landtuna said:
Software-wise, it has been my 20+ year experience that open source has fewer bugs and exposures than the majority of proprietary software. Because most open source software is either freeware or sold at very low cost (compared with proprietary software) the developers tend to "do it right" and do not work to artificial revenue-dependent deadlines.
But I find that, other than some utilities and things like Firefox, productivity software is costly and always lacking something that is "still under development."
I've been through a dozen scanning / scanned image processing options before coming up with one that works and does almost exactly what I want. Of course, it's not the downloadable $40 generalist shareware program, but ran around $6000 and gets about 12 updates a year, including a couple I requested.
Sure CC Cleaner and many utilities are free, and others are nominally priced, but few satisfy the needs of more demanding use. And with the PC I still have to do a regular round of driver update checks otherwise the updates on one program kill the older ones. And a fresh install of Win 7 every 5 or 6 months is vital... all these being things that make, to many users, the Apple devices with controllable closed architectures much more appealing.
In hardwareland there can be issues depending upon the ability of the manufacturer to adequately test multiple versions and pair those up with appropriate drivers. But the industry has seemed to have reached a point where this isn't a major issue.
Let's see.. Windows 7 has how many versions? Home, Professional and Ultra, and then there are 32 bit and 64 bit versions of those.... things like that, from the offset, make PCs inherently more confusing to the consumer who wants to use a computer the same way they use a TV or refrigerator.
Given that Apple products are closed-hood, if course there will be fewer problems (and functionality).
For the vast majority of tasks, the Apple's simplicity, interface and attractive designs (any laptop I would consider buying is always a dull black brick) are to be preferred. In some areas, like using devices with multiple languages, Apple is far ahead. My iPad is set up to tap its way from Spanish to English to Portuguese keyboards... on a PC, changing language is tedious and changing keyboards is a significant process.
Personally, I like being able to modify the original product to suit my unique needs and am willing to take responsibility if something goes awry in the process. I realize not everyone is that way.
Most people are not that way.
I currently operate with an 8-year old PC which has been updated and modified (hardware and software) to keep it current. The cost has been minimal. I could not have done that with an Apple product.
But you could have seemlessly upgraded to better hardware. I'm already anticipating Ivy Bridge, which means the tower gets a new MB, and maybe faster memory. My remaining SATA I devices will likely have to be replaced with SATA II ones, although my boot SSD is already SATA II... and I go through things like that at least once a year. Again, how many people want to lie on their side on the floor with a shop light installing a new drive or MoBo, going through the still-scarry process of flashing BIOS, etc?
This is sort of like radio. For the moment, radio is simple to use, but limited to a few varieties that someone else picked for you. The moment that devices make picking streams and webcasts that simple and that ubiquitous, yet customizable to my taste, the single-use device called a "radio" will be gone. But for much of the market, ease of use is the key...
