Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Desktops (Apple) Windows Hardware Apple

Most Mac Owners Also Own a Windows PC, But Not Vice Versa 814

Barence writes "More than eight out of ten Mac owners also own a PC, according to a new piece of research. The NPD survey found that 12% of US computer-owning households have a Mac. However, 85% of those also own a Windows PC, suggesting that the Mac/PC divide is nowhere near as clear cut as both Apple and Microsoft suggest. Mac owners are also far more likely to have multiple computers in the house. Two thirds of Mac owners have three or more computers in the home, while only 29% of PC owners have two or more PCs."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Most Mac Owners Also Own a Windows PC, But Not Vice Versa

Comments Filter:
  • Here's why (Score:1, Insightful)

    by abbynormal brain ( 1637419 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @12:44PM (#29658681)

    Because we (PC users) can't afford them! Lower the price already. Also: I wasn't raided with the "I'm better than you - look at my Mac" attitude - or a hippie, or drive a VW, or ... you get the picture.

  • by Jeremiah Cornelius ( 137 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @12:45PM (#29658693) Homepage Journal

    Gee, I could have deduced that most PC users DON'T also have a Mac. How? Maybe the bloody marketshare? Appologies for the US-centric market data [], but I'm sure Apple is less than double-digit in the ROTW.

    This is really a story in search of a topic, isn't it? :-)

  • by znu ( 31198 ) <> on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @12:45PM (#29658697)

    This is a survey about households, not individual owners, so the fact that most Macs exist in households that also have Windows machines is largely just an expected result of Microsoft's high market share. Even if one person in a household has a Mac, others are statistically like to have Windows machines because, statistically, most people have Windows machines.

  • by OzPeter ( 195038 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @12:46PM (#29658729)
    I prefer to use a Mac, but I make lots of $$$ with Windows based software (which is s staple of my industry)
  • I have both... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by commodore64_love ( 1445365 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @12:49PM (#29658793) Journal

    ...unfortunately. One of them has proven itself to be much cheaper to maintain (basically zero dollars), and with the ability to continue using it even after 10 years of age. I won't say which one, because I don't want to get flamed, but I bet you can guess.

  • by Penguinisto ( 415985 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @12:50PM (#29658799) Journal

    No kidding... even from the fanboy front, supporters can easily call out that this is just a natural progression of all the "switchers" out there.

    After all, just because you buy a new computer (in this case a Mac), doesn't mean you simply toss out the old one. You give it to the kids, leave it loafing around the house for specific tasks you hadn't transferred to the Mac yet, keep it around for the occasional PC game you don;t want to get rid of, use it for backing up your Mac (e.g. you copy stuff from new laptop to the old desktop), etc., I sincerely doubt that Apple gives a damn if users keep their old PC's around so long as they're buying new Macs.

  • by dingen ( 958134 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @12:51PM (#29658829)

    I never got people who were talking about using a Mac as "switching". Like you would suddenly not use the operating system you have been using for the past 20 years by buying a computer that runs something different.

    I don't know a lot of people who are devoted to a single platform. Most people I know use one OS on their desktop, something else on their notebook, something else on their phone etc. So when someone buys a Mac, they just add that platform to the list of systems they were already using. There's no reason to stop using all of your other stuff because a Mac got into the house.

  • by sopssa ( 1498795 ) * <> on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @12:53PM (#29658841) Journal

    While that is true, there's certainly people who like to have a second pc for other purposes too. If you have a mac, you probably get Windows for its apps and especially games. Most people who have Linux PC (either as a server or a desktop) probably have a Windows PC too because you can't really do everything with Linux. I have a Windows pc and a linux server. I would probably have a Windows pc too if I had only a mac.

    You have a point with the household's share, but it certainly counts for individuals too, only a bit less.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @12:55PM (#29658869)

    the more likely to get fed up with the constant tweaking in Linux and move to a Mac.

    There fixed that for you.

  • Your logic fails. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DaveV1.0 ( 203135 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @01:03PM (#29659023) Journal

    So mac owners own more computers and computers of various platforms? Logically this leads one to believe that Mac owners are more computer literate and proficient than the average Windows user.

