Blog FeedBundling Up
I recently spent a bunch of time in the market for a new laptop to replace an aging machine that I had up running Linux. My old Pentium 3 had finally bit the dust, and it was time to trade up to a newer model. Not only that, but I was also switching operating systems from Linux to either OS X or Microsoft Windows. I bought myself a Macbook, which has been amazing. Shortly afterwards I helped my parents pick two shiny new Toshiba laptops. They were on sale at CompUSA for such a rate that I couldn’t steer them towards a Mac, as the price was just beautiful for a Core Duo machine. But I digress, this article isn’t about laptops it’s about operating systems.
One of the things I noticed very quickly was how few real useful applications come with Macs and Windows machines. The Toshibas came with gigs upon gigs of applications but a good chunk of them were absolute drivel. The Apple machine did come with some nice applications but it was missing so many key items that it could hardly be called a complete suite of software to get you up and running.
Truth is I’ve been spoiled by, of all things, the ease of using Linux. Not something I normally say together but the truth is Linux distributions come bundled with a far more useful package of applications than either of the major retail options. For instance, I was shocked to find out that they were still packing a version of Microsoft Works in with computers despite the fact that the entire known world runs Office. Works wouldn’t be so bad except there isn’t an option to save your files in Word .doc files or Excel files. You’d need to go out and buy those programs just to get the basic open and save file compatibility. Now maybe this would have seemed acceptable 10 years ago but come on - there has been Open Office out for some time which freely lets me read and write Microsoft Office documents. Even worse is that the Apple Macbook, wonderful as it’s been, doesn’t even come with any office suite. After spending 1300 dollars I don’t have a program for writing well formatted documents on my machine without going out and buying an extra piece of software.
It’s not just the Office suite. I was surprised to find out that despite the huge costs associated with these machines, they only come with one web browser option. You get either Safari or IE; there is no option for Firefox, or anything else to be installed with your OS. That’s all that they come with. Same thing again for mail, they’ve got nothing but one first party mail application on there out of the box. Same thing for instant messaging - sure you might be able to get iChat or MSN Messenger but you know you’re going to have to download Adium and so on and so forth. It almost makes me surprised that people claim this is easier to use than Linux. Especially so after It took me hours to get my Windows machine to treat my WiFi network right, whereas I had it working with Linux in shorter time.
I know that there are of course areas of Linux that just aren’t that easy to use. Especially where it comes to using the console and a command line interface. But for all that’s made of Windows and OS X being easy to use, they sure fall short in the area of bundling. Meanwhile many good Linux distributions come not only with the kernel and the GUI but also almost every app I need. On Apple & Windows I have to really hunt for the stuff I want. You’d think that for all Apple’s claim that they have the most user-friendly OS and that it works so well out of the box, they’d have a machine that comes with the software necessary to do basic tasks like a spreadsheet, word processor, or meta-IM client. Or a movie player that works with WMV format with or without Microsoft’s support. Like any featured Linux distro.
6th August | Reply
Ooo, a fine line this one. I understand where you are coming from and would agree that Apple would do well to, for example, include an iWork license so that you can do a spot of word processing out of the box since TextEdit doesn’t really cut it (although that does at least support Word’s file format and Rich Text). At a license cost of about £55 it really wouldn’t kill their margins that much to include it, although it’s likely that the required Microsoft relationship would be harmed such that development of Office is stopped. The same would likely apply to the inclusion of OpenOffice, which isn’t much cop on a Mac anyway since it’s not a real Mac application. Unfortunately, Apple needs Microsoft to continue development of Office:mac and installing software that kills any incentive for people to buy Office:mac would likely kill that relationship dead. Obviously, including Office:mac out be out of the question due to its relatively high cost. Apple is kinda caught “between the devil and the deep blue sea” on this one.
The idea of including multiple applications, or providing options for them when installing, is a bad one. It’s great for power-users but for people who just want their computer setup quickly and to start working it is asking for trouble. However, making it simple to find new software and for people to easily explore the catalogue available is a good idea and the process should be simpler than it is at present. Apple does include the “Mac OS X Software” option under the Apple menu but there’s I’ve not seen anything explicit to say that this is there or that this can be used to find new software applications. The installation process could also be simplified through a client application along the lines of YaST on SuSE Linux and whatever the similar applications are on other Linux distributions.
