No, you aren’t following what I am saying. A speculation from someone who doesn’t even work in IT about what SHOULD happen when a company changes platforms isn’t good enough for me. Sheesh, that’s even less useful than an anecdote, which is all we are getting this ‘PCs need more IT help than Macs’ hypothesis from in the first place. I was asking if anybody knew of any situations where an office changed platforms from PC to Mac (recently, I’ll concede that Macs stacked up better to PCs in the DOS days) and knew what changes had to be done with their IT department.
To offer some explanations why there might be a long-term need for more IT people when a company changes platforms…
-
There are a lot more PC-knowledgeable people working in tech support than Mac experts. Each tech is probably going to know several other people who could use a job. Maybe they are manipulating the company into thinking it needs more people so their friends can get a job.
-
There are schools that are turning out thousands of people with certification to work on PCs to meet demand, and a lot of them are not as knowledgeable as they should be. The company might not have been able to filter out the bad techs and has hired an inefficient group of techs. In my experience techs who really know Macs have been working with computers longer on average and generally taught themselves over taking some class, which I think is a better way to learn. There are equally knowledgeable PC techs, but there are a lot of people new to the field who will work for less.
-
PCs are not as childproof as Macs, as brought up before they will let you make changes in your system that a Mac won’t. Perhaps after the change of platforms some of the employees started messing with things they shouldn’t have and therefore had more computer problems than they should have - this can be prevented by being careful about assigning permissions to workstations, but did the company know that?
-
There is a LOT more recreational software available for PCs, and most home computers are PCs. People probably started installing games and time-killer programs off the internet or from their home systems that weren’t as available for the old platform. Anyone working in IT knows that when people start bringing in their favorite software from home there will be problems.
-
If the company had been using Macs for a long time, they probably (like most offices) had some non-IT people who knew enough that they were able to fix problems for their friends around the office so they didn’t have to call helpdesk, effectively reducing the workload for the IT department. They could have had problems all the time, but developed their own solutions and workarounds. After switching to a new platform, it’s going to be some time before workarounds and solutions for the new problems on the new platform are known to people outside of IT.
-
Many Mac users are zealous about their system of choice, and were probably upset when the office upgraded to PCs. A few stubborn people who blow problems out of proportion and refuse to learn how to deal with them themselves can really increase the workload of an IT department. I would resent it if they took away my PC and made me work on a Mac, and whenever I had the slightest problem I would probably bitch about it, instead of figuring out how to fix it myself.
-
Maybe the PCs they upgraded to were inferior and the contractors hired to set up their new system did not know what they were doing. They may have made a deal with Compaq (shudder) for a bunch of ancient Deskpros and chose the software based on price instead of research on what worked the most efficiently.
-
Some other change in the company around that time that was not mentioned in the post changed the atmosphere of the office, leading to more complaints - perhaps an influx of new employees, a change in the helpdesk hierarchy or procedures, or a change in the dealings with other companies which required them to do more with their computers than they had to before.
I am not as well-equipped to reply to this, but until Joey, Stoid or AHunter can get here, I’ll give it a shot…
Oh puleeeeze. I can see this happening in rare cases, but really? Come on. That sounds a little too Conspiracy Theory to me. Sorry, not buying it.
Hmmm…maybe. But I should think that after a period of settling in, either the badly trained techs would learn more, get weeded out, or whatever. I don’t see this as convincing proof that the need for a LOT more IT help would stay very high forever. Which seems to be the case.
So. You’re basically saying that PCs are more difficult and unforgiving. (“Childproof” is sooo condescending.) I won’t argue with you there.
But part of the problem (that I have seen on my PC) is that a lot more software doesn’t “play well together” on a PC. I don’t think this is something to excuse away. It shouldn’t be that way. True, the employees shouldn’t be putting on their own software on the PCs, but if the damned PC is too forgiving to handle it, I think the blame is on the PC for that.