    Actually, no, it doesn't. There is not enough information to come to that conclusion.
    One could also conclude that Mac owners need Windows based PCs because the Macs don't do everything the owner needs.
    Or, one could conclude that Mac owners own more computers because are more affluent and they can.
    Or, one could conclude that Mac owners own Macs because they are more affluent and can.

    Also, there is no indication of the number of PCs versus the number of Macs in multi-computer house-holds nor the age of the respective computers. If someone owns two new PCs and one only Mac, what does that say about the owner? What if one has one Mac for one of one's children, but everyone else uses Windows PCs?

    There is not enough information provided to come to any conclusion other than what is stated in the write-up.

  • by Foofoobar ( 318279 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @01:05PM (#29659059)
    Thought there might be a smart ass remark like that but regardless, in this scenario, having to learn two different operating systems, the setups, configurations, etc, makes you more computer literate by default. The more you learn about different systems, you naturally become more computer literate. You can make snarky comments but you can't deny the facts. If I used merely a Windows machine compared to someone who used a windows machine and a mac vs someone who used Windows, mac and linux, it is pretty obvious that one leads to the other; more computer literate people generally use multiple systems and multiple systems lead to increased computer literacy.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @01:06PM (#29659091)

    Actually, the more money you have, the more likely you are to have a Mac.

  • Re:Here's why (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @01:07PM (#29659123)

    Actually, what I took from that article is that the people most likely to gripe about Macs probably don't own one, whereas the Mac users griping about Windows are mostly speaking from personal experience.

  • Re:Here's why (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mabhatter654 ( 561290 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @01:12PM (#29659217)

    A vanilla Macbook is appropriately priced for what you get. You have to buy Sony or go online to get an equivalent laptop.. if anything the problem is that Apple doesn't make CHEAP computers like $300 netbooks so that cuts out the poor/cheap folks looking only at price. Even the maligned Mac Mini is a pretty good machine for MOST sub $700 machine buyers. The majority of PC users don't open their computers over the life of the machine. The majority don't even add ram or video cards. They pay $600 for Last Year's parts in an empty plastic box that makes them feel good. A Mini has nearly all the same features as a stock Dell, plus bluetooth, two video ports and firewire... all items adding $75 more each to that "budget" PC. Again, the problem is that Apple doesn't sell a "stripped out" model to hit a lower price point like Dell does... then you find out that the Windows PC was TOO stripped out and won't use all the features of your new OS (hint: THAT is why Vista bombed.. Microsoft caving to cheap OEMs)

    I'd look at these numbers differently. Most people own a PC because the workplace DEMANDS it. 12% of people that own a Mac in addition to a PC went out of their way to seek it out because they didn't like Windows.... that's a huge and growing dissatisfaction rating.

  • you have no logic (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Foofoobar ( 318279 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @01:18PM (#29659321)
    Your logic makes no sense. Even if they do need a Windows machine, learning about a second machine will still make you more computer literate than someone who just knows one platform. Learning about Mac and Windows makes one proficient on two platforms. By your logic, they might need a Linux box too because Windows doesn't do everything either. This forces them to learn about Linux as well. Now they know three platforms.

    The point was that owning two platform increases computer literacy because they have to learn about multiple systems and not only do people who are computer literate buy multiple systems but people who own multiple system become more computer literate by default as a result of having to learn multiple platforms.
  • by Idiomatick ( 976696 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @01:20PM (#29659371)
    Spoken like Steve Jobs. Options that we decide you don't need are BAD. /sigh I thought choices were good things.
  • Transition (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @01:27PM (#29659503)

    My guess is that in households with both Macs and PCs, the PCs are older than the Macs.

    When people buy their first Mac, they often already have a PC. The Mac is the new/replacement computer, while the old PC is kept around for "backwards compatibility" for a few programs that really need it. This extends the useful life of the old PC, but it also means Windows is getting phased out. Not everywhere, but you don't see many Mac users going back to PC.

