“For real long-term security improvements… the right answer is to look at Linux, or any other Unix, on non x86 hardware,” Paul Murphy writes for CIO Today. “One such option is provided by Apple’s BSD-based products on the PowerPC-derived G4 and G5 CPUs. Linus Torvalds, for example, apparently now runs Linux on a Mac G5 and there are several Linux distributions for this hardware — all of which are immune to the typical x86-oriented exploit.”
“In addition, Apple’s Mac OS X has several compelling attractions of its own. First, it’s the most advanced and user-friendly graphical user environment in commercial use. It offers thousands of commercial applications, including Microsoft Office. And it runs nearly all open-source applications,” Murphy writes. “Also, Macs are less expensive. That’s not what you see in the PC press, but it’s reality. The explanation for that, besides dishonesty on the part of PC reviewers going as far back as 1984, is primarily that Apple’s product cycles resemble those of other consumer electronics manufacturers, not those of the PC industry.”
“Thus, Apple’s products have generally been considerably less expensive and faster than PCs at the beginning of the Apple product cycle, and comparably slower and more expensive than PCs at the end. That probably ended, however, in the late 1990s when the combination of decreasing hardware prices with increasing Microsoft licensing cost reduced the pricing advantage enjoyed by PCs introduced at the end of an Apple product cycle,” Murphy writes.
“Notice that in assessing relative price and performance, both aging and software confuse the issue. Macs run more functional software and have a much longer useful life. As a result, the Macs that PC users see most often — in schools or at grandma’s house — tend to be significantly older and slower than the PCs people compare them to because Wintel product churn means that a three-year-old PC is a museum piece, while a six-year-old iMac running OS 9 is likely still to be in use,” Murphy writes.
“…if security concerns are your most important driver for desktop change, and Microsoft Office compatibility is your most significant barrier, then switching to Macs actually offers you the best of all possible worlds. Microsoft Office on Unix/Risc with a better GUI, longer product life, some cash savings and a performance bonus thrown in,” Murphy writes.
Full article here.
[UPDATE: 4:55pm ET – edited last quoted paragraph for clarity]
MacDailyNews Take: Revel in Murphy’s truth and common sense. Find out more about the thousands of software products for Apple’s Macintosh here.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Switching from Windows to Mac? Save money by asking to ‘crossgrade’ your software – April 12, 2005
InformationWeek: Apple Mac is better, faster, cheaper – October 06, 2004
Apple Macs are cheaper than PCs – August 26, 2004
Macs are quite often cheaper than comparably equipped Windows PCs – February 14, 2003
You know, I remember when 10.3 was first coming out, and people were comparing it to Longhorn. Now 10.4, Tiger is coming out, and once again people are comparing it to Longhorn. Honestly, what the heck? If Longhorn was ‘scheduled’ to come out within the next 3-6 months, sure you can compare the two. But when they the software releases are *years* apart, that’s ridiculous.
Sorry this is off subject…
Uhm… this can’t be, a positive spin without snide remarks? It’s not April Fools again is it?
MDN,
Please use an ellipsis between paragraphs or some kind separator. You last bit of quoted material
— … OS 9 is likely still to be in use,” Murphy writes. “In other words, if security concerns…. —
make no sense. When compared to the original, there is approximately 7 paragraphs of text between the two points that you join together.
What is this, IT Lies Exposed or something?
While I am an Apple Kool Aid Drinker…
I would hardly call the 167 MHz bus in the PB G4 cutting edge technology… It’s been at that speed for years now… and they’ve finally gotten the processor upto 1.67 GHz… show me another computer in which the Bus Speed is 1/10th of the processor speed… Frankly, that’s sad… and to charge effectively 4 times the price of admission for eMac level hardware save for the opportunity to get a 64/128 MB video card… (Which will change with the next eMac revision as you’ll be able to get a better video card, 64MB, as the rumors say)… You can’t tell me that’s a good value….