Or, in other words, Macs are so much easier to fix. So the average Joe could fix many problems without getting the IT guy. I mean, that’s what I do. I hit on my MSCE friend to help me out on my PC, but I need no help for my Mac. And I started out on a PC, and have more hands-on experience with it. I think it is quite likely that (at least these days) many workers are more than familiar with PCs already. But they might be like me. They don’t find them as easy to fix. Hence the need for the IT guy.
Up to a point, maybe. But after a while, I’d expect that to settle down. I mean, a lot of these things you are bringing up sound plausable for the first few months (or whatever) but don’t wash as an explanation for why there is a need for IT help for the long-term.
Maybe if they did research on what worked the most effiently, they’d stick with their Macs! 
Well, since some PCs are crap, and they picked crap, who is to blame? I cannot answer whether this may be true in some cases - it probably is. But I doubt that it explains it for every instance this has happened.
Sounds far-fetched and remote. And once again, I’d expect that after a certain period of time, things would settle down and the need for IT help would go down to the same level it was at before the change.
[/quote]
I’ve worked in tech support and help-desk jobs for the last 5 years, and it’s not unusual. HR is often totally clueless and believes what the IT management tells them. IT management is frequently promoted for people skills over technical skills and believes what the ‘old hands’ tell them. And ‘old hands’ often have a friend or daughter or cousin who needs a job. Nepotism is big in this line of work.
Again, you don’t really have a handle on how IT works. They are often the department least accountable for their actions (because the people in charge don’t understand what they do and realize how dependent they are on them) and people who remain in their jobs the longest tend NOT to be the most technically brilliant (who soon move up to much higher paying jobs or start their own businesses) but the people who have the best interpersonal networking skills. Even at a very technically oriented company (the one I work for) our help desk gets away with a lot of stuff, spend most of their time goofing off, and their job could probably be done better by 1/4 as many people.
Don’t put words in my mouth. There is nothing ‘difficult’ or ‘unforgiving’ about having the capability to tweak your system more easily. There are controls that can be put into place to keep the user from doing this, but these are OPTIONAL on a PC (while it takes a lot of work to keep a Mac from automatically trying to decide what you REALLY want to do). I know a lot about Windows NT but I wouldn’t be able to cause many weird, difficult-to-troubleshoot problems with my workstation because I don’t have the permissions I need to change those settings - I work for an ISP, and they know how to set up networks.
Again, you can set up a workstation to not allow you to install new programs on it, or to only allow installation of certain kinds. One of the good things about PCs is that anyone can make software for them. Of course, bad software is going to be made. This is not a flaw in the platform, and it is the fault of the company and it’s employees if it is allowed to become a problem on their machines.
Again putting words in my mouth. In my experience (I have troubleshot both platforms), once you have a problem it is far more difficult to diagnose and fix on a Mac. Your results may vary. I’m saying that if a company has been using one platform for a while, the employees are going to know it’s quirks and know workarounds for most problems they encounter. What I am describing is a universal problem - switching from PC to Mac, Mac to PC, any change is going to have this effect.
In my experience, people can hold grudges for a long time, and they can spread to others - let’s say said Mac zealot is experiencing a common recurring problem that he COULD fix himself but calls helpdesk and bitches about each time it happens. He sits next to a new employee who runs into the same problem. He’s going to hear about how the company has gone to hell since they switched to PCs, it’s all the managements fault, and they should call helpdesk and give them hell whenever this problem comes up. In the old days the new employee would simply be told ‘This happens sometimes, this is what you do to fix it’.
Who is to blame? The company. The manufacturer of the bad software the company bought. The makers of the crappy PCs or the salesman who convinced them that 5 year old computers would do the job for them. Some Macs are better than others, Mac users have very strong preferences in OS versions, and some of them had real problems.
What’s so far-fetched about it? A change as big as switching witch platform your company uses might well be the result of changes in how the company is run.
