Super-Slim ThinkPad Sneak Peek

“What I find so amusing about the Apple haters is their inability to see the direction in which the industry, in general, is moving. The computer is becoming an appliance and an appliance’s greatest strength is its ease of use and consistency of the user interface.”

Ummm, no — but this ais a typical commment, the basic refusal to recognize how computers have changed thinking and intellectual, managerial life, legal institutions, and a concentration on consumerism, on “giving the masses what they want”. Ummm … the effect of computers reach far beyond 14 year olds and their ipods my friend. I’ll say it again: Apple users are basically anti-intellectuals, and they hate computers. They want only to know what computers can do for them — as music players, as organizers, as personal journals — and basically have no interest in how computers can change, have already changed the way the entire world functions.

@Leon Li, oh yeah, and there’s nothing inherently “intellectual” about computing. As if “intellectual” pursuits are the only ones of merit. Sheesh.

@Leon, since you clearly value innovative software development, check out this nifty Mac app called Leap:

http://www.ironicsoftware.com

It’s a far more interesting, dynamic, and innovative way of organizing data than anything Apple or Microsoft has produced.

@Rob

There’s one huge point you’re missing. Business generally doesn’t like Macs because:

a) They’re non-standard in terms of the applications they use

b) Using Apple permanently ties you to one hardware distributor which, as any business will tell you, is not a clever idea.

It is no coincidence that the people posting here who actually hold positions of responsibility in business use Windows machines usually with XP as the OS (not Vista – MS needs to do a lot more convincing with this one). XP SP2 (with SP3 coming) is an excellent OS that does the job. Frankly, we don’t care about the bells and whistles OSX offers because they’re just not relevant to business.

In addition, I believe the OSX version of Office doesn’t support MS Access which makes it an unattractive propspect for medium sized businesses if this is the case.

As for the personal market, I’m afraid a lot of your posts are rather ill informed or meaningless. You may wish to take off your green tinted spectacles before you start labelling the 90%+ of the world’s population who use PCs as nerds on the basis that we’re not actually the ones fixated with a particular manufacturer.

@ Brett

“I expect that many large companies do the same thing. And if we wanted to do so, we could switch distributors. So I’m not sure that this one holds any water.”

You could switch to Dell or Lenovo or Acer or any number of other providers. If you have Apple’s hardware running OSX you can switch to…err… Apple.

That’s why it’s not a practical solution for most large businesses.

I take your point about using the best tool but when you’re talking large businesses with significant standardisation who need to talk to key customers and suppliers the solution is almost always going to be MS based. I’m not arguing the rights and wrongs of it, I’m just stating that because of MS’s mass market penetration that’s always going to be the preferred solution.

“If one of my employees works best on a Mac, he gets a Mac. If he needs to use MS Access, I can spend a few hundred dollars to drop a PC next to his Mac on his desk.”

Not economically practical in a large organisation with standard builds.

“I don’t see what the big deal is. They are tools, not religious or political affiliations.”

I agree. I like Macs, I just don’t think they’re practical for large scale business.

“And businesses that are unwilling to embrace change get left behind.”

It’s nothing to do with that. No large business will commit itself to only one suplier for life – yes, we’ll sign long term purchasing or leasing agreements but we always have the option of review. A monopoly doesn’t allow you to do that.

Sorry Brett, I meant Mark in that last post. ;-)

@Rob

I’m not sure why you are such a rabid apologist for Apple. The point I’m making is that MS will continue to dominate the business market because:

a) It has massive mass market penetration

b) The OS isn’t tied to a particular hardware manufacturer.

This has nothing to do with my own personal preferences for computers or OSs, it’s just a commercial reality.

Anyway…

“the majority of the business world uses PCs because they are locked in, simple as that. And IT departments are the *last* ones to embrace change usually.”

Yes. As mentioned that’s the reality of the situation. Like I said, I’m not justifying the rights or wrongs of it.

“Microsoft has done a wonderful job of convincing business that it can’t get anything done without them, and businesses continue to buy Microsoft. It’s like the old days when “no one got fired for buying IBM.” No different.”

Yes, I agree.

“This argument that one can’t get real work done on a Mac is so laughably ignorant.”

But since I didn’t actually make that argument I don’t see what your point is.

“There is no MS Access, true, but not every business needs Access.”