    True story: A group my business associates were visiting Apple headquarters in Cupertino. As visitors, they wanted to leave their HP notebook computers with the receptionist.

    One guy says to the receptionist, "If I leave my computer here, will you keep an eye on it?"
    She responds, "Sure, no problem. Nobody is going to want them!"

  • by svendsen ( 1029716 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @01:27PM (#29659505)'s all about the software anyway. You will run the OS that supports the software you need to be productive.
  • Re:Here's why (Score:5, Insightful)

    by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @01:43PM (#29659799)

    And the simple fact is that now Apple has switched to Intel you can buy the SAME hardware that is in a Macbook or Macbook Pro for $700- $900 or more cheaper from a Dell or HP.

    No, quite frankly, the simple fact is you can't.

    Whenever I see this argument, I have to wonder - how have you not noticed that Dell and HP (and most others) make both cheap laptops and expensive laptops? The cheap laptops are big, thick, and heavy. The expensive laptops are lighter and thinner. Yet they're all running Windows and have similar processor speeds and RAM amounts. If your argument had any merit, Dell's $2000 laptops should be considered "the SAME hardware" as Dell's $700 laptops. So tell me - how do they get away with this?

    Here's the answer: With a laptop you pay more if you want lighter weight, thinner profile and/or better construction. The real difference between Apple and Dell (or HP or whoever) is Apple doesn't offer an equivalent to the low end, thick, heavy laptops that Dell or HP offer.

  • Re:Here's why (Score:3, Insightful)

    by nolife ( 233813 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @01:44PM (#29659807) Homepage Journal

    Apple doesn't make CHEAP computers like $300 netbooks so that cuts out the poor/cheap folks looking only at price.

    Don't you think some people buy a sub $300 netbook or PC because it might meet their specific needs? I have an HP Mini that I got for free but they sell for under $250. It does what I need it and expect it to do. What am I missing out on? What am I doing on it that it is failing to perform because it is "cheap"?

    I happen to look at the price of EVERYTHING I buy including a bag a frozen vegetables at the grocery store and make a decision if it will meet my needs for that amount of money, I call it maximising the value for my dollar. How do you buy and compare things?

    A Mini has nearly all the same features as a stock Dell, plus bluetooth, two video ports and firewire... all items adding $75 more each to that "budget" PC.
    You can find PC's that have all of the features of the mini for well under the Mini's price. Sure, I can also find PC's that are the same and even more expensive than the Mini too but if you'd like to only compare to the overpriced PC's, that's your choice. Another note, maybe someone does not need or has zero use for firewire, bluetooth, or two video ports on their specific PC, why should they pay for it?

  • Re:Here's why (Score:3, Insightful)

    by The Wooden Badger ( 540258 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @01:49PM (#29659901) Homepage Journal

    I won't buy a Mac because I can't build my own system. Why bother buying some store bought computer when you can get the same thing for much less by building it yourself? In my case I saved more than 50% with my recent system build. Not even an option with a Mac.

  • Re:Here's why (Score:2, Insightful)

    by ebh ( 116526 ) <edhorch&gmail,com> on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @01:53PM (#29659967) Journal

    Do you want to *support* four customers who have each put a million dollars in your pocket, or do you want to support four million people who have each put a dollar in your pocket?

  • by sean.peters ( 568334 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @01:54PM (#29659993) Homepage

    It's still obviously a cost consideration. If you pay $300 for a Windows PC, or save up $1,000 for a Mac over the next 4 months, you're still spending over 3x as much for the Mac.

    And if you're spending $10 for a pocket calculator, and $1,000 for a Mac, why, you've spent a hundred times as much for the Mac! Imagine that! Dude, the point here is that Macs and ultra-low-end PCs are different products. Some are right for some people, and others are right for others. If your budget and needs are such that the cheapest possible machine from Tiger Direct is the right choice, then, as you say, more power to you. People who need/want/can afford something better are not going to bother with the cheapo machine no matter how cheap it is.