You know, since I am not (as I admitted before) the most well-equipped person to go into the IT thing, I won’t exhaust myself with it right now. Though I have to say, I am not that convinced. I mean, sure, a certain amount of what you say might be an element, some of the time. But I keep hearing tales of the need for MUCH more IT help when a place switches to PC, and I just don’t think that it can all be explained away. Not when it (apparently) happens so often. It sounds like you are grasping for any explanation, rather than acknowledge that the most obvious explanation is right in front of you. But really, I’d best let Joey or someone else take it from here, because they have witnessed this phenomenon first-hand.
I started to look for cites on this Mac vs. PC thing on Google, and I actually stumbled upon an old thread I started on MacFixit! I started it last year, when I hadn’t been into Macs for that long. This thread had quite a life to it. Some of what is discussed there is verrry interesting. Sure, they are almost all Mac people, and they show that bias. But I don’t believe they were fabricating some of the tales they told about the difference between working with Macs vs. PC in the publishing/graphics area. So, check it out!
http://www.macfixit.com/ultimate/Forum8/HTML/001135.html
Badtz:
Are you suggesting that PC techs are less ethical than Mac techs? [wink]
I agree, most Mac gurus tend to be competent generic computer gurus. They’re self-taught, because they can… You seem to be making our point.
Again, you reinforce our point.
This happens with Macs, as well. The difference is that with Macs there is less liklihood of a conflict.
Agreed, however I point out that not only does it reduce IT workload, it fixes the problem quicker so productivity improves. Again, you reinforce the point that Macs require less IT than PCs…
Can I quote you on some of these? Really, you seem to be making arguments for the other side…
Actually, that was a big problem when we were a Mac-based shop, as well. As you can imagine, most people had PCs at home, so the Mac Help desk was constantly inundated with problems and questions that were based in confusion between the two platforms and PC zealots that wanted to demonstrate how inferior the Mac platform really was.
Side track: Are you suggesting that some PCs are better than others? [sarcasm] Maybe that’s why some are cheaper than others…
We’ve marched down this road already in this thread. It still has not been demonstrated that PCs allow users to tweak their systems any more or any easier than Macs. Until you demonstrate this, that argument doesn’t hold any water.
I have no earthly idea what you’re talking about. The Mac has various optional levels of access control (more than the PC, as far as I can tell). I think that what you view as “Macs trying to decide what you want to do” are really cases of Mac behavior being DIFFERENT than what you expect. Maybe if you cite some examples, I’ll understand your point better.
Another side track: What does this suggest about the user friendliness of the PC platform. This is sound advice for a corporation and many corporations have just such policies, but it doesn’t sound very attractive from a home user perspective.
My results do vary. For software issues I can almost always restart without the extensions and quickly narrow down the source of the problem on a Mac. It’s much more difficult to do this with a PC. For hardware issues, well, I simply don’t have enough data. The only hardware problem I ever had with any of my Macintoshes was with a third party monitor. I had a friend who had a problem with a third party video card. As I’ve stated before, all of my PCs have had various hardware problems (On my laptops: a detached keyboard interface, a bad PCMCIA interface, a bad NIC, an LCD driver problem - On my desktop: a hard disk crash). When I survey my friends and family I find that nearly all of them have had multiple failures with their PCs, as well. While I’m sure the fact that I have more friends with PCs than Macs and that people tend to complain about their problems more than they praise their computers, maybe this is not overly scientific study, but I’m certinaly not convinced by your argument.
This is a valid point, though in my case, I can’t think of any other changes that might be a contributing factor.
Well, the 3 Mac gurus I know don’t know squat about PC’s. They only know the “G4 is better than Pentium” line. However, like what Batz said, techs who REALLY know Macs to the core have been using and teaching themselves the platform longer than PC guys.
I’ve only been using computers for 2 years, and I can tinker with the registry somewhat without totally killing my system (And, like a smart user, I keep this wonderful creation called a BACKUP registry!).
This doesn’t necessarily mean PC’s are ‘easier’ than PC’s, but this DOES mean it’s not as difficult as you make it out to be.
