Get a PC! There are infinitely more computer video games for Windows than there are for Mac OS!" Then my customer service side steps in, and says "Really Brian? Is that what most of your users buy a home computer for? Video games?" In the end I must always concede, no. Your average user mainly just wants a computer to surf the web, do e-mail, manage finances, store the photos from their digital camera, that sort of thing. At most they might want to play a couple rounds of Sudoku, maybe some Bejeweled here and there, but nothing as involved as what your typical PC gamer (like myself) would want. Same with application programs, utilities, even small-business tools; while there are more of these for Windows than there are for the Mac, there's still a large enough array of them for Mac OS that most Mac users can find a program to suit their needs.

Most of all, though, it comes down to this: I know how much trouble the average user can get themselves into with a PC, even one runing Windows 7. I see it all the time at work: a user calls and says they clicked on a web link, and a message popped up on the computer telling them that they have all kinds of viruses and security threats on their computer, and Click Here To Remove. So of course they clicked, and of course the thing they clicked on promptly installed malware on their computer. You read that right: in an effort to remove the (false) threat of malware, users click on the very thing that installs the malware! From there, all manner of bad things happen--the computer slows down to a crawl, the user is prompted for their credit card number so that the fake program can continue to provide "virus protection," all kinds of popup messages appear, advertising Viagara or teeth whitener or ribbed condoms or whatever.

So what's next for the hapless PC user? Well, of course they take the computer to Geek Squad or some other computer repair shop. Who, in turn, dutifully repairs the computer (usually by completely wiping out the hard drive and reinstalling Windows 7, because that's likely all that you can do at that point)--charging however much money for this service they want. (I want to believe that computer repair shops charge a fair price, but what I know is that they know you can't be without your computer. And I suspect that's the more driving force behind the prices that they charge.)

And what are the chances of anything like this happening on a Mac? You guessed it--virtually zippo. For this reason more than any other, it's a Mac that I want to be in the hands of the average computer user. The user who doesn't know what malware is. Who doesn't know how to wipe and reinstall their computer. I know how to do these things of course, but understanding that most people don't was a big breakthrough for me.

Now, big disclaimer here (I probably should have started the blog post with this): Apple Computer Corporation is hardly one of my favorite companies. In fact, they've historically been one of my least favorite, yet another hurdle I had to overcome in my efforts to provide computer recommendations from the standpoint of the user rather than from myself. I don't much like the Big Boss over at Apple, Steve Jobs; to me, he exudes a lot more negative energy than positive, even when he's up on stage trumping some new product. I don't like the swift and harsh retributions faced by apple employees who--intentionally or otherwise--disclose details about upcoming Apple products to the press. I don't like that Macs only benefit from the computer technology that Steve Jobs wants them to benefit from--which is why, for example, there's no such thing as a Mac with a Blu-ray disc player. Or a VGA output for connecting an external monitor.

And while I stand by my previous statement that Apple computers feel like they give more bang for the buck than do PCs, I nevertheless wonder how much of the price difference between the Mac and PC comes from a Mac's (generally) higher-end hardware, and how much of it comes simply from the "sexy factor" and from the brand recognition currently enjoyed by Apple.

But my own personal feelings toward Apple, and the various reasons for those feelings, aside... it nevertheless seems to me that Apple has the upper hand these days, at least for home computers, for all the reasons mentioned above. I'll kick out another blog post in the coming weeks on using Macs at the workplace. Also upcoming will be a piece on pad computers.


--The EduGeek

The Edu-Geek on Life: It's Not What Happens to You, It's What You Do About It

Brian the Education Geek writes an occasional blog with observations about life, geek stuff, politics, and just whatever strikes his fancy...

The Edu-Geek on Life: It's Not What Happens To You, It's What You Do About It

---

Back in the early 90's, about the time I graduated from college, I remember it was all the rage to get up in front of an audience and talk about some new idea about life or this or that--and to get the whole thing on video. Then take that video and sell it to some local TV station, private or public, as a "motivational" or "self-help" seminar. That's how that Deepak Chopra guy got popular as I recall; some of the other ones I remember were How to Raise a Child with Love and Logic, Rich Dad/Poor Dad, and Anthony Robbins. Maybe these shows were based on books that the lecturer had written in the past, I don't know; I just remember it being a thing.

