Poll: Do you think Apple should port Safari to Windows? [Archive]

shadowfax

May 23, 2003, 12:47 AM

Originally posted by usersince86
I'm a DEDICATED Mac/Apple fan, but...

Wouldn't it make more sense to make Safari better than IE on the Mac BEFORE porting it to Windows???

Maybe the GM version will be much improved, but, as much as we might not like it, I'm guessing MANY more Mac users still use IE over Safari.

(Hope I'm wrong...) i think you're wrong. i think that apple users have eaten safari up like a really big... i mean, they really like it. enough to use it more than IE. but windows is a totally different ball-field. there are some much better browsers to deal with.

jimthorn

May 23, 2003, 12:49 AM

I don't think Apple will ever port Safari to Windows. Why would they? The browser market is full, and the vast majority are freeware. Whether we like it or not, IE is still the standard in the industry (it should really be Mozilla, but that's another story...) and Windows users would have no reason to switch to Safari. Safari is a slick browser meant to complete Apple's suite of free apps that make up the OS X experience. Personally, I like it. But I just don't see what anyone would stand to gain by porting it.

mim

May 23, 2003, 01:28 AM

I voted yes.

There is a heap of good reasons why they should over in that other thread.

No, they shouldn't port it just for something to do, but there are wider issues at stake other than just providing Windows with another browser.

Think what Apple to best (other than create mad raving loonies who watch the Apple Store site to see if it's gone down that is...) - integration.

There's some other adgenda here (if the rumor is true).

awulf

May 23, 2003, 04:12 AM

I voted yes, I would use Safari on a windoze machine because Safari is small, fast and beats the hell out of IE. Mozilla is good but slow, Opera has banner ads.

But I wonder if Apple could make Safari on Windoze as good as they did in OS X.

I don't think Apple will realease a version for windoze, since it will upset M$ and Apple wouldn't gain any money from it.

boskie

May 23, 2003, 04:21 AM

...Just Cut them up like regular Chickens... ;)

Check out "Precursor"

The king of programmed beats... Check out more below @ Boskazaa - live every hour of every day!!!

gerror

May 23, 2003, 06:57 AM

I don't think it will be faster than IE.

MikeUnicode

May 23, 2003, 08:08 AM

Apple MUST make a version for Windows.

1) Make money by selling it -- To people who probably won't be able to switch to a mac for 2-4 years. Show them the Quality of Apple software.
2) Gives me a Browser, I can tell Upper Management,
that we need to be compatible with,
with our Web Code. Gives Businesses a reason to target the Mac browser.

Le Big Mac

May 23, 2003, 08:33 AM

IF nothing else, then I could use Safari at work as well as home. Damn office with Windows.

jkojima

May 23, 2003, 09:58 AM

I believe that Apple should focus on making better Mac software. When ClarisWorks (now AppleWorks) was avaiable for PC it hardly made any noise, and FileMaker is also just a bit player in the PC database scene. Safari, though a great program, would hardly be worthwhile to port - instead of expending resources (time, money and people) to porting it to Windows, Apple should focus on its core market, the Mac.

wdlove

May 23, 2003, 10:22 AM

Well it is still close 51.45% say no out of 1100 votes. I say let Apple be Apple!

mim

May 23, 2003, 10:29 AM

Originally posted by wdlove
I say let Apple be Apple!

Granny Smith, or Golden Delicious?

I say let Apple rule the WORLD! They couldn't do it any worse than Microspud.

Mr.Hey

May 23, 2003, 11:47 AM

Apple couldn't possibly make every website compatible with Safari so if they ported and gained a miner or large user base than what we have now , web developers would be forced to make their sites compatible, making it easier for Apple to focus on other projects like a video iPod :eek: ;)

macmusix

May 23, 2003, 11:52 AM

Safari should be compared to the others by a huge population. Safari is faster than others, but that's it's only advantage. So many sites just don't open correctly with Safari, buth they do with IE.

yzedf

May 23, 2003, 12:43 PM

What about Linux or the BSD variants? If it is a true upgrade from Konqueror, people might pay USD $5 for it. Sell it for USD $10 for Windows. Another revenue stream can't hurt, if it is done properly.

vniow

May 23, 2003, 01:21 PM

Originally posted by gerror
I don't think it will be faster than IE.

Ah ha...ah ha ha ha..AH HAHAHAHAHAHA!!

alset

May 23, 2003, 02:06 PM

There are a lot of people saying that Safari for Windows is pointless, as many PC users don't respect Apple products. Well, I guess the iPod for Windows must have been pointless, too. It only opened up a large sector of PC users to the possibility that Apple could make a unique and functional product, so it must have been a complete waste of time.