No he doesn’t. He’s saying Windows can be customized in ways that Mac OS can’t. By allowing this level of software tweaking, it also allows the potential for system damage. To screw up the registry, you must either A) fiddle with settings when you don’t know what you’re doing, B) Install/Uninstall poorly developed software software (I can think of a few specific programs I have that are very poorly programmed and must be installed just right or I’ll get file missing errors), or C) Catch a virus in an undefended system.
Which is, of course, due to Apple’s proprietary standards. Windows has just basic standards, which allows easier programming at the cost of allowing poorly developed software.
Well Joey, I seem to be reading completely different stuff than you, because I see Batz making completely different statements. I read this as Mac users in businesses tend to learn Mac OS and thus can help others who might be new or are just not computer people, while PC users in businesses just use the OS. If someone just uses Windows for the tasks they are assigned, how will they know how to deal with a problem?
Well, there are tweak a Windows system.
The first is at the hardware level, through the ‘antiquated’ BIOS. In BIOS, you can assign specific IRQ’s to specific hardware devices, you can enable different memory caching levels, you can overclock your processor, you can change the system bus speed, etc.
The second is at the system software level. In Windows, doing this is as simple as clicking Start/Run/ and typing regedit. While it is easy to get to this point, it is easy to mess up when you get there (Which is the inherant problem with the registry tweaking possible in Windows). From there you can do pretty much ANYTHING with tweaking Windows, you just need to know what you’re doing.
It depends which Windows OS you’re talking about. They may look the same, but they are COMPLETELY different. Win98/ME has very limited controls in an individual machine, while NT/2000 have much great acces controls, which I’d be willing to bet is greater than the access control available to Mac users (except maybe in OS X).
I don’t see how this is unattractive, either. It doesn’t sound unfriendly to a user to me. The PC platform has NOTHING to do with a program’s structure and quality.
[quote]
For software issues I can almost always restart without the extensions and quickly narrow down the source of the problem on a Mac. It’s much more difficult to do this with a PC./b]
That’s not necessarily true. For software problems I can almost always restart my system, and I will usually never see this problem again (not difficult). For more difficult problems or recurring problems, such as an application crashing consistantly, I’ve found uninstalling and reinstalling fixes it (not difficult). For the most difficult of problems (Such as a missing .dll), I’ve found that software documentation almost ALWAYS contains troubleshooting info for (a little difficult). And for the mother of all problems (registry errors), replacing the registry with a backup is almost guaranteed to fix it (a little difficult).
Now, when you delete critical system files, you should simply be slapped. Then your system gets formatted and reinstalled (moderately difficult), and if you’re smart, you have an emergency repair disk (not difficult to make) so you don’t have to spend a lot of time configuring your system again.
[sarcasm]Where do you buy your systems? Compaq?[/sarcasm]
This is one fundamental problem with buying prebuilt systems. Many companies try to cut costs by providing cheap hardware (Generic modems, generic NICs, generic everything), and then still charge you for the same price as better hardware (I’ve noticed that they generally charge extreme amounts for RAM. At most places it’s roughly $200 for 256 MB, but I can go to any local retailer and get 512 MB for $150. They do this with MANY components). Also, some manufacturers simply make crappy laptops (There isn’t really a laptop architecture standard). I’ve found IBM, Dell, and Gateway make pretty reliable systems. I’ve also noticed that Compaq sucks ass. HP’s used to be horrible, but they’ve improved in the past couple years.
I’ve had my custom built system for over a year now, and I have not yet had a single hardware problem.
When I survey my friends and family about problems they have, I ask them: What did you do last? I’ve recieved various answers. My younger brother refuses to answer my questions when he successfully crashes my system (playing a game), it doesn’t take me long to find out he was using game hacks at the time. When my dad’s old computer stopped working, he said the stupid thing was a piece of crap (What really happened was that he had spilled Coke in it, and no computer could survive that).
