Should The Mac Zealots Just Shut Up?
It is unlikely that there is any city in the US with a population over hundred thousand folks where you can’t go to central spot on a Friday evening and not receive the dreaded “attempted conversion.” The procedure is both tiresome and familiar and runs something as follows:
“You, in the black shirt, are you prepared for the end of the LIFE AS YOU KNOW IT!!!!!!?”
You: “I’m comfortable with my…”
Nut case: “Have you heard the WORD, the WORD will save you and this great country!!!!!?”
You (trying to be polite): “Uh, like I said, I’m fairly comfortable with my current choice in the…”
Nut Job: “Friend, allow me to give you this pamphlet. The PAMPHLET will open your eyes to the EVIL around US. SON, read the PAMPHLET and spread the WORD!!”
You: “I’m open minded, but I find your tactics not only annoying but a bit disingenuous so…”
Total freakin Nut Case: “Behold one of the EVIL ones, one the scorned few who drive four bangers. One who openly rejects the liberating advantages of a FULLY HEMI POWERED ENGINE. Scorn him children. Scorn the fool!”
You: ” Please tell me you won’t be here when I come out the bar.”
Person teetering betwixt institutionalization and self-care: “Will you please donate a few dollars so I can continue to spread the good WORD about the awesomely powered HEMI ENGINES!!!!?”
You: “Here’s two bucks”
Feel free to change “hemi powered engines” to any topic that fosters passion. It might be religion, politics, environmentalism etc., the choice of topic is less important than the delivery. Just how many people does the street corner screamer convince? A few addle brained fools will certainly buy into the hemi powered argument but a great many more will simply tune the self proclaimed crier of “the truth” out and, likely, avoid the followers admonitions with increasing zeal. At some point zealotry starts hurting more than it helps and the question the Mac community needs to ask itself is: Is zealotry pushing away more users than it is bringing in?
First A bit Of History
Mac Evangelism likely originates with Guy Kawasaki. By most accounts Guy coined the term “Mac Evangelist” and spent a considerable amount of time after the Mac was introduced try to stave off domination of the computing world by IBM. It seemed to work well enough that Guy left Apple (1987) to pursue other ventures (which probably means look for a way to get obscenely rich). 1995 rolled around and Guy was brought back into the fold to work his magic a second time. This probably marks the true birth of Mac Evangelism as it is commonly regarded. In any event 1995 was the year the Mac began to seriously slip in market share. The counter to this precipitous decline was to motivate Mac aficionados to get the word out using, among other things, the nascent ‘net. The efficacy of the approach is questionable. Obviously the campaign did inspire many Mac users to extol the virtues of the Mac but the sales kept slipping. One suspects that the evangelism, in this case, helped keep the Mac (somewhat) viable and that the dwindling sales can be better attributed to any of a number of other factors.
Many people probably don’t remember the lengths Mac evangelists used to go to spread the word. I, to use an overly personal example, once spent most of a weekend hanging around a CompUSA basically selling Macs for no other compensation than the warm vibrations of helping my fellow man. Other folks made it their business to go into Sears and Best Buy and reset the Performas and iMacs so they would at least appear to work for a few hours. The evangelism also extended to countless message board posts, screeds on the web (before blogging became the default name for such activities), requests for Macs at countless corporations, etc. In short a great deal of effort was put forth by the Mac faithful to keep Macs afloat.
So What’s Changed?
When the Evangelism movement was at its peak Apple was experiencing their darkest days. Other than a few incremental advances here and there Apple just wasn’t very exciting so it made perfect sense to cater to the technophobes, the terminally different and Microsoft grudge bearers. With the advent of OS X all that has changed. Macs, as their recent sales indicate, are becoming more and more accepted. The media coverage has been nothing sort of universally praise filled and Macs are once again accepted as the platform of choice by a large number of computer geeks.
So now the Mac community is faced with a completely new environment. A changing environment necessitates changing strategies. To understand just how much damage a stagnant unchanging mindset can be consider the Norse Greenland Colony. Surrounded by fish and seals the Norse eschewed these food sources and relied on untenable stocks of sheep and swine. Presumably the Inuit laughed at the stubbornness of the flaxen haired interlopers and, when the colony failed three hundred years after it had been established, probably weren’t sorry to see them go. To apply this lesson to Macs let us consider a person jumping off the Windows ship into the warm embrace of the Mac community. These potential switchers don’t want to hear how stupid their past choices were, they don’t want to be told time and time again that they are mindless Windows zombies and they don’t want to join a “cult” just by buying a computer. What they do want to hear is how great the Mac is. They want to hear about what the Mac will do for them, they want to hear about why Mac is growing in popularity. In short, like just about everyone else when it comes to purchasing something, they want to hear how smart they are for considering a Mac.
