"Apple Time" Update

It has been almost two months since I "went Mac," and it is time for an update.

First, let me say that the Mac has won me over. As I stated in March, I am not going back. This MacBook Pro is truly the best laptop I have ever used, and it does things very well.

The goal was to be able to do all my work on this Mac without resorting to Windows, and I can say that for the most part, that goal has been reached.

Of all the applications I use, the ones that matter are:

• Microsoft Office
• MindJet MindManager
• The BlackBerry
• Keypass
• Sony Digital Recorder software
• Various utilities, such as Telnet and FTP
• Text Editing/Programming software
• Web Browsing

Of the above, the only one that does not support the Mac is the Sony digital recorder software. I was going to add the BlackBerry, but there is an application called "PocketMac" that RIM distributes free -- I have not tried it, but I will.

MS Office 2008 is good -- I installed it about two weeks ago, and it is different from MS Office 2007 for the PC, but compatible. It is certainly workable, and so far, I have had no serious issues. It is important to note that the Microsoft Mac development team is a whole 'nother bunch of people than the Office 2007 team -- but, hey, that is standard issue for Microsoft. I have not had the chance to really work Office 2008, but so far, it works fairly well.

MindJet MindManager's Mac version is not as feature-rich as the Windows version, which is unfortunate, because I really use this software more than any other. The files are all compatible, though, and it works very well -- it just lacks some features that I like.

Keypass is an application that I use to hold my passwords, and I was afraid when starting this experiment that I would have to forgo it -- but, there is KeypassX, which is a Mac version, and it works great! Keypass, by the way, is a requirement. It is the best way I have found to keep track of the myriad passwords that I have, and it is very secure. Security people say you should never write down passwords, and should have hard-to-guess passwords. Well, hard-to-guess passwords are also hard-to-remember passwords. So, people use their pet's or kid's name (hey, I did this too when I started out!). Also, many people use the same password for their work computer, their email apps, their banking apps, and their other web logons. Someone can guess it once, and get into all of it! Keypass makes it easy to manage all of this. I store all my confidential info in Keypass, including SSNs and other information, because it is so secure. Do it!

The utility and text programs are different in a Mac, but are excellent and professional. It is important to note that all the development pros I have seen lately are using Macs, including the guys at Google who released their Google App Engine a few weeks ago.

The goal of this experiment is to see if the Mac is a viable alternative for a PC in a business environment. So far, I have to say that it is not "seamless." There are issues surrounding Mac use in a Windows world. To a Windows-centric IT shop that does not want to work with it, the Mac will not work. This is mainly because hooking up a Mac to a Windows domain, using Windows (Active Directory, really) shares and printers, and authentication, is not the same with a Mac as it is with a PC, and the Mac does have limitations here. So, an IT shop has to look broader: Are there benefits to going Mac that outweigh the limitation of using a Mac with Active Directory? Smaller shops have an easier time, since the impact of architecture changes/accommodations are limited to a few people and locations, and the impact can be made less painful. Larger companies, with ossified IT groups with ossified "change control" protocols and five-year IT roadmaps will just plain not really accommodate a Mac, unless the shop adds it into their plan, which means politics.

On this last note, as I have been studying the Mac and getting it to work in my group, I have seen a lot of IT-avoidance strategies to getting the Mac to work -- some have been used by my own users over the years. Some of these strategies are "unapproved" but basically harmless, and others are "unapproved" and can cause security and other problems. OS X has lessened the second scenario considerably, but the scenarios still exist. So, what happens in a non-Mac environment is what happens to any IT environment where a determined user community loses patience and goes for it: work-arounds and self-support. This has resulted in some rather artistic people, who lean toward the Mac, grinning and bearing the technical aspects of getting these things to work outside the Mac world. The fact that they are succeeding shows the versatility of the Mac (this is not a slight -- I sure would not expect a Windows Active Directory-jockey to design web sites or put together ad layouts).

With that in mind, I do want to point out some of the issues I have uncovered in my travels:

1. The integration to Active Directory was really cool until the security patch came out in March that took out printing to a Windows-based network. This is still an issue. The work-arounds are to either put your windows user name and password on the printer command line (really, really technical, and much deeper into the bowels of this thing than I thought I would ever have to go -- has to do with CUPS) which A. did not work for me, and B. is a security issue, or print directly to a network-attached printer to its IP address. What is its IP address? Exactly. More technical issues and sleuthing required. Sure, doable. But not as cool (or efficient) as choosing a printer from the available list and just printing.