The number one answer I’ve gotten from my friends? “I tried to tweak my system”. This includes overclocking the processor, FSB, graphics card, and tinkering with the registry (Do NOT play with your registry! You risk completely trashing your system).
The best answer I’ve encountered recently: My friend ran a program sent to him over AIM file transfer, which sent his IP address, MAC address, computer name, open port numbers to the guy (he didn’t even know the guy)…well, let’s say it didn’t take long for his system to be hacked and destroyed (Don’t run progs from people you don’t know!!).
<giggle>
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=68739
I know I shouldn’t laugh…
<snort>
Monster:
I don’t doubt that. My point is that most of the people I know, who I would label as a Mac guru are computer engineers, software engineers, and other computer professionals - people who have been working on mainframes, minis, and unix workstations for years. However, the Mac gurus tend to not like PCs - so it’s not surprising that they don’t know the details of the Windows OS or PC hardware. I said generic - not universal.
So far, the only tweaking capabilities, that have been discussed, that Windows has that the MacOS doesn’t have, indicate that it’s more dangerous to mess with your Windows OS. More (potential) danger, to me, seems consistent with more IT support required (potentially).
Well, the MacOS doesn’t have a registry, but it’s not immune to any of these three problems. The difference is that it’s much rarer that any of these problems will be encountered on a Mac and it’s much easier to recover on a Mac.
I think you are mistaken. It’s not the proprietary standards that limit conflicts in the Mac OS - it’s the well defined, well documented, open ones.
Windows has poorly defined standards that encourage software developers to do their own thing. It’s developer documentation lacks sufficient guidelines to insure that programmers don’t do anything likely to conflict. I’ve programmed in both environments and the Mac is much more disciplined (some might say rigid).
Exactly. So which user is going to get back to their normal productivity levels faster? The Mac guy who fixes his problem on the fly (or has his buddy do it), or the PC guy who has to wait in the IT queue to have his problem resolved?
Well, you’ve got me there. Since the Mac hardware doesn’t use dedicated hardware device IRQs, we can’t very well tweak them. So what’s the advantage of assigning specific IRQs to specific devices??? I know the answer, I just want to hear you say it…
You do this in software on a Mac.
Yep, you can do this on a Mac, as well - in fact, my main system is overclocking both the CPU and system bus.
So what, specifically, do you think you can do with RegEdit that you can’t do in the MacOS with either control panels or other tools? I can’t think of anything.
I think you’d lose that bet, but I’m game to test your theory. I don’t have much time at the moment, but here’s a challenge - if you’re up to it. I’ll list all of the access control mechanisms that I can think of in both WindowsNT and the MacOS - I’ll try to post this later this evening. In the mean time, you research the WindowsNT access controls to make sure I don’t miss anything. I do most of the work… what a deal!
Maybe it’s just the spoiled Mac mentality in me, but I can’t imagine not being able to install software whenever I see fit. Windows users do it less frequently because they are afraid…
I decided to run a little experiment. I counted the approximate number of applications and utilities that I have installed on my PC (less than 100) - which is, incidentally, much higher than the norm around here. Then I counted the same for my Macintosh (more than 800).
I’d be willing to bet that you’d see that trend repeated with most Mac and PC users, maybe not at an 8-to-1 ratio, but still significant. I’m not sure how we’d test that theory though… My point is that it’s less risky to install software on a Macintosh than on a PC and, likewise, uninstall it. Therefore, this is one contributing factor to the lower tech support requirements on a Macintosh.
I was talking about software conflicts between DLLs and processes running in the background or in the System Tray. Simply restarting will not typically eliminate these kinds of problems. Instead, you need a tool to selectively constrain startup processes. On the Mac, the Extension Manager is built in to the OS. On the PC I used to use a tool called StartCop, but it seems to have some conflicts itself, so I don’t use it anymore (I have not found a replacement).
Unless you’re running WindowsNT… which I am, so I can’t.
My desktop was a Compaq. My laptops were all Dells. We also have IBMs, HPs, Toshibas, and a few other assorted brands. None of them seem to be immune from frequent problems.