Dan

matty8r

May 23, 2003, 02:52 PM

You guys are kidding yourselves if you think MS users are going to drop explorer for the current state of Safari. Even if it is better, it just won't happen. At work, corporations standardize on browsers, at home, most fear trying new things. Bad idea. BAD IDEA! Besides, it's just one more reason to buy a mac.:D

In fact, I think Apple needs to chill on developing anything software for Windoze. Quicktime is fine, it's a standard. I'm even wary of them doing iTunes. Again, iTunes for windows is just one less reason to buy a mac.

noel4r

May 23, 2003, 03:28 PM

definitely, windows users need to see what they're missing by using windows...

iElvis

May 23, 2003, 04:14 PM

I would use Safari on my PC and install it on my friends PC's.

Wonder Boy

May 23, 2003, 04:15 PM

I voted yes on the condition that apple makes money by porting it, though I'm not sure how they could do that...

markjones05

May 23, 2003, 04:23 PM

Absolutely not. It should be a big selling point for apple. I know alot of people who would pay good money for no pop ups. I tell people who get hundreds of pop ups a day that i havnt gotten a pop up since i got my mac and they are baffled.

macdong

May 23, 2003, 08:13 PM

Originally posted by markjones05
Absolutely not. It should be a big selling point for apple. I know alot of people who would pay good money for no pop ups. I tell people who get hundreds of pop ups a day that i havnt gotten a pop up since i got my mac and they are baffled.

You have a point.
With existing IE, you'll have to pay for shareware or go with crappy free popup blocker.
Safari's built-in popup blocker COULD be a serious advantage.
Though M$ might deal with it soon...

Roger1

May 23, 2003, 08:50 PM

I think Apple should make it for the pc side. What they could do is have it as a free download on their website, or have it bundled with the itunes for pc when it comes out. That way, it will give people a chance to see other apple software in action.

shadowfax

May 23, 2003, 09:19 PM

Originally posted by macdong
You have a point.
With existing IE, you'll have to pay for shareware or go with crappy free popup blocker.
Safari's built-in popup blocker COULD be a serious advantage.
Though M$ might deal with it soon... that's not a point though. no idiot would switch platforms for no popups when Mozilla does the exact same thing and just as well. safari's popup blocker is a good idea, but not original in the least, and it's maybe the 4th browser in existence to actually have one.

shadowfax

May 23, 2003, 09:21 PM

Originally posted by vniow
Ah ha...ah ha ha ha..AH HAHAHAHAHAHA!! I'd be surprised if it were overall faster than the next browser microsoft releases to compete with it, if they bothered. they've always valued being the de facto browser of that operating system, and the internet itself.

macdong

May 23, 2003, 09:34 PM

Originally posted by Shadowfax
that's not a point though. no idiot would switch platforms for no popups when Mozilla does the exact same thing and just as well. safari's popup blocker is a good idea, but not original in the least, and it's maybe the 4th browser in existence to actually have one.

If Apple can make it great, it'll be more popular than Mozilla.
Bundle it with iTunes 4, and people will try it.
Then they'll be impressed (I hope).
I think it's not entirely pointless.

Nermal

May 23, 2003, 09:55 PM

There are heaps of browsers available for Windows, I don't think they want/need yet another one.

shadowfax

May 23, 2003, 09:59 PM

Originally posted by macdong
If Apple can make it great, it'll be more popular than Mozilla.
Bundle it with iTunes 4, and people will try it.
Then they'll be impressed (I hope).
I think it's not entirely pointless. mozilla already made it great. i think that apple used mozilla's technology to block popups. at any rate, a popup blocker is just that. there's not much of a margin for making it noticeably better.
i don't think they should bundle it with iTunes. if it's not free, it can never be worth it, IMO. mozilla is a basically flawless internet experience, or at least nearly so even if you could improve on it, you could never make your design worth enough to justify paying, when mozilla is free, IMO--at least, not for most people.

mim

May 23, 2003, 10:11 PM

Originally posted by Nermal
There are heaps of browsers available for Windows, I don't think they want/need yet another one.

Yup, too damn right.

And like everything for windows, there are 20 to choose from and all but 1 are usless junk.

And at the moment that 1 is FireDuck. It wins hands down.

I also can't believe people are saying that windows users would never change browser, and then in the same breath say that Safari is a selling point for the Mac.

