Really? Yes, I mean really? I have used computers since the days when memory was measured in Kb.
I worked with Apple computers in the days when those words constituted the company's name - long before the iPhone and long before it became more of a consumer digital device company than strictly a 'computer' company.
I also worked with many of its competitor's products because of both curiosity and the tendency for the undiscriminating to purchase what was, (supposedly), cheaper, rather than seeking quality, intuitive and straight-forward interface and reliability. (PC 'clones' were never actually cheaper than Apple computers if one took into account a usually poor level of quality in construction, design, aesthetics, materials used, innovation, included software, & not least, the inclusion of features that inevitably required the purchase of additional cards, etc. to bring an opposition's machine to the same level of functionality. Even then, it would not match the Apple product in relation to integration, quality control, reliability, OS or software performance.
As a manager and computer manager for a large tertiary college, I even bought the first release of Windows. - What an absolute disaster it was. A complete and utter disaster. There never was a 'Windows 2', at least not publicly released. The first useable version was Windows 3.0 and even that had to be updated almost immediately to Windows 3.1
The only truly stable version of Windows was Windows XP. Windows 95 was a wreck, though not as bad as many other variants of the OS.
Yes, I've known some people buy Macs to run Windows but only because the Mac was capable of running *both* systems whereas the Windows machine was not. Did they use Windows as their preferred system - no - they simply needed it to be able to easily work on files from work-places that swallowed the notion of Windows machines being cheaper and their resulting ubiquity requiring them to run similar OS and software.
The only other times I've met someone purchasing a Mac with the intention to run a different OS has been when they've wanted to use a version of Linux. That however has been relatively rare because this has usually been those who are (or think they are) very knowledgeable and want a custom OS and usually hardware, too. PC clones have certainly had the advantage there in the very fact that because their lower price came predominantly, (other than from poorer quality) from their lack of features most users would want, such as audio, good graphics & networking. The result being that the clones required 'add-on' cards thus adding to their initial cost.
It is amazing how many people don't even realise or know that the ubiquitous Microsoft Office came about through the development of Microsoft Word and Microsoft Works - for the Macintosh. At that time most PC clones were still running an extremely limited DOS OS from a variety of brands, MS DOS being only one of them. WordPerfect was the more popular software for business word processing and Lotus for spreadsheet work, at that time.
The Windows OS has never come even close to the Mac OS for operational ease or efficiency. Unreliability has been a continual problem and its vulnerability to hacking attack a constant disadvantage, at least until very recently. Even amongst Windows aficionados there is significant debate as to whether it is desirable to move from Windows 10 to Windows 11.
No, I don't claim that Apple always gets it right, though its biggest blunder was to appoint a soft-drink salesman who then opened the OS to third party licensing. This led to the same type of issue that plagues the PC clone universe - generally poor and limited integration and a lack of quality control. Apple and its users have benefited enormously from Apple having control of its hardware and software and its being able to exercise sound quality control of approval/endorsement of software developed and marketed for it.
Regardless of how significant Microsoft might be and I agree that it has made a significant contribution to personal and business computing, the Windows OS is distinctly not a product deserving of praise or glory. It may have made and continue to make $billions for the company but that is its sole claim to fame - and that is a benefit for Microsoft, not for users.
Apple, on the other hand, has from the start and with only a few hiccups along the way, achieved its status and worth because it has been driven by the needs of its users and has not only listened to them but often anticipated their needs. No, I agree, it hasn't always got it right and it isn't perfect. I don't claim that it is. However, Apple’s hardware and OS, for the average user and even many specialists with demanding requirements, is far superior to that of PC clones running Windows OS.