2. Windows Active Directory and OS X's Directory Utility (DU) work well together, but their error checking and correction are not what I would like it to be. Therefore, it is possible to add a Mac to an Active Directory domain with the same name as another computer. This can cause really, really serious problems. I blame Microsoft (since it is its software that is failing, not the Mac), but it is still a problem. This little problem killed our network and brought down our Exchange server.

3. Office 2008's Entourage is pretty cool, but I noticed some definite differences with Outlook (actually, a lot of differences, but most seem to be benign). The main one is that Entourage does not seem to support distribution lists from Outlook in my personal contacts list. You can create a "group" in Entourage, but it does so in your local contact list, not the contacts in your Exchange contact folder. (Disclaimer -- I have not tried hard, but I shouldn't have to!). Again, I blame Microsoft. Entourage is theirs.

4. I was unable to easily open a Word document on a Windows "share" from within Word.

What does all this mean? That the Mac/Windows interface is a pain, and therefore, a problem.

There are three official actions I can take about this:

A. Tear out Windows and Active Directory, or at least build a parallel directory environment using Mac Server,
B. Be aware of the issues and have Mac users (including me) live with them until they eventually go away, or
C. Ban Macs as too much of a problem (while keeping mine, of course!).

Option C is too draconian and actually impossible in my environment. Option A may be the best long-term option, since Microsoft seems determined to fall on their sword with Vista and other super-kludgy software. In this scenario, we reduce Windows and Active Directory as much as possible, root out as much MS software as possible (Exchange? Gone! Office 2007? Gone!), and make the Windows PC's work with LDAP running on Apple servers (can we do this? I don't know. Theoretically, sure. Comments from those that have done it are welcome!).

Option B is the way are are going now, with an active eye on the incremental improvements as OS X gets better and better. Alas, we are not where I wanted to be: Root out PCs and add Macs and be in Nirvana. But, perhaps soon.

Oh, before I close, I did manage to lock up this baby a few times:

1. When I pulled the monitor cable from the laptop before shutting down. Perhaps it is best to do this when the machine is not on. Don't know.
2. When I had lots of apps opened all at once, including Windows on VMWare fusion. Something tweaked.
3. One other time that just seemed out of the blue. Might have been a problem with Firefox -- don't know.

So, they are not crash-proof. But it came back really well each time. Also, I have been just closing the lid and opening the lid, and it just sleeps and awakens like a little baby (only, without the crying part).

Finally, I put in place a local USB drive (a Passport from Western Digital) and set up (as if there is anything to really set up) "Time Machine." Really cool. For those of you old enough to have seen "Star Wars" when it first came out, remember when the Millennium Falcon went into Hyperspace? Well, like that: What a rush! And for backup software! Not only that, but it really works well, and saved me from some serious problems, and I don't have to think about it. The only problem is that I can't have a network drive be the backup drive. I don't know why they don't allow that.

So, bottom line, Vista is failing and people are buying Macs and getting serious about it. I am using one and will not go back. Macs are not quite ready for prime time in the pure Windows business environment, but are usable and worth the effort, and the tsunami is out there and mark my words, by this time next year, the wave will hit and Macs will rule.

Gartner Catches On to Microsoft

Over a year ago, I predicted the end of Microsoft domination. Now, a year and a quarter later, Gartner is catching on and stating that Windows is "collapsing." The reasons stated are the obvious: Vista is seen as too incremental to warrant a migration off of Windows XP, and it has the reputation of being a resource pig.

I have been using a Mac now for a month. I am really, really happy with it. It is not perfect -- the Mac's reputation of being the PC that never crashes is overstated -- but it is a heck of a lot better than XP. 

I find it interesting to find my own mind-set changing, quite without thinking about it. When Google announced its Google App Engine two days ago, I noticed that the demonstrator was demoing it using a Mac. When I have been seeing developers show demos for whatever they are selling, I am seeing them done on a Mac. When you see pictures of a "generic laptop" in ads or in movies, they are always a Macbook. This has been trickling in over the years, but now it is ubiquitous. iTunes sells more music than everyone other that Wal-Mart, and they will overtake Wal-Mart this year. iPod has been the number one music device for years. iPhone is selling very well and has the cache of being the phone to have ("Blackberry or iPhone" is the question. No one else need apply). 