Exactly!!! I am very careful and cautious these days about installing software on my PC. (My MSCE buddy gave me a whole lecture about this.) No such worries about my Mac. Though I have to say, I am so gun-shy from my Windows experience, it’s taking a while to adjust to the concept that I can just install something on my Mac, without having to stress over it beforehand.
JoeyBlades:
Since nobody uses QuickDraw 3D on the PC, this is irrelevant. The PC has plenty of 3D accelerators, they’re just designed for Direct3D and OpenGL.
There are wireless networks and video capture cards for the PC, too.
Yes, dust buildup is bad. But I haven’t heard anyone suggesting that air cooling itself is bad.
Also, about installing software. I haven’t checked the thread for a couple days, but it seems you’re talking about the Windows security policies that can prevent workstation users from installing applications.
What’s wrong with that? If a sysadmin decides the workstations are supposed to be used for running AutoCAD and Excel, not Unreal Tournament, why not let him enforce that?
Otherwise, I’ve never been “afraid” of installing a program. Basically every program with a professional installer also has a professional uninstaller, so a couple clicks in the Add/Remove Programs control panel will restore any files that were replaced, remove the registry settings, etc.
yosemitebabe:
On my PowerBook, I have dozens of programs that were copied over to it from my previous computer, a 7100 (which is, incidentally, still in daily use with its RAM maxed out and a G3 accelerator card from Sonnet giving it new zing), and perhaps 1/4 of those were copied to the 7100 from the computer that preceded that, my SE (which was in daily use up until the accelerator card shorted out around 1996). These are all programs that I use on my current computer that were not installed there, just copied over wholesale, in some cases 2nd-generation copying. Among them: Adobe Photoshop; Microsoft Excel; Metatools Bryce; Macromedia SoundEdit 16; Filemaker Pro; Netscape Navigator; Adaptec Toast; Norton Utilities; Dantz Retrospect; BBEdit Lite; Nisus Writer; MacWrite Pro; Spanish Assistant; WordPerfect; ResEdit; …
I have my PowerBook’s internal ATA hard drive partitioned into 7 volumes, of which all but two are bootable. One of the bootable partitions is Mac OS X, which deserves special consideration, so I’ll ignore that one. All of the above-mentioned applications and a basketful of others that were installed for the first time on the PowerBook run regardless of which partition I’m booted from. Now and then I have to either re-enter some preferences and setup information (and registration codes for shareware) or else copy the relevant preferences files from the System:Preferences folder of a more commonly booted partition; and every once in awhile I find it necessary to copy an extension or control panel from the Extensions or Control Panels folders of the drive that was booted when installation occurred to the current drive before an app will work when booted from that drive. (The worse offender so far being Microsoft, the Excel of which requires nine or ten proprietary extensions, but they are well-labeled and don’t patch system code at startup so they can be copied over at any time and no reboot is required).
On more than one occasion I’ve launched an application that wasn’t installed on any of my own volumes but was instead installed on someone else’s computer that was available over the network, including Macromedia Freehand 8, Microsoft Excel (more recent than my own version), Microsoft Word (don’t use it, can’t stand it), and a later version of Photoshop launched by accident (could have used my own, accidentally double-clicked hers).
In the PC world, I’ve seen at best a diminished form of this kind of portability, and only in relatively ancient DOS programs like WordPerfect 5.1 (which, if you copy the entire folder from one PC to another, works just find on the destination PC).
I did once manage to transfer a properly installed copy of Microsoft Excel from one PC to another over the network and got it to work on the destination machine, but it took hours and a hell of a lot of trial and error and I was never sure that I was finished (i.e., the user might invoke some function I hadn’t checked and get an error message about “can’t find such-and-such”), but the CDROM was fried on that box so it was necessary.
So you’re saying software piracy is easier on a Mac?