But a lot of businesses do. Since OSX cannot support the application it’s a non starter for them.

“I see a lot of people complaining about Apple “locking” them in to the hardware. Every Mac runs Windows today. How is that being locked in?”

It’s not – you could certainly buy Apple hardware and run Windows on it and some businesses do. However, unless you have the right software licensing package it’s probably not going to be economic to do so.

“Yes, if all you care about is finding the cheapest generic PC you can, the Mac is not for you, but price out an iMac and a comparably equipped PC. There’s not much difference.”

Not disputing that. The cost is in buying the additional OS.

“And what about Microsoft’s lock-in? Sure, you can buy any bottom of the barrel hardware, but you’re still locked in to Windows and Office.”

Rob, most businesses don’t buy bottom of the barrel hardware. It’s a complete myth that most companies will buy the cheapest units they can. For example, we buy good spec HP units which have a comprehensive servicing agreement because when they’re used for a multi million pound business you want to be sure they’re going to work, which they do.

“So, it’s not okay for Apple to provide a seamlessly integrated hardware/software platform, but it is okay for Microsoft to lock you in to their proprietary file formats?”

Like I said I’m not arguing the rights and wrongs of this, I’m just stating the facts.

“At least Apple works to be interoperable. I mean, the OS has system level file translators for Office documents for goodness sakes.”

And if your PCs run Office anyway you don’t need these.

“Macs read and write Windows discs. One click turns on file sharing that supports both Mac and Windows clients. And Xserve features all sorts of platform agnostic tools for sharing files, setting up encrypted chats, sharing calendars, email, etc. Microsoft does *nothing* to integrate with anyone else. Talk about lock-in.”

Rob, this is because, as market leader, MS doesn’t have to.

“Finally, have you ever looked at Xserve? For $3000 you get sweet server hardware with unlimited client access for file server, group calendaring, email server, chat, wiki, etc., etc., etc. And how much does Microsoft charge per head for their server software?”

It depends on the needs of the particular corporation, the contractual obligations, support framework and leasing options. Quoting a flat price of $3,000 for a server without taking this into account is a bit silly.

“And yes, Brett, you are fixated with one manufacturer: MICROSOFT!!!”

It’s Mark, and, no, Rob, I’m not. I use PCs and Macs and appreciate both. Macs are easier to use for day to day personal stuff, PCs are better games machines and dominate business because of market penetration. That’s just reality. I’m sorry if that conflicts with your own views.

“You can argue all day that Windows gives you the option to buy a wide range of hardware.”

Which it does.

“Fine. But, in the end, you’re locked in to one manufacturer, so it’s really no different.”

Well we could argue that Linux is also available if you like but since I’m not arguing that point let’s not.

“Um, you’re committed to Microsoft, right? For life. Talk about monopoly. Sorry, your argument just doesn’t hold water.”

Not sure why the extra post was needed when you had already made that point. The difference is this though:

If Apple were to make OSX available on non-Apple hardware then it would be a much more attractive proposition. However, they don’t. It’s by far the lesser of two evils to only have to tie yourself to one supplier for software (which, with Linux, you actually don’t have to) and have choice of hardware than to be tied to both.

That’s just the reality of business.

@ Rob Wyatt – no problemo, this is a sort of fun and heated debate, so it is easy to get lost in the comments…

@Mark, “It depends on the needs of the particular corporation, the contractual obligations, support framework and leasing options. Quoting a flat price of $3,000 for a server without taking this into account is a bit silly.”

Good dodge. My point was simply that you can buy an Xserve with an unlimited client license for *all* of the software on it, including file server, groupware, chat server, etc., etc., etc. for around $3000. What does an unlimited Windows server license cost? How much to have unlimited filesharing clients? Unlimited Exchange clients?

My issue in a debate like this isn’t one’s preference where machines are concerned. It’s the utterly dismissive attitude that comes from the PC side, this idea that the Mac is a toy, one can’t get “real work” done it, no one supports it, there’s no software, files aren’t interoperable, etc. 95% of that is total bunk. I’m not saying that’s how you feel personally, but that attitude is very evident here in *many* posts.