Make up your mind :p

If it is released, Apple will make money off it exactly the same way that Microsoft does. Bundl-el-ling.,

joelc

May 23, 2003, 10:39 PM

The reason we all like Safari on the mac so much is its SPEED and a few handy features that people have mentioned are available in Mozilla, Opera, etc. Speed is my big one. IE on Mac OS X is painful. IE on WinXP is not. If I had a PC, I probably wouldn't use Safari. If I really wanted stuff like popup blocking and tabs, Safari would be nice, because the alternatives are slow. But IE is the standard, and it really is fast on decent(!) windoze machines

pEZ

May 23, 2003, 11:30 PM

Okay. I said no. But with this poll I had to think about it first.

I'm seeing this webpage on Safari right now - but if Apple had not come out with Safari, I'd be seeing this webpage with Camino. I haven't used IE for at least 8 or 9 months - because both Camino and Safari are faster, and they block pop-up ads.

First of all, the speed issue. Sure, Safari is faster than IE on a Mac. Netscape is faster than IE on a Mac. Molasses in winter is faster than IE on a Mac. But on a PC, people don't switch from IE to something else for speed issues - it's plenty fast if you have the connection to go with it.

On a windows machine, I can't see a reason for Apple to port Safari, because it would in no way help Apple - I take "the glass is half empty" approach and say that it would be one more reason for PC users to keep using the PC. Have Apple put a price on a web browser? Jeez, Phoenix isn't that bad if you have to pay for the slightly superior alternative. Why would I use Audion, Mint Audio, or MusicMatch when I have a perfectly good, cost-free iTunes at my fingertips? Also, there are plenty of ways to block popups on a PC if you look for them.

That's the bottom line of this entire long-winded post - you have to look for it. If someone has already looked for it, they won't see Safari and jump at the chance for Apple's new browser, because odds are that person is a hardcore PC user and scowl at all things Apple. And if they haven't looked for it, it's not natural on a PC to use anything but IE - whereas on a mac, it has become natural to use Safari.

Why am I using Safari right now and not Camino? Simply because everyone else uses it - both browsers do the exact same thing for me and they are also the exact same speed. The saturation method is the most extraordinary form of advertising. Safari would never saturate the Windows world.

shadowfax

May 23, 2003, 11:40 PM

Originally posted by mim
Yup, too damn right.

And like everything for windows, there are 20 to choose from and all but 1 are usless junk.

And at the moment that 1 is FireDuck. It wins hands down. i can't speak for the browser you've mentioned, but i can say that calling things like phoenix, opera, and mozilla "usless" junk is an opinion that can't be upheld by anything but utter idiocy. mozilla is an intensely useful browser, the features of which apple has copied to a startling degree. who do you think started "smart" popup blocking? how about "tabbed browsing?"I also can't believe people are saying that windows users would never change browser, and then in the same breath say that Safari is a selling point for the Mac.these two opinions aren't exclusive. and furthermore, who's expressed both of these opinions. i don't think anyone has said that windows users would not change browsers, just that they wouldn't have any reason to change to apple's. it has next to nothing on all the browsers in windows, certainly not enough to make it stand out at all. also, since when is safari a selling point for the Mac, and who has said this that's also said windows users won't change browsers? you're the first i've noticed to link those.If it is released, Apple will make money off it exactly the same way that Microsoft does. Bundl-el-ling., bundle with what? iLife? they don't have any windows software to bundle it with. and even if they did, it still probably wouldn't be a big hit.

pEZ

May 23, 2003, 11:47 PM

Originally posted by Shadowfax
bundle with what? iLife? they don't have any windows software to bundle it with. and even if they did, it still probably wouldn't be a big hit.

I totally agree with that one. That's like saying that we were suddenly all converts to MSN messenger just because it came bundled with Microsoft Office v.X.

shadowfax

May 23, 2003, 11:56 PM

Originally posted by pEZ
I totally agree with that one. That's like saying that we were suddenly all converts to MSN messenger just because it came bundled with Microsoft Office v.X. yeah. this is the age of broadband. microsoft IE got popular in an age when there was no way in hell for most people to get on the internet and download a browser. things have changed. now it takes maybe a minute or two for most users to grab a browser off the net. hell, i used to download the latest chimera nightly once a week. this is not the age of bundled browsers anymore. safari for windows would more than likely be posted on apple.com, and that is where most of the relatively few people who use it would get it.

rdas7

May 24, 2003, 05:48 AM

Am I the only one out there who's a little disappointed in Apple for confusing the whole browser-issue? It seemed like everyone was just about settling into a Mozilla/IE world, when Apple decided to base their browser on Konqueror! The end result is that we're pushed back five years, into a world, where everyone is using different browsers and developers have to build all kinds of workarounds.

