Apples newest commercials. &A#JD1Tg!d8!' 2739

I agree. That particular ad is not realistic. Most certainly iLife runs rings around anything Microsoft bundle. But they should have made that clear by putting the MS bundled stuff on the table for comparison. I expect they considered this inconvenient within a 30 second ad. Their loss.

Keep learning iMovie. You will quickly change your mind.

Again, keep learning and you will get it. The best book for learning all the little kewl things in Mac OS X is by the great David Pogue: 'Mac OS X, The Missing Manual.' Robin Williams writes the very best beginner level Mac books, but I think you will like Pogue better. If you want to learn Mac OS X out-the-ears-to-the-max then I suggest 'Mac OS X Unleashed' by Ray and Ray. It is more of a geek level book without the humor of Pogue or Williams.

The Walt Mossberg review in The Wallstreet Journal and the lack of any kind of similar review for a Windows PC is real.

The marriage of iLife applications such that they are seamlessly interoperable is real.

The ad about malware for Windows versus Mac OS X is actually a big fat blunder in favor of Windows. I am ashamed that Apple blew that one. Windows actually has over 150,000 pieces of documented malware, according to McAfee. Apple would have made an even better impression if they had gotten their facts straight.

So, from those ads I have seen, what I consider unrealistic is the buttertion that the only bundled apps with Windows are the calculator and clock. Poorly done.

Kewlness. I think everyone should support it.

Sorry, but if you look at the actual lists of vulnerabilities in Windows versus any other operating system you will immediately change your mind. There are arguments that Windows is more thoroughly analyzed for security holes. I am willing to bet that helps. I also think that one reason that reported Mac OS X vulnerabilities has doubled in the last year is due to a similar situation. But the shear number of Windows vulnerabilities, and the stunning stupidity in programming that caused some of them is undeniable.

Maybe this is in one sense a question of the target size. Maybe crackers just want to get attention and planting the most used operating system gives them the biggest rush. But does this explain the fact that there are more than 86 times more pieces of malware per machine for Windows than Mac OS X? You explanation is kind of a stretch.

My experience tells me that:

A) Mac OS X is not perfect, there are vulnerabilities, there are exploits.

But:

B) Microsoft have a long history of not giving a damn about security. Over time they have repeatedly said they were doing something to improve themselves and their software programming, and yet the security holes keep being discovered in high numbers.

I think with Vista that Microsoft are making a real stab at actual, reliable security. The firewall is supposed to be more usable and stealthy. The user accounts are supposed to be better locked down to help stop rogue processes. We'll see. For now it's all just delayed vaporware.

-- Fortune Magazine, 11-29-05: What's your computer setup today? Frederick Brooks: I happily use a Macintosh. It's not been equalled for ease of use, and I want my computer to be a tool, not a challenge. Frederick Brooks is the author of 'The Mythical Man Month'. He spearheaded the movement to modernize computer software engineering in 1975