Yeah, Mac people can be annoying (including, sometimes, yours truly), but we tend to take issue with how the PC works, the UI, hardware and software incompatibility, etc. I’ve never suggested that Windows was a toy and that one cannot do real work on it. Yet this is precisely the crap that PC zealots love to say about the Mac. And it’s simply not true. And anything that doesn’t fit into the boring old metaphors is dismissed.

Witness the attitude towards Time Machine by many PC users. It’s by far the most intuitive and innovative backup software on any platform, yet some dismiss it because of its trippy animation and time traveling metaphor. Is computing really supposed to be so boring that we’re stuck with file trees and list views and backup catalogs forever? I hope not! And how much do you want to bet that the next version of Windows will include something similar to Time Machine? Or Coverflow. It’s pretty darn cool to be able to flip through a folder of documents and have the OS render a preview (QuickLook) of each document’s content as you go. Sure beats scratching your head wondering which is the right file in a list view…

I choose not to use Windows because I don’t need to. In my business, Macs work great for me. There’s nothing I need to do on a computer that a Mac cannot do. I don’t care one bit about gaming. After sitting in front of a computer all day, the last thing I want to do is sit in front of it all night playing games. But that’s just me.

As for Apple’s hardware/software integration, I definitely appreciate your point. However, I think you miss the other side of the argument. Apple’s control over hardware is what ensures such a seamless experience for the user. It’s Apple’s greatest strength. Holding on to this choice in hardware argument to justify Windows seems silly to me. Maybe back in the day when Macs cost twice as much, but that’s no longer the case. They are very cost competitive.

Apple will never let OS X run on your garden variety PC for obvious reasons. Do you think they want to deal with the driver conflicts and rampant device incompatibility that has plagued the PC world since the beginning? Sure, it’s gotten better, but true plug-and-play is still pretty much a pipe dream on the PC side and probably always will be so long as there are so many different hardware manufacturers. For the industry to blossom and mature, we needed the Microsoft approach. Were it not for Microsoft, there wouldn’t be such a thriving computer industry. They made it cheap and ubiquitous.

Yet, were it not for Apple, we wouldn’t have the vision. I don’t care how much one prefers Windows, there’s no argument that the vision comes from Jobs. Just look at what he did at NeXT while Apple languished through the 90s. NeXT may not have been commercially successful, but it was one of the most innovative companies in the history of the industry. And, I firmly believe that, as we move away from the PC to a variety of information appliances, we’ll see more hardware/software integration, not less. Even Microsoft has jumped on the bandwagon with Zune. A phone can’t be far off either. There’s a great benefit to controlling everything. It’s the only way to ensure that everything “just works.”

The UltraLite was pretty small, but…

It had no hard drive, and an 8086 processor!

So, not too useful.

Lot’s of good and thoughtful comments among the usual bashing comments. No wonder I can’t decide.

I am often just a poor old user and to be honest I have to use Macs and Windows systems because the world is a mix. But I am very tempted to switch to Apple hardware and software with Windows on the same hardware so I can start to save some money on hardware and software.

The MBA is not designed for me, I need more power for video editing in the field. But I love the design and I’m hoping for lighter weight, higher power, large memory, large storage MBPs. The next laptop for my wife will be the MBA. It’s a perfect fit.

The new ThinkPad looks great, but the SSD is too small and the benefit is not clear other than mechanical reliability. I’ve been very happy with all the IBM ThinkPads I’ve used in the past including the oft maligned version with the expanding keyboard. They just work.

But I am now heavily engaged in the security market designing products to thwart cyberattacks. Consequently, I will never buy another ThinkPad now that they are made in China. This is not a prejudicial comment about China’s capabilities. In fact it is those very capabilities that force me to shun Chinese-manufactured computers. The Chinese have shown a propensity for cyberattacks on our infrastructure and undoubtedly plan to use these well honed capabilities (coupled with millions of Lenovo ThinkPads, which could bear hidden microcode), when it furthers some cause. I don’t plan to help them or anyone else by inadvertently spreading such capabilities.

@ Steve Markman, and lest we not forget that almost all laptop manufacturers (Apple and Dell included) have ODM’s out of China and Taiwan manufacturing their laptops (Mostly out of the Shenzhen region and Taipei).

it’s a nice version of unix that’s easy to maintain. Others like the ease of writing Cocoa front-ends with the free developer tools or that many tools come pre-installed, like Python and Perl. And others just have good taste in hardware.