Well, my MSCE friend (who has been into computers, building his own, etc., since 1978) would disagree with you. He gave me dire warnings about not installing any old software I wanted on my PC. He says he’s very careful about what he installs on his systems.
And, I have found that many of these professional uninstallers don’t always work. AOL, for instance. I installed a trial of AOL, hated it after a day, tried to uninstall - but the uninstall thing wasn’t there. Not in the folder that held the application, not in Windows “Add - Remove software”. Nowhere. I called AOL tech support, and they just told me that the only thing I could do was just trash the AOL folder. And I’ve had it happen with other applications. An old version of Paint Shop Pro comes to mind. I remember a version of Netscape a while back that gave me problems. Couldn’t frigging get rid of it!
AHunter: Yes! Isn’t it great! I am just starting to learn this! I have accidentally run programs off of Zip disks. Blew my mind!
Mr2001:
You’ve obviously not been paying attention.
My, we do have a short attention span, don’t we. First, I was talking about PCMCIA cards that support built-in antennas. However, Monster pointed out that there are some Sony computers with built-in antennas.
I was not talking about video capture cards, I was referring to specialty audio capture cards for music recording and sound manipulation. Again, look above for more clarification.
Not the cooling - the laminate air flow - a by product of the cooling fan air flow.
Nothing, but that was not the point that was made. We were discussing how it seems to be more risky to install software on PC platforms and Badtz wrote:
My comment was that this is not a very practical solution for the average user (i.e. not a company machine).
My, we are naive. Uninstallers are often not completely effective… they quite often tell me that they were unable to complete the task. Sometimes they are wrong about whether a shared DLL is still in use by another program and users may elect to remove the DLL. On the other hand, I’ve seen the other problem where a program installation replaces an existing DLL that then causes a conflict - the remove application then fails to remove the offending DLL and of course, has no way to restore the original, anyway…
Badtz:
No actually, this was really a back door suggestion that there is a lot of high quality freeware available for the Mac. [wink] Piracy is a lot easier on the PC - there are a lot more PC users to share with.
You know, this is why I believe AOL is hated even MORE than Windows. Even though I can tolerate the “faults” of Windows, I CANNOT stand AOL.
And one nitpick for Babe, it’s MCSE (Microsoft Certified System Engineer).
I’ll try to get back to some stuff that I think has been misread/misinterpreted. For now, I gotta go start trying out the Windows XP Beta 2 I just recieved in the mail today…
Monster:
OK. As promised, here’s my security analysis (ignoring OS X).
I’ll start with the Mac (OS 9), then follow up with the NT similarities and exceptions (sorry I don’t know Win2K, so there may be some subtle differences).
At the very simplest level, the Mac allows you to replace the Finder (the desktop interface) with AtEase. Granted, this is really only useful for kids and other novice users, but it does offer various levels of security. With AtEase, an administrator can restrict access to Control Panels, the System Folder, applications, document folders, etc…
At the next level, there’s the Simple Finder and various switches to restrict menus, restrict access to the System and Applications folders, etc… It’s more secure than the standard Finder interface, but less restrictive than the AtEase interface.
For serious security, there’s “Multiple Users”. This is very similar to the user login available in WindowsNT (except the MacOS offers more individual configurability for each user). Like Windows (and unix) the MacOS lets the users set owner, user, group, and world privledges for applications, files, and folders. These privledges control what users can do on the given machine, connect to the machine to see which disks, which files via File Sharing, Web Sharing, and FTP, link to shared applications, and connect from the WAN (internet). I don’t know if WindowsNT actually supports all of these options, but I’m giving it the benefit of the doubt.
In addition to these global security capabilities, there are some local privledges for some critical system tools. The following utilities (Control Panels) support individual access control to allow Basic access, Advanced Access, and Administrative access: AppleTalk, Internet, Modem, Remote Access, and TCP/IP (there may be others). This is notable if you don’t want to implement global security measures, but do want to keep casual users from upsetting critical network configurations.
The Mac OS has built-in (integrated) file encription.
The MacOS let’s you use a Voiceprint password to log in to your system.