At least with Intel products, you get the same damn chip that’s in a desktop without such a “premium” for it… In the case of Apple, you’re paying 4 times as much for the privilege of running the same OS on something portable… that’s ridiculous when the specs of the PB are nowhere near what the desktops can deliever…
Frankly, it’s a ripoff…..
With all the above said, Tiger’s a great OS in search of some decent hardware to run it on.
Speaking of longer lasting, my slot loading 500 MHz G3 iMac still gets plenty of use and it runs 10.3.9 without any glitches. On top of that, my G4/400 (AGP) is still running without a hiccup. I’ve since upgraded it a year and a half ago to an 800 MHz machine and upgraded the system drive and added another internal drive with no hitches. I can feel the age of the machine a little, especially when working in Photoshop. But, all in all, my Macs have remained far more useful longer than any PC I have owned. I’ve thrown out (or donated) three PCs b/c they stopped being useful. Top that with a horribly inefficient OS and you end up with a bunch of junk after two years.
Apple definitely knows how to build quality from my perspective.
With all the above said, Tiger’s a great OS in search of some decent hardware to run it on.
Look no further than the Power Mac G5s
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
Eric the Red:
The megahertz myth was exposed years ago.
High bus speeds are only an issue if you are constantly moving massive amounts of data (think server), as opposed to moving that data in bursts.
The advanced caching and bottleneck-free designs of Apple’s hardware (seperate buses for I/O, etc.) have always allowed the lower MHz machines to compete favorably with similarly-priced Wintel hardware.
Even data intensive applications like video editing have always performed on a par with similarly-priced Wintel hardware.
I would feel ripped-off if I bought some high-priced, high MHz Wintel hardware and found out that it performed the same or only marginally better than the lower MHz Apple hardware.
I’m milking my G3 All-in-One for all its worth. G3 867Mhz, 576MB RAM, 80GB HD, USB, FW 400, CDRW runninb 10.2.8. Yeah, I am limited by the OS updates, but I am as happy as a college kid can be.
Seriously off topic:
Anyone else notice the charming “Kiss Brad Pitt and get a free handbag” promo on the rhs?
Very nice. I’ll look so great with a pink handbag over my shoulder. Perhaps if I can just win an entire ensemble, I could change from being a “Glen” to being a “Glenda”
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
WOW. An intelligent and truthful article about Macs. Amazing.
My original lime green iMac (Rev C) is running 10.3.9.
It may not have Firewire, but that G3 266 still has me running iMovie.
Although I do brag about it constantly, my shoebox runs 10.3.9.
It is a shoebox that may catch on fire if ever pushed over 330 mhz. Only 256 ram too.
Macs are built to last.
Informed: I have an iBook running on a 1.33 G4 and a Dell Inspiron running on a 1.8 P4. Both have 512 MB RAM and a 32 MB video card. The iBook smokes the Dell. In fact, the only PC I use that compares or does better than the iBook is the hp I use at church (3 Ghz Athlon 64FX, 512 RAM) and it has been crashing ever since my church bought it. We even had to do a harddrive wipe a month after buying it. Lets just say my pastor wishes he had bought a Mac.
One of the main reasons businesses are looking at open source is cost savings. And Open Office is coming on strong. I kid you not. Version 2 is due out in July and it will make a huge impact on the business world. The days of Microsoft Office being the only choice are winding down. Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem like Apple is recognizing this. They refuse to participate in the development of Open Office and there is no native OS X version in the works. This WILL prevent OS X from becoming an option to most businesses. The Open Office document format has already been standardized with the Oasis Group. And some state agencies are now requesting that documents be in this format instead of Microsoft’s doc format.
The tide is turning. If Apple doesn’t give support to a native release of OS X, they should at least accept the document format in Pages and Keynote.
The city government I work for has standardized on Mozilla Firefox for our browser and we recommend Open Office to our departments. In order for them to purchase Microsoft Office, they need to provide a valid reason.
Having a native version of Open Office running on OS X would do wonders to the credibility of using Macs in our work environment. Otherwise, the only alternative we will seek to Windows is Linux.