    If Apple wants a larger market share, they will have to make their pricing competitive. It's still not competitive enough, so they will continue to make a larger profit per unit with a smaller number of units.

    As has been pointed out (over and over), Mac pricing is quite competitive when you compare (ahem) apples to apples. Which is why Mac market share in the mid-range and high end continues to grow. The concept of competitive pricing at the ultra-low-end is N/A... because Apple has decided not to go there. Which in turn is fine for Apple shareholders, who are making money hand over fist.

    If you have the 1 million dollar customers, if one goes away, that hurts a lot. If you have the 1 dollar profit customers, a whole bunch can jump ship, and more will come in because your prices (and profit margin) is smaller.

    Apple has (wisely, in my view) decided that they don't want to and/or can't beat the Dells of the world in making the cheapest computers. And that's ok, because making a higher quality/higher priced product is also a perfectly fine way to make a profit... it's working for Apple.

    But hey, if you want to save up your pennies and buy a Mac, more power to you. It'll be a nice fixture in the back of your car, when you get fired in the next round of downsizing next week, and you find yourself homeless.

    Yeah, and not only does Mac ownership lead to homelessness, but also asteroid strikes and cannibalism! I mean, come on. If I bought a computer this week and became homeless next week, I doubt the first thought on my mind would be "Alas! If only I had bought a cheap PC!". If people are that nervous about being downsized, they probably shouldn't be buying PCs either. Probably your remark was meant to be funny, but it comes across as overwrought.

  • Re:Here's why (Score:3, Insightful)

    by interval1066 ( 668936 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @01:54PM (#29659997) Homepage Journal

    "I'm reasonably certain it's been shown a number of times that if you build a PC with the exact same hardware as a Mac, you'll end up with a PC that costs about the same."

    No, not even close. I build my own rigs and I've never spent as much money on my hardware as it would have cost me to buy a Mac.

  • by _avs_007 ( 459738 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @01:54PM (#29659999)
    I have lots of friends that have both Mac and PC... Just because you own both does not mean you are proficient at both. Most people I know, call tech support when they have issues. Most people I know with Macs, take their computer back to the apple store when they have issues... A couple of my friends will call me, asking me to fix their computer, even when they know I don't own any Macs. That being said, One time a friend was having issues with his network on his Macbook, and I was able to figure out how to alter the routing tables on their Mac, so they can surf the net, and connect to their source control server at the same time... That person owns both windows and macs, yet he could not figure that out, and I could, and I don't even own any macs. Was he more computer literate than me? Nope...

    Computers are just tools. Tools do not give you computer skills. One with computer skills uses any available tools at their disposal to accomplish a given task. This is the same reason I found it no more difficult to replace the intake manifold gaskets on a Nissan VQ DOHC V6 and a GM Supercharged overhead valve V6.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @01:56PM (#29660039)

    Most people with money enough to own a cool car also own a working car. Most people who own a working car don't own a cool car.

    Where working car = a car that isn't very cool but takes them were they need to go, and is also more reasonably priced.

    - anon who owns both a windows pc and an imac ;)

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @02:16PM (#29660401)

    I really don't think that was a snarky comment. It's simply true. My parents use both Windows and Linux, but they're really not all that computer literate. They just click the thingy that takes them to "The Internet" and use the same browser (Firefox). Does this mean they will learn more about each system? Not at all.

  • Re:Here's why (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Sandbags ( 964742 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @02:34PM (#29660695) Journal

    It's a bite more, give them some credit....

    Just because the CPU speed in GHz, RAM size in GB, and HDD size and type are a match does NOT mean the machines are even CLOSE to equal.

    Compare for example the 15" macbook pro, with the nVidia 9400GPU (base, not even the enhanced 9600M GT), to a Dell Studio 15, or to their new "flagship" machine.

