. . . continued from Hot News But I've reviewed lots of Linux products over the past year in particular too. Xandros Linux, which is built on Debian's distribution, is amazing. It's difficult to see how much more it can be improved especially in light of Jim Huddle's recent review of Xandros version 3 Deluxe. That's a fine product. To confuse matters further, I recently bought a Mac Mini. Now there's a delightful little machine. It's perhaps not the absolute best buy for the money, but then again, I'm willing to pay a small premium for something unusual that works as well as the Mini; and work well it certainly does. So as I ramble back and forth here I keep asking myself the same questions. A. If I truly want my computer hardware to disappear into the background—to become and appliance in other words—doesn't the best chance of making that happen reside with hardware used to run the most popular operating system in the world? Windows XP? I don't really have a significant hope that my computer hardware is going to become as reliable as my refrigerator any time soon. There are too many computer hardware variables, not the least of which are drivers and the vast number of permutations and combination of hardware possible for any given setup. The variables add up, from time to time, as instabilities which cause crashes, lockups, data loss and so on. So let's take concern "A" off the list. It's just not in the realm of possibility right now.

If Mac OS and Linux user interfaces are better, how much better are they, and if they're only, say, 20% better, how does that improvement translate into more productive use of my computer time.

B. Do the Mac OS and Linux user interfaces truly offer more intuitive, user friendly environments in which to do my work? Intuitive design is based on two fundamental bits of logic: a) rational workflow, and b) the ubiquity of a particular rational workflow. Windows XP meets both fundamental requirements head on. Microsoft's operating systems are ubiquitous. Because of that ubiquity, it is possible for neighbors who barely know each other to provide mutual technical support for Windows operating system and software problems. With that much common knowledge and vast community in essence floating around free for the asking, even the most awkward user interface design becomes generally familiar and acceptably easy to use. The failure of the design only reveals itself to new users who fall into extreme demographic categories, seniors citizens being the primary example. In fact, most software workflows which adhere to the common model imposed by Microsoft, do reasonably well on consumer and business desktops. While not the best choice of all for many individual efforts, Windows XP generally provides a workflow that is acceptable to most people.

C. If Mac OS and Linux user interfaces are better, how much better are they, and if they're only, say, 20% better, how does that improvement translate into more productive use of my computer time? Whether another user interface design is better than Windows XP is less important that how much you personally appreciate the competing design. It's as simple as that. If you like it better, then for you it is better. As long as the competing operating system also offers all the software you need to get your work done, there's no question about making the jump. The fact remains that smart user interface designers toil long and hard on all of the competing operating systems.

D. Where do the foregoing analysis questions end and where does the experimentation begin? Trying out a new operating system is truly an effort of will. The amount of satisfaction you derive from the experience is directly proportional to the amount of effort and focus you bring to the experiment. Mac OS and Linux devotees are growing rapidly in number because the payoff is worthwhile, not because there's a growing legion of users who hate Microsoft. Most people I know don't think about Microsoft from one month to the next.

E. Is change for the sake of change—especially given that I can do everything I do now in Windows XP on Mac OS X or Linux—a benefit because it's refreshing and mildly challenging in this case? Sure. Why not? As long as the learning curve for the new operating system is limited to a maximum of a few hours before you can become acceptably productive, the change is worthwhile. Mac OS X shines here; Linux less so (although it gets better each month—you've really got to check out Xandros Linux).

F. Is it really a concern for me that Microsoft has been besieged with lawsuits about its development and sales tactics? Who cares! Microsoft will sink or swim for the same reasons that apply to every other giant. If it answers consumer needs, it will swim. If it consistently disappoints consumers it will lose. Half of every corporate-targeted class action lawsuit is valid, and half is pure nonsense designed to obfuscate the moral and ethical center we're slowly losing sight of in an increasingly complex world. Why should the principle of Caveat Emptor—buyer beware—apply in a world in which litigators, judges and courts will give hearings to people—very large groups of people sometimes—who consistently plead ignorance in their own defense. Legitimate class action lawsuits exist for certain, but I will forever question the convenience of levying such actions against targets that obviously have the money to pay off the plaintiffs even if only to get rid of a demonstrable nuisance in situations where the action itself is based on questionable merits.

The end result of all of this is that I've got two computers at my main workstation at home: a Windows XP PC and a Mac Mini running Mac OS X Tiger, each machine with its own monitor, keyboard and mouse (I didn't like the KVM switch approach). Throughout each week I still get plenty of work done—productivity hasn't suffered in the slightest—but I'm trying things on different machines. For the Kickstartnews podcasts, I run all of our music bumpers from the Mac during the recording session. While I'm working on Kickstartnews reviews on the PC, I've got e-mail and a web browser (usually Opera) going on the Mac. I've stopped syncing podcasts to my little iPod Shuffle with iTunes for Windows. Instead, I'm using iPodderX and iTunes on the Mac and it all works much better. Moving files back and forth between the PC and the Mac is easy because Apple seems to have worked out all networking kinks in Mac OS X. Really, it all hangs together nicely.

The end result of all this effort is still not fully visible. Windows may be ubiquitous, but Mac OS X and corresponding Apple computer hardware are infinitely more elegant. Windows is the biggest target on the planet for hackers, while Mac OS X has yet to draw such attention. Linux is off in the background, toddling along, gathering more fans in direct proportion to improvements in its ease of configuration and increases in compatibility with hardware, wireless and so on.

The most important thing I've found—and the one item that is helping to dramatically reduce my confusion level—is that I can now do anything on Mac or Linux that I can do on the PC. If you're thinking of experimenting, now is a good time.

Back to Hot News!