On laptops, the MacOS let’s you lock a disk with password encryption. This is important, because you can daisy chain computers via the SCSI bus and use a laptop machine as a shared disk. Obviously you don’t want people to be able to hijack your data without some form of encription.
Finally, the MacOS has the KeyChain feature that let’s you keep track of multiple passwords for various secure services. These “keys” are are protected and accessed via your master password (or Voiceprint).
So… Windows NT doesn’t have anything like AtEase or Simple Finder (though I admit these are only useful for limiting novice users). Also, I’m sure there are Windows equivalents that may be available, but I’m only talking about security measures that are integrated into the OS. WindowsNT certainly supports multiple users with access controls and configurations. I don’t know of anything equivalent to the security controls for specific Control Panels. For file encription, you have to resort to third party tools in Windows. Same thing for key chains. I’m not aware of a Voiceprint password capability for Windows…
So what security features does WindowsNT have that the Mac doesn’t? The only thing I can think of is the “Vulcan Neck Pinch” (CTRL-ALT-DEL). I mention this because I’ve been told that this is a critical piece of the NT security model - though, no one has ever been able to explain the exact role that this key combination plays.
Maybe you can think of some others?
JoeyBlades:
OK, what are five PC products that use QuickDraw 3D and don’t support Direct3D or OpenGL?
Ah. In that case, I direct you to the Sound Blaster Live.
Anyway, if it’s just a PCI audio capture card, why can’t it work with the PC too?
I’ll interpret that as the Royal We. 
Typically that means that you have configuration files, documents, saved games, etc. in the program directory - things that the installer didn’t put there. Everything is deleted but those files.
There’s always the handy “No” button.
I’ll agree that managing applications is easier on the Mac, but that’s because of the way PC applications tend to be designed, not because of any flaw in the OS.
The installer puts files in several directories (when the DLLs could just be put in the application’s directory) and writes settings to the registry. The application depends on the settings being written by the installer, even though they could be initialized when the program is run.
But with well-designed applications, that isn’t a problem. I’m the author of a popular IRC client, and installing my program means downloading a file and unzipping it. Nothing tricky is required to move it to another location or even another computer. Many other programs work the same way.
JoeyBlades:
Please describe this greater degree of configurability. Can I have a single profile that follows me around to whichever workstation I decide to log in on, like I can with Windows?
Windows 2000 lets you use a smart card. A voice print can be foiled with a $5 tape recorder.
And yet when Windows includes something that MacOS doesn’t, you aren’t quite so picky.
I’m not familiar with NT4, but Windows 2000 has a very detailed applet called “Group Policy”, which lets you enable or disable hundreds of aspects of the system, on a per-user, per-group basis, or system-wide basis. You can also edit these settings (and most other settings) over the network, of course.
As far as the control panel goes, I can disable control panel entirely, disable specific applets, enable only specific applets, and customize several aspects of Add/Remove Programs, Display (disable changing background, disable screen savers, etc), Printers, and Regional Options.
Windows 2000: Right-click file, Properties, Advanced, Check ‘Encrypt contents to secure data’.
I don’t know if I’d call it critical.
Ctrl-alt-del is intercepted at a very low level, so when you press it, you are guaranteed to get a response from the OS - not a rogue program posing as the OS. While you’re logged on, ctrl-alt-del brings up a box where you can lock the console, start Task Manager, shut down, or change your password.
The system can also be set to require uses to press ctrl-alt-del to get the login screen (this was the default in NT4). That way, they can be sure that their password isn’t being intercepted by a program that just looks like the login screen.
The critical part is that, due to NT’s multitasking scheme and memory protection, you really are guaranteed to get a response from the OS itself. Correct me if I’m wrong, but from what I’ve seen, it’d be pretty easy to write a Mac program that would worm its way into the OS and bypass various security features.
I see that the audio capture card has already been addressed by you and Monster, so please disregard that section of my post. I apologize for not being more attentive.