Just think about what I said. A couple of years ago, you could rightly argue that having Microsoft Office is a reason to go with Apple as an alternative instead of Linux. But now, Linux is the alternative because it has Open Office. Companies are sick of paying Microsoft. That includes Office. Hear me Apple? Are you listening?
I’ve had a G3 333 MT for 8 years and have had to spend minimal money to keep it running. I paid $2800 for the computer and monitor. The only items I’ve replaced are the Monitor and RAM. Not a bad investment, I’d say.
I think they would support Open Office more but that would tick off Microshaft a little too much. Apple still needs Office as a ‘winnie” to assure PC switchers that it is a good option to go Mac. If Open Office becomes more widespread I would see Apple going for it big time once they knew it would be a viable option.
Let’s be honest, OpenOffice is UGLY as hell, it is slow and its interface stinks. Thats the problem with most OpenSource projects where too many people work on the same code.
Jeff: you mean this?
http://porting.openoffice.org/mac/
Runs pretty well on OS X
RunningOpenOfficeOnOSX,
As you will see, this is NOT a native version. It is running under X Windows. There was a native version in the works, but its dead now. Apple needs to support this. Forget Microsoft.
Halix,
OpenOffice 2.0 is separating the display from the inner workings. That is one reason why there is no OS X version. I don’t think Open Office looks any better or worse than Microsoft Office. If you look at the version with GTK/Gnome it looks pretty good. So a native version would solve your complaint. I don’t know where you are coming from saying that Open Source projects have too many people working on the same code. Don’t forget that Apple is piggybacking its success on Open Source. If not for Open Source, Apple would still be where it was in 1997.
The G4 is a fine processor, even @ 1.5Ghz, BUT Eric the Red is right that the FSB (167Mhz) is a HUGE bottleneck that should have been fixed long ago. The chip is not necessarily slow, but info getting to and from the chip is, plus the dual G4 all shared that bus really killing some power. If Freescale can clear this hurdle and even give us dualcore at the same time, there will be no reason for a G5 in the laptops (except for maybe bragging rights) because you cannot fit more than 4 gig of RAM in them.
Jeff — What do you want Apple to do, develop a version of OpenOffice themselves? Should they charge for their efforts? Kinda defeats the point, methinks. Plus they’re never going to develop a product to compete with MS Office (Pages is really an amateur page-layout program, not a word processor). Fact is Apple and MS have a good relationship and it’s in the interest of both companies to keep it that way. The reason OpenOffice development is so slow on OS X is simply that there aren’t many OS X users willing to put the time into it. I know that Macs being more expensive is a myth, but most Mac users are willing to spend money on a good, easy-to-use program. And they do. There’s nothing stopping people from developing OpenOffice — the developer tools are free, fer cryin’ out loud. It’s just kinda superfluous on the platform.
I’m not saying that’s a good thing. I want to see open-source and GPL software loosen the MS stranglehold as much as the next guy. But there’s also something to be said for a healthy consumer market, with for-pay products. I personally use Nisus Writer Express, and I’m happy to pay the good folks at Nisus. Others use Mellel, or SubEthaEdit, or whatever. And fact is I have friends who need to use features in MS Word that are unavailable anywhere else. Yes, MS Word deserves a place in the market. Not the monolithic place it has, but a place nonetheless.
Someone pinch me – I must be dreaming! Some tech writers are beginning to see the light …
re. notatotalsucker and the “Kiss Brad Pitt” promo …
After 2 years of ad free web browsing I encountered adverts only briefly when the Safari update broke the ad blocker Pith Helmet on my machine.
To see how adverts have taken over the web left me in shock – they’re so annoying and they slow down your browsing …
Fortunatley Pith Helmet has been updated now, so I’m browsing ad-free again.
P.S. This isn’t an ad for Pith Helmet (though it rocks!), merely an observation.
i missed the part where $300 dells are ‘more expensive’ than apple machines, will somebody go over that one with me?