I know that the situation was not perfect, and you could argue that it was so bad that it was easier to start fresh, but I can't help but feeling that it was a bit closed-minded (not like Apple at all) to go with thier own solution. For what? Tabs and fast load times? Apart from bookmarks management, I don't really see what is the big deal about Safari...

On the other hand, developing a proprietary html rendering engine was inevitable for Apple, as I see them move away from browser-based internet interfaces and more towards in-app interfaces, like Sherlock and iTunes4.

I see the standalone browser (safari) as a cheap spin-off from these legitimate development projects.

I don't see any reason to port it to Windows. Port the OS to Intel. THEN we'll be talking! :)

Here's a thought: if Apple port iTunes and Safari to Windows, aren't they essentially taking a bite out of their own future on the Intel chipset? They would two less reasons for PC users to install MacOS, if they could use iTunes and Safari in Windows.

Or perhaps all this rumour of porting apps is pointing something bigger being ported?

moet_01

May 24, 2003, 09:45 AM

They should port Safari to Windows for a few reason. It will make the Mac Safari support more sites and bundling it with iTunes for Windows would be a great way to pass it along to Windows users. Installing iTunes would ask the user if it would like to make Safari your default web browser or go the MS route and don't ask just make it the default:) Don't forget QT now the windows side will have 3 great apps to play with and it will expose them to the Mac and apple is counting on OS X to be the killer APP... So once the software side is done all the need is a cheaper hardware for pc user's to switch to. The 799 eMac is a step in the right direction but the need something cooler and a little bit cheaper that runs OS X smooth and fast. Remember most home users only use computers for web and e-mail and soon music will be a big part of what most home users use a computer for.

maradong

May 24, 2003, 10:01 AM

of course.
by the way, if they want to release itunes for windows they have to, as itunes uses the safari engine, slightly modified, to connect to the music service.

donely

May 24, 2003, 10:04 AM

Yes! It's a good idea to port it...

Most importantly, to make sites support the way it renders webpages. Seeing that Apple only has about 3-4 percent of the market, it might not be support by some sites (not the big ones, but small community based sites), that just thinks it's easier to build their sites using Microsoft technology, og "optimizing" to render perfectly only on the IE.
It's already evident. More and more sites support the Mozilla/Gecko engine, why not get this going for Safari, more than just to suit the needs of the Mac community?
This also has a side benifit for the Linux community (doesn't Konquerer use the same engine/webcore?), which will get Linux in the online loop. If say, online Banks start supporting it, then imho it'll start the switching big time style.

--
Soren
... Yes there are errors, but hey, they my precious errors

WorldWithoutLuv

May 24, 2003, 10:19 AM

Originally posted by noel4r
definitely, windows users need to see what they're missing by using windows...

The flip side, however, is that Windows users would get Apple benefits with their currently crappy OS, rather than switching to a good OS and getting the benefits. It really just says "Stay with Windows, we're getting to you next". Rather than "Liberate yourself and buy a Mac". I think the "Liberate" message is better sent by NOT allowing them use of the product they want, until they buy a mac.

Freg3000

May 24, 2003, 11:06 AM

Originally posted by WorldWithoutLuv
The flip side, however, is that Windows users would get Apple benefits with their currently crappy OS, rather than switching to a good OS and getting the benefits. It really just says "Stay with Windows, we're getting to you next". Rather than "Liberate yourself and buy a Mac". I think the "Liberate" message is better sent by NOT allowing them use of the product they want, until they buy a mac.

I think the point of porting Safari and iTunes is to tempt PC users. Apple isn't going to give all the iApps to the PC, just some select few. The idea is that hopefully the PC user likes what he or she sees, and decided to get a Mac.

WorldWithoutLuv

May 24, 2003, 11:19 AM

Freg, I agree that the user probably would see the quality of Apple's products and want them, I am just worried they would be faulty on Windows. You make a good point, plus it would put a stop to Ignorant Mac Bashing!