None of this is to say that Mac users should simply ignore the deficiencies of competing platforms. Linux is too difficult for the average Joe, it is ridiculous that Windows users have to run two or three programs in an effort to stem the tide of malware and spyware. Still there is a huge difference between saying: “Linux? You paste eating goob! The Mac is much more user friendly!” or “How do like that worm Windows swilling Lemmings?” and saying “Macs are pretty sweet, no security worries and they are still easy to use.” To phrase it differently: People aren’t buying a philosophy any more, so the Mac community shouldn’t try to sell them one. For most folks, a computer is just a tool, the Mac world needs to tell them why it pounds nails better.
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Slashdot
StumbleUpon
Comments
The sad thing is I like MDN as a Mac news site. MacNN and MacMinute are also decent sites but I am not fond of their respective layouts (MacNN seems too “squished”, if that makes any sense, and MacMinute is a bit bland on topics). So MDN is probably one of my most frequently checked RSS feeds, but purely for update purposes. The MDN “take” and commentary on the other hand can sometimes be infuriating and even worse they can be self defeating, turning off more potential users to the platform then on. Zealotry abound over at MDN.
And if you are a long time reader you will notice that, like most Mac zealots, MDN’s “take” is very rarely wrong, at least according to the writers of MDN. One would only have to witness their takes on the Intel rumors, pre announcement, compared to their very quick change of heart when it came down to smacking any dissenters who dared questioned the move post announcement. Can anyone say hypocrite?
And sadly that attitude is primarily what enforces the idea of all Mac users as “Zealots”. Casual outiders to the Mac community hear about this very vocal, very arrogant segment of Mac users and most want no part of it. Effectively turning off the potential to help someone out and turn them away from the ills of a poorly built and un-secured OS, Windows.
Yet Zealots will throw temper tantrums telling you it’s just that Windows users are stupid people who like viruses and defend Microsoft, that’s why they don’t switch. But anyone who is paying attention knows thats no true. That particular battle of words is between Mac Zealots and Windows entusiasts, of which there are a few believe it or not (Zealots won’t believe it but magazines like Maximum PC do sell to somebody so it would be ignorant not to believe it). The rest of the computer users of the world just want some objective direction here. What is the best OS for them? These people don’t read techie sites, they watch Peter Jennings at night and Katie Couric in the morning, they read the Washington Post, the New York Times or the NY Daily News on the way to work. They are going to base their opinions on operating systems and computing choices on the opinions of people they have grown to trust.
So when Fortune magazine starts writing articles about how the right choice for a personal computer for your college bound child is an iMac you don’t hammer the writer for some inane reason, like getting name of the command key wrong. You embrace the fact that the average user has heard about the benfits of an Apple PC from a mainstream journalist (whether you admire that persons journalistic talents or not), instead of some idiot who has preconceived and dated opinions about Apple and the Mac platform. Zealots can’t, or won’t, do this. They will scream about agenda, they will talk about Gates “paying off” the author of the article to get things wrong. They just can’t let go of the fact that maybe an author who himself just turned to the Mac platform, as many recently have, got a few things wrong while ENDORSING the god damn platform because he too is learning the ropes.
Sometimes you just want to take the Zealots and shake some sense into them. Like Chris Rock says “I’d never hit a woman (Zealot), never ever hit a woman (Zealot). Never. Ever. Hit a woman (Zealot). But I’d shake the sh!t out of em’”
Q: How many Mac zealots does it take to change a light bulb?
A: None… “The bulb does not need changing.”
Zealot: “Apple will never change that bulb and you’re an idiot if you think otherwise.”
Apple changes the light bulb anyway and then puts out a press release announcing that they have re-invented the light bulb.
Zealot: “Changing that bulb was absolutely the right thing to do and you’re an idiot if you think otherwise.”
Light bulbs now cost $85 each.
Damn, and now I’m $50 short because of that stupid not-so-Mighty Mouse… and I needed a new light bulb too.
Back to zealots…
I think that 1999-2001 hurt Apple a great deal and we can really thank a majority of the zealots for keeping them alive to see tomorrow, I really believe that. I had written the entire company off during that period and from what I can tell so did just about everyone else. The fact remains though that no amount of Windows bashing or name calling will ever convert people to Mac, not now, not ever. When Apple was at its absolute weakest, MS was at its strongest - and the folks that bought computers during that time are just plain scared to buy anything else for the most part. If OS X truly is the better platform, and I believe it is for whatever that’s worth, then it will gain momentum and be successful. Plain and simple. Some of us think it’s completely without flaws, some of us accept the few flaws that there are and deal with them. Either approach works just fine for yourself but no one these days has any business coming off like Mac Hitler anymore. The two platforms are close enough in design and function where the very idea that they are that much different is borderline ridiculous. I fully support Apple and the great things that come from them most of the time, and am further impressed that they are not just a software company but also a design company, a hardware company, and a very very adept marketing company. With only 5% marketshare that’s a very impressive resume. If you want to be a zealot about something, be a zealot about that.