Anyway, I’m now waiting what should be the last few weeks before I can order a new MacBook Pro. Fingers crossed that the new models are announced tomorrow…
6th August | Reply
I should also note that Firefox, as great as it is on Windows and Linux, is rubbish on a Mac. It’s not that it’s different to the versions available for the other platforms since it’s exactly the same. The problem is that it’s not a Mac application and therefore is constrained by the limitations placed on it by, principally, Windows. I’ve highlighted this before but Firefox is a non-starter for me because it doesn’t support Network System Preferences or Keychain Services. The Network System Preferences is the kicker because it means that I manually have to change, in Firefox, my network connection settings whenever I move to/from my wired office network with a proxy server. All Mac applications support Network System Preferences that allow many configurations to be set (e.g. wired with proxy, wireless with direction connection, etc.) and this means that my connection settings change automatically so that I can connect immediately when I go home to my wireless network. Constantly swapping network settings gets on my tits so Camino is used instead although I’m currently back using Safari again. The lack of support for the built-in Dictionary also annoys since then have 2 dictionaries to train.
If you only ever use a direct internet connection then Firefox is more practical but to me it just feels like a port of an application that caters mostly to the lowest common denominator. I understand that this situation may change in version 3 so I’ll take a look at that when it comes out.
7th August | Reply
Actually one of the big points for Firefox is that it’s the same on Mac. I have 3 OSes running at my house. My old linux box (still chugging along) which i mostly use as a guest web terminal and file dump, then I have my game box/desktop which of course runs windows and my macbook which runs windows & OSX. The fact that it’s the same everywhere makes it that much easier on me.
You also mention that Open Office is no good on a mac, I’m not quite sure i get you. You just have to install the X11 distro that comes with OSX. I love using it because it’s the same program i use in everything else and can do everything I would need MS office.
7th August | Reply
As far as I am concerned, Firefox being the same on all platforms is one of the reasons I find it to be a weak browser on the Mac. That the browser is exactly the same across all platforms means that it caters for the lowest common denominator and, usually, this means Windows. I was used to, for example, needing to change my network settings when I was running a Windows laptop and so Firefox made no difference to the process of opening the Preferences and changign settings whenever I went home or to the office, or opened a VPN session. With the Mac, however, this is not necessary and it annoys me that Firefox (and, in fairness, Flock, Seamonkey and Opera) makes me do this.
The same non-Mac application issue applies again to OpenOffice. As everyone notes, Macs tend to be more expensive than a comparitive PC. Given this, why would I want to spend more on a computer and then use the same software that I can get on a cheaper PC? What I want is something integrated with the rest of the system in much the same way that the iLife software is. NeoOffice Aqua is a step in the right direction for OpenOffice (particularly through not requiring X11 and producing Aqua widgets) but it still has some ways to go before I’ll dump MS Office:mac.
I guess if you need to move around computers and want the same applications regardless of OS then the likes of Firefox and OpenOffice fits the bill for you. Personally, I prefer to use just one computer but am forced to use a PC at work but which comes with MS Office installed, so OpenOffice would just make life more difficult. However, I at least hope you appreciate why OpenOffice is not shipped with new Macs now.
7th August | Reply
Actually the reason i bought a macbook was I thought it was the best hardware available for the money. I wanted a small form factor notebook with at least a gigabyte of memory, a widescreen glossy and over 100 gb hard drive. To get the same thing in a PC cost me about the same amount of money as it did with a mac.
8th August | Reply
Hmm, I’m still having the glossy/non-glossy debate with myself since it’s a free build-to-order option on the MacBook Pro these days. I’m currently erring on the side of non-glossy since I found the MacBook’s that I tried in a shop in Antwerp to be a bit too reflective - I found myself staring back at me on a few occasions. Does it work OK for you? The only reason why I ask is that the glossy screen looks damned nice with the rich colors so I’d choose that if the reflection can be lived with.
8th August | Reply
I actually have a full column coming up on my macbook and the only draw back is if you’re using your machine in a car or outside in a sunny environment or a super highly bright environment it makes it very difficult to see the screen. However Inside, in more modest lighting it looks gorgeous. So it sort of depends on where you use your machine and how much say you have about lighting.
9th August | Reply
Well, looks like I won’t be ordering the new laptop yet so that decision will need to wait a bit longer (new Mac Pro looks nice but not what I want). Damn…
Anyway, cheers for the info and I’ll definitely consider it since I’m not likely to be using the screen in direct sunlight or a car, although I am intrigued to know how being in a car impacts the view.
22nd August | Reply
My best mate bought a MacBook last week and had problems with the screen (one side being slightly darker). Never seen this issue before… The guys at the Apple Store were helpful but couldn’t explain the problem either. He’s waiting for a replacement now … :-/
23rd August | Reply
In Reply to #9:
Hmm, I’ve heard of reports of similar problems with some of the 17″ MacBook Pro. Not heard of it affecting the MacBook but I guess it is possible. I’m guessing that this is what happens when you get 3rd parties to build your products. Last heard Apple was seeking a 3rd manufacturer in order to keep up with demand for their notebooks which, while good for business, probably doesn’t bode too well for quality control. I’m still hopeful that my 17″ system will be fine but must admit that I am fully aware of the potential that it might turn out to be a duffer that I need to send back (which, frankly, will be a pain).