YWN

May 24, 2003, 12:58 PM

Bundle iTunes with Safari, port it both to peecee, and sell it for 10$. People on peecee want iTunes, which is and stays free for mac, the safari is just something you get with it. People start using safari, because it is good, and the people pay 5$ for it, (because 10/2 = 5 :) ) I think people would pay 10$ for iTunes without problem, mostly probably because of the music store...

shadowfax

May 24, 2003, 01:01 PM

Originally posted by YWN
Bundle iTunes with Safari, port it both to peecee, and sell it for 10$. People on peecee want iTunes, which is and stays free for mac, the safari is just something you get with it. People start using safari, because it is good, and the people pay 5$ for it, (because 10/2 = 5 :) ) I think people would pay 10$ for iTunes without problem, mostly probably because of the music store... i wouldn't use iTunes on a PC. winamp is plenty cool. and the music store--there are others, and i still much prefer owning the CD and the album art &c. it's worth it to me if just to get rid of the %#$#@@# DRM, even though it's only slight now.

cb911

May 24, 2003, 05:35 PM

that would be great if Apple made Safari available for Windows. we know already that iTunes is coming, so why not Safari. i agree that it would have to be good enough to be able to compete with IE for it to even be worth releasing, but i don't think that Apple making their software available for the PC world will detract from their sales any. i mean, hardcore PC users would never even think of purchasing a Apple anyway, so there is really no reason for them to switch just because of iLife and things like that.

coolfactor

May 24, 2003, 07:26 PM

Originally posted by rdas7
Am I the only one out there who's a little disappointed in Apple for confusing the whole browser-issue? It seemed like everyone was just about settling into a Mozilla/IE world, when Apple decided to base their browser on Konqueror! The end result is that we're pushed back five years, into a world, where everyone is using different browsers and developers have to build all kinds of workarounds.

Apple confusing the browser issue? People wanted Apple to develop their own browser. To me, that's listening to the customer. And rather than "confuse the issue" by developing a whole new rendering engine, they based Safari on an existing open-source engine.

I know that the situation was not perfect, and you could argue that it was so bad that it was easier to start fresh, but I can't help but feeling that it was a bit closed-minded (not like Apple at all) to go with thier own solution. For what? Tabs and fast load times? Apart from bookmarks management, I don't really see what is the big deal about Safari...

On the other hand, developing a proprietary html rendering engine was inevitable for Apple, as I see them move away from browser-based internet interfaces and more towards in-app interfaces, like Sherlock and iTunes4.

Again, it's not propriety. The rendering engine is based on the open-source KTHML technology. Improving the engine during Safari's development is allowing them to address issues, such as the beastly-slow Help Viewer and enhance products, such as iTunes.

I see the standalone browser (safari) as a cheap spin-off from these legitimate development projects.

I don't see any reason to port it to Windows. Port the OS to Intel. THEN we'll be talking! :)

Although I was totally against the idea of running OS X on Intel-based PCs, I can see where that might take the operating system. People would have a *decent* alternative to Windows, rather than choices like Lindows and Linux.

Here's a thought: if Apple port iTunes and Safari to Windows, aren't they essentially taking a bite out of their own future on the Intel chipset? They would two less reasons for PC users to install MacOS, if they could use iTunes and Safari in Windows.

Or perhaps all this rumour of porting apps is pointing something bigger being ported?

shadowfax

May 24, 2003, 08:59 PM

Originally posted by cb911
that would be great if Apple made Safari available for Windows. we know already that iTunes is coming, so why not Safari. i agree that it would have to be good enough to be able to compete with IE for it to even be worth releasing, but i don't think that Apple making their software available for the PC world will detract from their sales any. i mean, hardcore PC users would never even think of purchasing a Apple anyway, so there is really no reason for them to switch just because of iLife and things like that. hardcore PC users also wouldn't bother to use iTunes and other Apple stuff either, methinks, especially if it cost $$.

tazo

May 25, 2003, 01:58 AM

i know that if apple put safari on windows it would probably rival mozilla as my browser of choice.

shadowfax

May 25, 2003, 02:04 AM

Originally posted by tazo
i know that if apple put safari on windows it would probably rival mozilla as my browser of choice. how can you be sure when you don't know how fast it is? i mean, obviously, it won't be having any features you can't get on mozilla, near as i can tell, so speed would have to woo you, and i severely doubt it will pass up moz.

tazo

May 25, 2003, 02:18 AM

I meant that if it was almost an exact port, i would probably use it. but for now Mozilla is the absolute best. I just wish I could remove IE :(

shadowfax

May 25, 2003, 02:23 AM

Originally posted by tazo
I meant that if it was almost an exact port, i would probably use it. but for now Mozilla is the absolute best. I just wish I could remove IE :( why do you want to remove it? you can make it all but disappear with SP1 and use a different browser. you can't get rid of IE completely. it's like part of the explorer shell. you run it when you browse your files.

goofbutt

May 25, 2003, 01:02 PM

I don't think that there is any thing wrong with Apple releasing Safari for Windows, as long as Apple doesn't expect any Windows users to actually use it. IE is probably used by 99% of Windows users and Safari is not as good a browser as IE is for Windows. It is better then IE for the Mac, although Camino is still the best of the Mac browsert IMO.