I'd watch these shows from time to time when I was bored, and since I went through periods of unemployment lasting 6 months or more at a time back then, boredom was fairly routine. But only one of those shows really stuck with me, and has stayed in my mind right up until today--enough to be bloggable even.

It was a guy by the name of W. Mitchell. I had no recollection of his name--I just now had to look it up--and as far as I know, he never gained the popularity of the people/seminars I mentioned above. What I do remember, like it was yesterday, was his story.

I turned the TV to channel 12 one Saturday morning, and here was this guy in a wheelchair, burned to a crisp. That's not an exaggeration at all; every inch of him had these horrible-looking burns, and he'd obviously had to have his face reconstructed. He'd been in a motorcycle accident with a truck, and he barely lived through it--yet he went on to form a successful company, Vermont Castings. THEN, years later, the engine quit on his private plane during takeoff, and the resulting crash left him paralyzed and in a wheelchair.

It took a few minutes of watching the show for me to really wrap my mind around this. Think of it. You or I could go and lay down on I-25...TWICE...and still come out better than this guy did. So here he is, his life completely torn apart, with every reason in the world to give up hope. Yet what he keeps saying over and over, throughout the show, is this:

It's not what happens to you in life. It's what you do about it.

That was a concept that hadn't occurred to me up to that point, and to hear it for the first time--from about the last person I'd ever have expected to say it--really moved me. Because I wasn't watching it on a news report or reading about it in the Drama in Real Life section of Reader's Digest; I was seeing it right there before me. And I vowed at that moment to always remember this guy's experience, like a TSR (terminate-stay-resident) program on a computer, and to put whatever happens to me in this context.

Now I'm certainly no W. Mitchell, and I can't help but feel a small yet nagging sense of hypocrisy for taking on such a philosophy for myself. Why? Because honestly, not that much has happened to me. Not compared to W. Mitchell, and not compared to a great many of my friends and acquaintances. I've sustained no injuries or operations, I've only really lost one or two people who were close to me, I've not been laid off from my job in years, never been arrested... really its been a pretty quiet life overall. (Knock on Formica...)

But for me to feel completely hypocritical about my fascination with this philosophy would be to completely miss the point of what W. Mitchell was trying to say. Which is that it doesn't matter what's happened to you over the years and it doesn't matter whether or not you had any control over these events, what matters is what they have brought out in you. What, if anything, you've made the result of these events be.

Here's an example: subsequent to that Saturday morning, I found that I didn't complain about things NEARLY as much as I had previously. This was more a subconscious choice than it was a conscious one, and I wasn't really present to how much the experience of watching this show had curbed my complaining until I actually met complainers. REAL complainers. The kind that you just want to roundhouse-kick with everything you have, if only to give them something freakin' REAL to complain about! I hear these people complain, but what I see in my mind is W. Mitchell.

W. Mitchell certainly had other inspiring, moving, downright awesome philosophies to share that day as well. One I remember in particular was, "The people we meet in life are gifts. Fate's gifts to us. How many gifts do we throw away throughout our lives--just because we don't like the wrapping?" He was saying, of course, that the people you meet count as things that happen to you, and that you have a choice--judge them or appreciate them. With the friends and family that I have, you certainly don't have to tell ME twice to do the latter! Yet I might never have become present to just how lucky I am to have them, if I'd not heard this W. Mitchell character put it into words all those years ago.

W. Mitchell has written a book, "It's Not What Happens To You, It's What You Do About It." I may pick it up at some point, now that I read books online (what few I read) and I don't have to lug them around. But for me, the benefit of having watched this self-help show that day has already been realized, no matter what.

For you though, I'm thinking that this book would be an AWFULLY good read, if you're so inclined. I promise, you will be moved...and you might even be moved enough to use it as the subject of your first-ever Internet blog!


--Brian
1-17-2011