5 reasons why Macs will never come loaded with Windows Vista

Why there is so much speculation amongst critics and writers outside the Apple realm about the possibility of Apple loading their machines with either Windows or Linux escapes me; however, I want to put the critics to bed with a few reasons why Apple would never be so foolish as to advocate the use of alternate operating systems on its machines.

ZDNet writer Adrian Kingsley-Hughes recently wrote an article which proposed the best way for Apple to increase its success was to offer machines loaded with Windows and even Linux in exchange for Apple’s own OS. This is the same old, repetitive, mind-dulling logic that infects the Windows using world; here is your answer to why that might be the worst solution for Apple’s succes:

1. OS X is, if not the best, one of the best OS’s on the planet today. That isn’t fanboy speak; its simply fact. I challenge you to find a safer, more reliable, more system-light operating system on the market that is user-friendly and enjoyable. Many Linux users feel their individual iterations are great; I won’t negate those feelings, because everyone is entitled to choice. However, to imply that any version of Windows is at all worth Apple’s time and well being to market in addition to its own OS is simply laughable. That would be like saying, “Sure, we here at the Hilton provide the best lodging available, but we’re seriously considering offering lack-luster, low-quality, smoke-filled rooms…you know, everyone deserves a choice, and we’re trying to market to everyone.”

2. Windows is available, if not pushed, by every other computer manufacturer today; why on earth would people turn to Apple hardware to use the same OS they can get on a $300 Dell? Though Apple machines do include high-end options like Blutooth, built in iSight, Firewire, etc., the “look” itself really doesn’t justify spending a moderate amount of money for something you can get cheaper…you pay for the OS in addition to Apple support, looks, and options.

3. Apple could never support Windows from a customer support perspective; imagine telling those friendly Apple reps they need to start training to fix Windows problems on a Mac…you’d have a lot of recent Apple employees flooding the market. It would be foolish to endorse an OS that is faulty in many ways, and really would tarnish the shiny reputation of both Apple and OS X that Steve Jobs has worked so hard to establish.

4. By providing Windows loaded on Macs, Apple would just become another Sony, HP, or Gateway, but with a flashier face and another option (OS X). Right now, Apple’s popularity is based on their uniqueness in both image and product. Why join the ranks of countless computer manufacturers who are all vying for a small piece of the industry pie when Apple has the ability and is currently baking its own pie, all for itself? In his article, Kingsley-Hughes quotes CNET writer Tom Krazit, who doesn’t think that people necessarily identify with the “image” of Apple because of iPods:

“Are you more likely to buy an HP PC because you own (and like) your HP printer? Are you more likely to buy a Sony television because you’ve spent thousands of quality hours with your PlayStation 2? Maybe, maybe not.”

What Krazit and Kingsley-Hughes mistakenly assume is that Apple is simply another mass electronic manufacturer that produces items similar to the rest of the technology world. The truth of the matter is that Apple is one of a kind, and to directly answer their inference: YES! People will and do buy Apple machines because they love their iPods; however, more accurately people buy Apple products in general because they really love the products, regardless of how they were introduced to Apple.

By defacing the unique image Apple now holds and selling Windows with Macs, Apple really would become another Sony or HP in short order; how is that success?

5. Apple has already arrived at the best possible solution for switchers that need what MacDailyNews calls the “insecurity blanket” of Windows in addition to OS X: Bootcamps. They don’t officially support Windows, because obviously that opens up a whole new Pandora’s Box of issues they would have to support…and frankly who wants that hellish existence? Everyone knows Macs CAN run Windows, and those that want to own Macs and run Windows are doing so happily (although I would gander most users eventually switch completely to OS X once they realize they can perform the exact same tasks in a safer, more user-friendly interface). What does Apple stand to gain from putting that poison on their machines before it reaches consumers’ hands?

That, Mr. Kingsley-Hughes, is your answer to why you can never expect to see the infection that is Windows pre-loaded on any Mac. And as a side note, I would appreciate if you could spread this article to all of your Windows-loving cohorts so they can stop suggesting it. The inference comes across as presumptuous that having Windows on a Mac could only benefit Apple, and let’s be honest…pre-loading Windows on Macs would only be slightly less ridiculous in concept than pre-loading AOL. That won’t be happening either.

• 

• Windows users pray for increase in Mac HaXXors
• Apple releases Bootcamp 2.1; Windows XP, Vista 32-bit, and Vista 64-bit are updated
• Apple Macs really really are cheaper than Windows machines
• New ‘Get a Mac’ ads slam Windows Vista
• Mac’s low popularity makes it look more secure than Windows