JohnStrass

May 25, 2003, 03:44 PM

Originally posted by macdong
You have a point.
With existing IE, you'll have to pay for shareware or go with crappy free popup blocker.
Safari's built-in popup blocker COULD be a serious advantage.
Though M$ might deal with it soon...

Yes. But of course it would have to be 100% robust, and no borwser on a wondoze would ever be. If IE crashes, people accept it and blame it on something else. If someone new to Apple has safari crash on thwir PC, then that will be their first and last experience with Apple.
Also, the more cynical person in me might suspect that M$ might somehow poison a competing app with slight windows incompatibility...

tazo

May 25, 2003, 07:51 PM

Originally posted by Shadowfax
why do you want to remove it? you can make it all but disappear with SP1 and use a different browser. you can't get rid of IE completely. it's like part of the explorer shell. you run it when you browse your files.

I am using 98SE on my pc, not XP which SP1 is for.

shadowfax

May 25, 2003, 08:03 PM

Originally posted by tazo
I am using 98SE on my pc, not XP which SP1 is for. ah. that's unfortunate. you can still use another browser as your default though, methinks. but you still can't get rid of IE, because it's integrated into the OS--sort of like taking the "finder" out of the MacOS...

tazo

May 25, 2003, 09:13 PM

Originally posted by Shadowfax
ah. that's unfortunate. you can still use another browser as your default though, methinks. but you still can't get rid of IE, because it's integrated into the OS--sort of like taking the "finder" out of the MacOS...

I use Mozilla 1.4 as my default browser. Whats funny is that Mozilla's betas are more stable then the final releases of Internet Explorer. :) :)

kanaka

May 26, 2003, 01:27 AM

Originally posted by Shadowfax
ah. that's unfortunate. you can still use another browser as your default though, methinks. but you still can't get rid of IE, because it's integrated into the OS--sort of like taking the "finder" out of the MacOS...

If I'm not mistaken, it's extremely easy to completely remove and replace the Finder in Mac OS X. A popular replacement is Path Finder (formerly known as SNAX) (http://www.cocoatech.com/) . To make Path Finder launch instead of Finder, simply open the Terminal and type this:

defaults write com.apple.loginwindow Finder "/Path/To/Path Finder.app"

I believe the Finder is essentially like any other application on your system (located at /System/Library/CoreServices/Finder), and thus is easily removed or replaced. I don't think the MS dictatorship makes it nearly as easy to replace Explorer.

Legacy user

May 26, 2003, 01:35 AM

I think that instead of spending time and money porting Safari, Apple should work real hard and make it 'interoperable' (for lack of a better word) with any other software or service out there. Most folks don't care what program they are using; 90% of computer users want to turn their machine on and do want you want it to do at the lowest cost......Platform, shmatform. Does it work? is all most folks want to know...

If Safari can let the Mac user send and receive mail, all webpages and do on-line banking, shop on E-bay, play games etc.., without fail or error, that would take away another objections not to buy an Apple computer.
Given current trends in computer sales, Apples best bet is to have folks take a chance on a Apple Laptop. However if you get a PC user to consider a Mac Laptop, they Now face a delimma: They have a desktop PC at home and in the office, and now they want to buy the cool Apple laptop... but then the doubts come in:"what about all my work? How compatible is Apple to the PC? Gee, the Compaq is about $300 less, and the CPU is faster...." Sound familiar? We all have friends that have succumbed to the Dark Side...

If I were Apple, I would make sure, that any files, Emails, anything will be seamlessly translated from PC, Linux whatever, No matter the firewalls, and is instantly usable to me. My friends, my banking institution, my Lan administrator, should not even know that I switched to a new platform (providing my password is authenticated). Now that would be the genius of superior software - The user doesn't have to do nothin' It just does it.

Being 'interoperable' is the way Apple can show it's technological superiority: It works so good, so fast, without error between any computer, that you don't even know its different. Except that it's way more fun to work on your MAC than an PC!

"Now that would be cool." -IBM ad from a couple of years ago....;)