Regarding my mindset, I look at a PC app and think to myself "man, that looks old." When I look at a software provider and I see that it only runs on Windows, I think "man, that is old-school." All of a sudden, the future for applications that people use has only two platforms that matter: The Web (as in Gmail, Twitter, Basecamp, etc.), or Apple Mac. The movement to the web was no surprise. That is a no-brainer, as Google Apps, Salesforce.com, and other "Software as a Service" offerings gain real traction. What surprised me was that Apple would surge back so strong. But, now that I am living the experience, it is no longer a surprise. I love this thing. I'll write more about that in a separate post, but I love this Mac.

Now, I can't ever see myself ever again saying "I love my Windows box." In fact, I can remember only one instance where I ever truly felt that I loved a Windows box, and that was my old 486 running Windows NT circa 1992 -- and then, it was the box I loved (faster that anything!) rather than Windows NT (Registry? What the heck is that? What was ever really wrong with Config.ini?). No, all Windows boxes I have had save the 486 were pains in the neck, but necessary evils, since there were no alternatives. Laptops in 1994, 1995 were Toshibas running Windows 3.1. Windows 95 beta fried my old Toshiba and forced me to swear off forever "beta testing" Microsoft products. Writing code for MS-DOS was quirky, but basically straightforward. Writing Windows code forced me to rely on their super-buggy Microsoft Foundation Classes. I had to debug their software! And pay for it, too! Oh, sure, I could have written my own library of Windows routines, but then about 90% of my code or better would girders and pillars, and only 10% or less would be actual functionality. 

The Mac was always a joy to write code for (although I didn't personally, because the money was not there... Mea Culpa on Windows domination to that degree.) I still have a t-shirt from the 1998 Software Development conference in Santa Clara for CodeWarrier ("Kicking Butt and Writing Code") which was the development tool of choice for many Mac developers and was a great platform, at least from the demo I saw and the people I spoke to.

Next Computer's NextStep operating system and Objective C were unbelievable! And, guess what? They live on in Mac OS X. 

In retrospect, it is surprising that I waited until 2008 to make the jump to Mac. I am not the only one -- it is happening all over. 

Macs are not 100%, yet. They don't fit very easily into a Windows Active Directory world, although they are better, much better, than they used to be. Businesses are still strongly incentivized to use Windows-based PCs and laptops, and general inertia will keep the platform alive in the business sector for several more years. But, it is dying. Businesses will, over time, move more and more to Linux and Open Source for back-office systems like databases, and web applications for user applications, leaving Microsoft in the lurch.

If Gates were still with Microsoft, I would not count Microsoft out. But, he is gone. Microsoft cannot pull off the big come-back without him. It looks like Microsoft's demise is getting obvious.

I'm Not Going Back

So, it's been not quite two weeks since I received my new MacBook Pro. What a machine!

Here's the deal. The Apple philosophy is different from the Windows philosophy.

"Philosophy" is a term I have been using since the '80s to describe the overall point of view a computer company takes in relation to how to use their product or system. The philosophy guides the user interface, what can and can't be done, what you can expect to do or not do, and the general attitude the system takes. For example, in the '80s, you had the CP/M philosophy of files and applications organized by "users" and the MS/DOS (from Unix) philosophy of hierarchical directories. The Mac had "folders" and the mouse and ease-of-use, MS/DOS had "directories" and the command line and "professional." The philosophies of Unix, MS/DOS, and to a large degree Windows assume a technical user community, or one that will just have to deal with the technical things going on. Apple has pretty much always had a target audience of people, and especially, artist or visual types, who don't need or want to know what goes on beneath the hood, so to speak. This was a detriment in the beginning, because the systems were not up to the task of being non-technical. You still had to look under the hood with earlier versions of the Mac. But, with OS X and especially the later versions, this goal of not needing a technical degree to run a computer that can still do some cool things has pretty much been realized. And, the goal of having a Mac do the things formerly firmly rooted in the Windows world seems to have been achieved as well.

The first thing that happens when a PC guy like me moves to the Apple is to try to do things on the Apple the way you do things on a PC. For example: using "control" keys for editing. Different on a Mac. The Mac has a different keyboard layout, and so the first thing is, get used to the new layout.

After that hurdle, the Mac philosophy really kicks in and messes with the Windows point of view. The Mac philosophy is "it just works." When moving from PC to Mac, this is the thing to keep in mind. It just works.

What does that mean? When you attach another monitor, it knows what it is and automatically adjusts. It just works. When printing to printers on an Active Directory network, you join the domain (need administrator help, here), and then all the freaking printers just show up, ready to print. It just works. When you are ready to go home, you close the screen and it suspends properly every single time. When you open the screen it comes back, every single time and it knows where it is and that it is not on the office network, home network, or that the screen is no longer attached, or that the internet is no longer available... it just works.