    The Mac has a faster system bus, included bluetooth by default, includes an enhanced multi-anteanna wireless N radio, better graphics than any Dell in even a similar price range without going into 16" and larger models, weighs less than the 13" dell systems, has a really solid feeling aliminum chassis, has higher tech LiPo batteries that last longer and charge faster and don't explode, has a higher screen resolution, offers a non-glossy screen option, can run both Mac OS and Windows, and in the case of Dell's new flagship machine, it's user field upgradeable where Dell's is NOT! All that for $1599 or less, compared to Dell's closest equavalent machine at $1709. Oh yea, Apple support also actually HELPS you with OS and software issues, Dell references you to microsoft who charges $199 per incident for support. A 13" model is ontl 1099, and the white macbook can be found easily under $950.

    You go find a 13" or 15" machine with 7 hour battery life, that weighs 5lbs or less, operates on a 1066 bus with a full featured Core 2 (including VT!), comes with descrete graphics, 1200x800 or better screen, Wireless N, bluetooth, and has an internal optical drive that costs less. I can't find a competitor more than $80 lower in price that meets that, and that's without throwing in the backlit keyboard, 8GB ram max (not 4), memory card reader, firewire ports, a webcam, and other non-essential "specs" and that's also without any of the software you're going to need to buy for a Windows box (OK, some people buy, /.ers know how to get other ways).

    No, Apple does not make a cheap shit netbook for $400. Who cares! Anyone who only needs the most basic netbook features (mail, web, word processing and well that's about all they can handle) doesn't need anything more, but, statistics show more than 90% of netbook buyrers have a second more powerful machine already... If you;re buying a more powerful notebook, start looking in the $700-900 range, and realize a Macbook Pro is $100 more, but has so much more performance it would last 4-5 years not 2-3, all of a sudden it's CHEAPER.

    Keep in mind, OS X has had consistantly declining operating requirements, where Windows (and even linux!) makes LEAPS in requirements, greatly shortening the survivable life of the machine. Having a laptop that supporets 8GB of RAM, user replaceable HDDs, and more powerful chipsets and faster subsystems, for a small premium over a "cheap" full notebook, and over 4 years, the Mac is far cheaper. compared to equivalent PCs, the Macs are in line. On the high end, the macs are hundreds cheaper (Macbook 17" is more than $700 cheaper than Del;l's equivalent flagship notebook and $300 less than Adamo).

  • Re:Here's why (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Runaway1956 ( 1322357 ) * on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @02:36PM (#29660737) Homepage Journal

    Story tagged "No news day". Phhht.

  • Re:Here's why (Score:5, Insightful)

    by shmlco ( 594907 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @02:36PM (#29660739) Homepage

    "...along with the belief that apple has that much better reliability..."

    Yeah, that's why Apple consistently has the highest customer satisfaction ratings in the industry.

  • Re:Here's why (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jo_ham ( 604554 ) <> on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @03:11PM (#29661253)

    The iMac uses "desktop" parts - desktop cpu, ram, hd, optical drive, screen, psu etc etc.

    I think only the base iMac uses what could be called "laptop" parts - the GPU. The higher power iMacs use desktop GPUs (modest models though they may be compared to bleeding edge, 9.4kW 8-slot, LN2 cooled cards in PCs).

    No, the reason a Mac costs more is that it is pitched at a different market - Apple don't sell a budget, it's part of the brand. So most of the consumer level gear is similarly priced to a budget PC+extras to match the specs - but this doesn't just mean "same RAM size, same CPU, same HD space", but includes things like "machined aluminium case" instead of "plastic case" and "firewire and camera as standard" compared to "sometimes has firewire [varies so wildly by model] and camera optional".

    As with any consumer gadget, you have to decide on a personal level whether buying a Mac is worth the price of it - as many people on slashdot will tell you, for them they are overpriced and they can do better with a whitebox store and an afternoon building something to slap Ubuntu on.

    It's no different to the guy who buys a slightly more expensive car than the next guy because he likes it better. Sure you have your guy who buys a car to lord it over people with cheaper cars, but most people who buy the more expensive one just happened to like it and felt the cost was worth it.