The two platforms are close enough in design and function where the very idea that they are that much different is borderline ridiculous.
Huzzah! I only disagree on the notion that they are ONLY borderline ridiculous. I think that the advocacy of the Mac platform is astronomically disproportionate to its advantages, even though advantages it does have.
One of the problems I have with the zealotry, and indeed the way in which I define zealotry, goes back a few years to OS 9 and Win 98/NT. I had a G3 with OS 9 at work at Disney and at my home office. At Diz, we used the Mac for doing some basic 3D work. At home I used it for doing cross-platform development with Macromedia Director (I did animation graphics, not programming). Even then, the meme was “stability.” It’s more stable than Windows. But I HAD a Mac. I used a Mac. And more stable they were NOT. Whether at Diz or at home, they crashed. The one at home crashed more often, so often that I just stopped using it and did all my work on my NT machine.
And yet the meme rolled on. And here’s the thing and why I constantly question the veracity of the fanatics. Through countless updates, variations, and even MAJOR changes including the move to PPC, the ‘nix kernel, the Cube, the Imac, as well as total rewrites of Windows, the meme HAS NOT CHANGED, not one single word of it. And there is something very wrong with that mentality, and this despite the often belated admissions that OS 9 and the first iteration of OS X were INDEED unstable and that OS X was bug-ridden. Still, they said, it just works. It’s stable. It’s soooo easy to use.
Granted, while the memes haven’t changed (despite the issues of stability and ease-of-use growing increasinly irrelevant), they have been added to. Now you can’t go five minutes in a typical Mac vs. PC debate without hearing the word “virus” and/or “spyware.” That’s the new meme, and like the previous ones, it will be around long after the issue itself ceases to be an issue at all.
I think if the zealots are getting to you, then you’re spending too much time on the internet.
I think personal experience will change user’s attitudes towards Macs, not anything anyone writes on the web. The web is too hobbled with inaccuracies, subjectivism, and ulterior motives disguised as good advice to trust.
Where ever one can replace writing with physical demonstration one begins to see real success. The Apple stores are doing it. I do it in my work with students in our labs. Administrators bravely do it againsts the forces of Microsoft, by sticking to their guns and using Apple in one-to-one programs in their school districts.
Many places give you no choice to use a Mac. And other places subtly make it difficult. I think if you use a Mac you are brave. And braver still if you have the capacity to influence demonstrable change.
Maybe we ought to stop spending so much time writing about these things and resume our work. But we should never let misconceptions and curiosity be unanswered. We can share our experiences with others and eliminate the ignorance.
Even then, the meme was “stability.” It’s more stable than Windows. But I HAD a Mac. I used a Mac. And more stable they were NOT. Whether at Diz or at home, they crashed. The one at home crashed more often, so often that I just stopped using it and did all my work on my NT machine.
This is the very reason I didn’t entertain switching until 10.1. For all its other advantages, OS 9 was more unstable than Windows.
Of course, that punches yet another hole in your “lavar is a Mac zealot because he likes the one-button mouse” theory/crusade, so feel free to assume I’m lying.
“That’s the new meme, and like the previous ones, it will be around long after the issue itself ceases to be an issue at all.”
What about the meme: There is no software for Mac. Macs are expensive. MacOS has been based on intuition since 1984. I still believe new computer users will understand the Mac faster than they would understand ANY version of Windows.
People who have worked with Windows for a long time, have lost this intuition. They created a MS intuition.
As Yoda said: Unlearn what you have learned.
Feel, don’t think.
<i>What about the meme: There is no software for Mac. Macs are expensive.<i>
The meme about no software for the Mac obviously isn’t true. You just have fewer choices for any given product. BUT, while software for the PC outnumbers software for the Mac by about 100 to 1, most of it is junk. In my experience, software for the Mac tends to follow the “foreign film” rule: you don’t as much of it but what you do get tends to be the best of the best. Why do I need 300 FTP programs when I only need one really good one?
There are exceptions to this. There is no really good DVD player for the Mac, nothing that compares to Power DVD. And this is hardware related, but I went to Fry’s for a USB wireless adapter. They had literally fifty of them for the PC and ZERO Mac compatible ones. And of course, there are fewer games and most of the titles for the Mac come out far later than their PC counterparts..