This is huge. I have a Toshiba Tecra that should be a dream machine that just refuses to come back from suspend or hibernation mode. "Resume failure" is the name of the tune. I have an HP that is testy when I resume in a new place under new circumstances. If it comes back, which sometimes doesn't happen. I feel like I am playing Russian Roulette when I turn my Windows laptop off. This is not true of the Mac. It just works.

I do have a need for Windows, because I have a Sony recorder and a BlackBerry. They need Windows to run their software. So, I have VMWare Fusion for the Mac. Oh man. I copied a Windows XP Virtual Machine (VM) from my Windows desktop to the Mac, and started it up under Fusion. It comes right up and runs, and it works wonderfully! I can run the Windows VM
in full screen and it is indistinguishable from any other PC -- looks the same. I run it one of the Mac's "spaces," which is basically how the Mac does virtual desktops. When I move to that "space", it is as if I am now running a PC. Wild.

It is not a walk in the park to learn the Mac, but Apple's guiding philosophy of "it just works," if you put yourself in that mindset, makes it become intuitive.

So, in a nutshell:

The hardware is second to none, looks beautiful, and works very well. As laptop, it is the best one I have ever used.

Mac's OS X follows the philosophy of "It just works." and it does. It has a number of really cool things that are cool because it makes you work better, which is the goal of having a computer in the first place.

So far, the main apps that I need in life run well under a Mac. Windows XP runs great in VMWare Fusion. My guess is that Bootcamp works well, too, but I am a VMWare guy and it is great to run it all at once.

Using the Mac for the time I have been using it makes me realize how much I need to think about system issues when running Windows. Things like: Viruses? Hard drive: which one? Where is that file, anyway? With the Mac, the apps get the attention. You don't think about where apps are, they are in the Applications folder.

I don't think I shut the Mac down fully since last week when I was installing and upgrading. When I did, it came back right now! not in five minutes.

I know that I will get very good with the navigation system on the Mac. I know that when I am (realistically, a few weeks - true of any system change like this), I will fly with this thing.

The goal is to have the Mac do everything that I can do with Windows. I am not sure that is true, yet, although I am leaning in that direction. I do know, that even if I have to do half my work in Windows, I am doing it on this MacBook Pro, and not on a Windows laptop. I am done with Windows laptops.

Apple Time!

I am going to see if it is time to move to Apple -- I am getting a MacBook Pro, and will use it for my main computer. More and more things that are done with computers are moving away from the computer themselves, and are moving to web tools, like Google, Yahoo, and others. It is becoming less and less important what machine you are on, and more and more important that you are able to get access, somehow, to the web.

Yes, there are tools that must be run "locally". Microsoft Office and Mind Manager, for example, are two. But both of these run on a Mac.

Some of the tools I use, most notably the BlackBerry, require at least occasional connection to a PC, and the PC must be a PC, not a Mac. So, for that I will run a copy of Windows on the Mac.

But, I think it is time that the Apple can truly take the place of a PC. I will find out, and let you know.

My goals for this are:

1. Do all daily activities on the Mac, including MS Office and Mind Manager activities, and access to Microsoft Exchange. Activities like Google Apps should be a no-brainer, since they run via the web. I can do that from Linux, if I want (and have!).

2. Only resort to a PC (or, really, Windows) when I must (and I will document it). Or, kill whatever forces me to run on Windows. The BlackBerry is safe. All else is suspect!

I should get the machine Wednesday or Thursday. We shall see what comes of it! I'll keep you posted.

Vista Cracking

Vista is not being well-received in the market, apparently. Computer vendors are being asked by buyers for Windows XP instead of Vista on their new machines, and apparently, some are complying. Dell announced that it was offering XP as an option for new consumer PCs.

This does not surprise me. It seems I am not the only one who is not excited by the prospect of Vista, and the market is responding.

More On Vista

In a recent post, I noted how unenthusiastic about trying out Vista I am. Reports from skilled people, who are paid to look into these things, are continuing to support my decision not to waste my time.

For example, read Wayne Rash's column on eWeek about this.

Meanwhile, Apple is wasting no time. They a pushing the Mac as the PC upgrade path, and why not? You have to buy a new machine anyway, why not cut the Gordian knot and get a Mac?