  • Re:Here's why (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jasonwc ( 939262 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @03:37PM (#29661593)
    Dell's 15" laptops are cheaper because they use cheap parts (Dual-Core Pentiums vs. Core 2 Duos), less RAM, cheaper hard drives, and most importantly, they're huge, heavy, and have shit battery life. Less money is spent on design because there's more space for fans and airflow.

    When you buy a 13" or even 14" laptop, you're paying for the reduced thickness, size, and weight, longer battery life, and higher quality parts.
  • by YenTheFirst ( 1056960 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @03:44PM (#29661749) Journal

    The thing to remember, though, is that it was a survey of households, not users. You could easily have a scenario where one person owns a PC, the other a Mac, and neither use each other's computers.

    Even by your definition of increased computer literacy, having multiple machines in the same household proves nothing.

  • Re:Here's why (Score:3, Insightful)

    by commodoresloat ( 172735 ) * on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @04:13PM (#29662207)

    (NO PC OEM makes a perfect match)

    I think we've found the basic problem with all this speculative comparison right here.

  • Re:Here's why (Score:5, Insightful)

    by binary paladin ( 684759 ) <<moc.liamg> <ta> <nidalapyranib>> on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @04:31PM (#29662431)

    No. Macs cost more because it's not the same market as Dell or [insert OEM here]. It's the same reason they don't feverishly update the processors or specs. They don't sell PCs. They sell a platform and they sell complete devices. Period. They also have a much nicer profit margin per unit than Dell.

    I'm not here to defend or attack that. The financials speak for themselves. There are hundreds of morons on this site who think that Apple would just "take over" if it took the advice of said morons and did things like offer budget machines or a customizable desktop that it would be king, etc.

    Mind you, I would LOVE a Mac desktop that was a real desktop and NOT an iMac and not a Mac Pro. I don't hate Apple for not releasing it though because I'm certainly not their bread and butter. (Neither are gamers and neither are people who, for the most part, really care about Hz, Bytes or tech specs.) My dad doesn't care what processor is in his MacBook Pro. My mom doesn't care about how much RAM is in her Mac Mini. All they care about is that it does what they want at a pace that's reasonable for them. I like it because, as I'm the "family IT guy" I almost never have to touch these machines.

    Just because Apple doesn't meet your needs, doesn't mean their execs are stupid. Getting annoyed at Apple for what they charge and what the sell is like getting pissed off when BMW doesn't my a 4x4 pickup work truck. It's not their market. They don't care about getting into it.

    If Apple doesn't meet your needs then don't buy their stuff. I have GOT to stop reading any article that's Apple related on Slashdot. It just turns in to mountains of faulty comparisons and complaints and crap on both sides.

  • Re:Here's why (Score:2, Insightful)

    by gmanterry ( 1141623 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @04:34PM (#29662473) Journal
    Thank you. Nothing worse than someone knocking an OS they have no experience with.
  • Re:Here's why (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jayme0227 ( 1558821 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @04:46PM (#29662653) Journal

    I'm just curious how the Mac brand would be affected if Apple added a low-end computer to their lineup. Apple currently seems to target the groups that want proof that they they are "cooler" or "more hip" than everyone else, although they surely wouldn't use those phrases. Would low end Macs completely eliminate the "cool" factor of the Apple brand, thus eliminating much of the fickle pretentious college student market, or would they be able to rely on their superior usability to keep their current markets and add new ones?

  • Re:Here's why (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sbeckstead ( 555647 ) on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @05:49PM (#29663477) Homepage Journal
    And last I heard Dell was struggling to stay alive and Apple was growing. So if you sell discount PC hardware you have to struggle and cut costs everywhere you can even on components just to stay in business. But on the other hand if you have consistent quality, good customer service and keep your prices high enough to support the service costs you make a ton of money? Looks to me like the business model of PC makers could use a boot to the head.
  • by JasonBee ( 622390 ) on Wednesday October 07, 2009 @07:18AM (#29668111) Homepage

    Another perspective might be that Mac users are connoisseurs of the the OS, preferring to taste multiple experiences, and are far more proficient at the tools unique to each platform, whereas pure windows users are, well unilingual.

User hostile.