The meme about Macs being more expensive, however, is absolutely true. I wish it weren’t, but it is. Sure, we can get into the whole nebulous TCO argument, but the bottom line is that Macs cost more than PCs. And this is by design.
While I Mac OS 9 had a well designed, consistent UI, superior font support, etc,. the lack of preemptive multitasking and protective memory was a deal breaker for me. In addition, some third-party extensions caused conflicts that were difficult to diagnose and resolve. I ran Windows NT and 2K since it was much more stable. The public beta of Mac OS X was really buggy and I didn’t switch until it had stabilized when 10.2 was released.
These days, I have seen a kernel panic on my G4 PowerBook in at least 2-3 months.
Yes, there are fewer games, and the ones that *are* released usually lag several months behind the Windows versions.
There is no really good DVD player for the Mac, nothing that compares to Power DVD.
Please explain what exactly does a DVD player need to do other than simply play DVDs? While I don’t remember the name of the application, a friend brought over her Dell laptop to watch a DVD. I couldn’t figure out how to get rid of the rows of buttons and borders around the video that seemed to do nothing but take up space and distract from the video. Finally, I gave up and stuck the disc in my Powerbook, which automatically switched into borderless full-screen mode and started playing without any intervention.
Please explain what exactly does a DVD player need to do other than simply play DVDs?
Hmmmm.
While I don’t remember the name of the application, a friend brought over her Dell laptop to watch a DVD. I couldn’t figure out how to get rid of the rows of buttons and borders around the video that seemed to do nothing but take up space and distract from the video.
Am I missing something or did you just answer your own question?
You weren’t using PowerDVD on the Dell because PowerDVD doesn’t have a row of buttons and borders. It’s quite simply the best software DVD player ever created. DVD Player on the Mac is passable, but it lacks the features of PowerDVD and it isn’t AS easy to use. That’s fine for a free program that comes with the OS, and it beats anything free on the PC side, but the problem is that there is no alternative for the Mac, even if you wanted to buy one.
Agreed. While on the subject of video playback, here is a place where having those 100 pieces of software for Windows is advantages over the 3 on Mac. Between Quicktime (with Divx codec), VLC, and Mplayer I have not found one single piece of software that will run better than about 45% of the divx/xvid video collection and yet the FREE Windows Media Player (with only the Xvid codec and AC3 filter installed) runs every single one of them just fine. I’m sure there are several other places where that comes into play as well, I’ve had a lot of gripes with Apple’s DVD Player - it’s passable, it’s functional, but PowerDVD? Not even close.
On Windows I have choices in that area, and others, and choices are what drive technology, especially software choices. Photoshop is the defacto image editing software whether we like it or not (personally I love it) but only because it’s been around nearly forever. The emerging uses of a PC (or Mac) in the living room are one strong area where the Mac is getting left far behind - simply because of this lack of choices. So now, what if your platform doesn’t have one great app? Then the other 100 you can’t use look that much more appealing.
Scott: Please explain what exactly does a DVD player need to do other than simply play DVDs?
Beeblebrox: Am I missing something or did you just answer your own question?
No, I don’t think so.
Beeblebrox: You weren’t using PowerDVD on the Dell because PowerDVD doesn’t have a row of buttons and borders. It’s quite simply the best software DVD player ever created.
Ok, but I’m still confused as to what a DVD player should do other than simply play DVDs. Perhaps I should rephrase and ask why is PowerDVD the best DVD player software ever created?
Beeblebrox: Am I missing something or did you just answer your own question?
No, I don’t think so.
Let me put it this way. If I had said that the Mac DVD Player was better than the Dell DVD player (which I’ve used and it sucks) would you have asked me: “what exactly dos a DVD player need to do other than simply play DVDs”? Of course not. Because you answered your own question by explaining just how and why the Dell DVD player is inferior to the Mac DVD player.
Likewise, the Mac DVD player is inferior to Power DVD. Ease of use features like simple screen captures and navigation. Playback features like presets using Smart Stretch and different aspect ratio configs, audio features like Dolby Headphone and room adjustments.
If you haven’t used it, then you really don’t know what you’re missing. Hell any single feature I mentioned, particularly Dolby Headphone or Smart Stretch, is worth the price of admission all by itself.
and yet the FREE Windows Media Player (with only the Xvid codec and AC3 filter installed) runs every single one of them just fine.
For all it’s bad rap, WMP is actually a pretty darned good media player. And it even plays DVDs as well (although crappily). And unlike QT, it has playlist capability, something QT sorely needs.