I will be trying to run my computing life over the next few weeks using non-Microsoft office tools. I will use Google docs and spreadsheets, and OpenOffice for office-type activities, and Firefox (which I already use) for web browsing. I have VMWare Workstation, so I will be doing some of this using Linux. I don't have a Mac, so I will not be using one, at least not initially.

The only Windows-oriented tool I will be using will be MindManager by MindJet -- but they have a Mac version in case I switch. I'll let you know how it goes.

Microsoft Prediction

When Bill Gates announced his retirement from Microsoft in July, that, to my mind, marked the end of the "Microsoft Era." Microsoft has been losing ground in the world of personal computing (actually, in computing overall).

Microsoft isn't over, and won't be over for a long time. After all, COBOL, the 1950's era business programming language, is still very much in use. But, Microsoft's dominance is on its way out, to the point where it will be a choice to use Microsoft products, not a requirement. I see this being fully fleshed out by 2010 or 2011.

It is difficult to predict something like "market share" for the PC market. In this world of laptops, BlackBerries and iPhones, what is a PC? Currently, Microsoft has a commanding 95%+ share of the PC market. Does this mean that 95% of all people who have any computing device also has some PC running Windows? I have a BlackBerry, a PC, and an iPod. So, in my case, two out of the three computing devices I have are non-Microsoft. But, there is no doubt that my primary device is a PC.

Perhaps it is enough to say that by the end of 2011, the percentage of people who have Microsoft-based product as their main computing device will drop below 50%. I think that should this statistic occur, it will be obvious: Many businesses will have moved off Windows, people will be using their non-Windows mobile device for their main device (many use their BlackBerries that way now!), and homes will have either a Mac or a Tivo-like Linux device as their main unit.

Why do I think this? Because Bill Gates is Microsoft, and he is leaving. Also, the Microsoft vision of a PC in every home has been achieved. The new vision is "I can get whatever information I need (including entertainment) from my hand-held device."

Vista does not fit into this world. The iPhone does. So does Linux-based wireless kiosks cruising the web.

Microsoft Vista? Not Yet...

Here is an article in ComputerWorld indicating why people should hold off on Windows Vista. Vista is the latest version of Windows, set to replace Windows XP.

From my perspective, Windows Vista is so unimportant, that I haven't even looked at it. So, why am I going along with the "wait, wait" crowd when I haven't even seen it?

I have been thinking that before I write about Vista, I ought to at least look at it. The problem is, I have zero desire to do so. To investigate it would take days and days, absorb my machine, requires a "fall-back" plan in case it all goes to pot, and I just can't gird myself to do it.

Which, I think, is interesting in itself.

Here is the latest version of Windows, the software that runs 95%+ of all personal computers there are, the software that started out as "Longhorn" and was marketed as being the first computer operating system that can read your mind (well, almost), the software that you will be running if you by a new computer any time soon, and... I don't care about it.

Why? Because:

1. Like all Microsoft products, it is big and piggy (or, should I say, "bigger and piggier"). Every reference to Vista has the addage "need to upgrade your PC." (They leave out "in order to run this pig!"). I am tired of big and piggy software. I run a very fast machine at work, and it yet I have to wait, wait, wait while running Windows XP. Why would I want slower?

2. The operating system is mattering less and less in the new Internet World. Almost all the time I am doing something using a Web browser, on the Web, i.e. Internet. Online Banking, Email, News reading, "googling" (which now includes using Google products, such as Google Calendar, Google Desktop, and other products), blogging, and research. What do I need an operating system for? I use Excel, MindMapper (the subject of another posting), Word, iTunes, and some sundry utility programs. I can do the bulk of my work on Linux or an Apple, now. I don't because I have some tools I need to get to on Windows.

3. The advertised features of Vista... well, what are they but more of the same? More XP than XP. Generally, when people use Vista for a while, they like it. Walter Mossberg liked it, but was generally underwhelmed. So, it is not a "gotta have," at least in my book.

4. The licensing issue. Vista "phones home" and forces you to re-activate the software if you change your computer's configuration, and there are a number of other limitations. I do not have full details, but gone are the days when you could just be on your honor and not have to worry about calling Microsoft to start your machine up. This also means that to use Vista, you will need a network connection of some kind.

5. It costs money. Google, iTunes (the client), most web content, Skype, Yahoo Messenger, are free. Microsoft wants money?

So, I add these up, and I am unenthused. I know that, if I stay on the Windows platform, I will be forced to move to Vista at some point. I see no need to hurry. I certainly don't want to spend money on it!

So, wait it out.