And here: Why many developers are not switching to mac.

1. Abysmal window manager, not replacable. Pixel waste, clumsy (long list here)

2. Mandatory Click-to-Focus and Click-Raise. Showstopper.

3. No home/end keys on apple laptops and other wierd layout choices.

4. Nasty BSD gang-rape under the hood. Yes, OSX has it's own "windows registry".

5. Idiotic shareware culture that makes you pay for the smallest things. $10 for a sane Macbook trackpad driver that should be in the OS in first place.

6. Inconsistent keyboard shortcuts, meta-key nonsense, Apple+Q.

7. Menus only on context-sensitive titlebar, sub-problem of #2

8. Single mouse button idiocy.

9. Finder.

10. Equivalent PC hardware can be had for 60% of the apple price

More like '5 reasons why Mac is no longer impractical for developers'. I think the only absolute benefit it offers (which is driving some people to it but curiously isn't mentioned) is being able to develop iPhone/iPod apps.

Not hating on the Mac, or anything - competition is a good thing. I just didn't care for the evangelista tone.

These are actually reasons why casual, non-developer users are switching to Macs, not developers or designers.

The author describes how OSX is more open-source friendly, describing also how it comes bundled with developer tools, but I find it incredibly hard to believe that an actual developer will have a hard time finding a better tool online. The apps that come with the OS aren't exactly the best, and just about everyone who's planning to get some work done will find other tools wherever with better libraries and more support.

The author also goes on and on about the UI. The simple taskbar in Windows and Linux is enough for me. Is it really necessary to have to view a thumbnail-esque to change to the window? Alt-Tab is enough.

Security? Please! I'll say again: the developers I know are not stupid. Anyone in their right mind and with some knowledge of computers should know that clicking on an odd-looking ad, or downloading a strange attachment, or accessing a crazy porn site aren't sane things. A combination of Firefox and AdBlock/NoScript can make any OS safe for most people. Unless you have kids who have thumb drives and like to use your computer, contracting a virus that way shouldn't be a concern, either.

The hardware-specific optimization is another problem. iPhone development is booming right now, but what about the rest?

I'm willing to accept "the apple", but presenting bogus arguments isn't convincing.

If you develop web based applications, Mac OS X has many limitations, strangely enough.

Mac OS X is UNIX alright, but to pull most of libraries from MacPorts is the only sane way to manage dependencies.

If you run Tiger (and see no reasons to upgrade) - then you are stuck with old Java release for ever. There is no way to upgrade Java other than buying Leopard, and then you are still at Apple's mercy for future upgrades.

A simple task like doing 'sudo emacs' requires some custom shell scripting, since emacs that came with the operating system is old and useless.

My initial excitement about Mac hardware is also dented after battery and graphic card both failed only after a year on my MacBook Pro.

A web developer would be much more happy on Linux if he/she could live without eye candy.

I'm not sure why a 'unified interface' is such a selling point. Does Windows not offer it? To be honest, I'm constantly finding that things on my Mac don't have a unified interface and that Apple keeps changing what they're looking to build.

Both platforms (Mac and Win) tend to violate consistency on a case-by-case basis. Adium, one of the apps highlighted in the article as awesome (which it is), does not conform to the rest of the system's interface. Specifically, it uses white tabs rather than the new not-quite-metal look of 10.5. Likewise, iTunes has different scrollbars, Camino and OmniWeb don't use the new button-look for controls and use the old-style flat color images, sometimes input boxes have rounded corners and sometimes they don't, sometimes you can tab to select menus and sometimes you can't, find boxes are in every form imaginable. . .

Consistency is great, but practicality beats purity. Both Apple and Microsoft have kept things decently consistent and violate their designs. Heck, with web pages throwing all sorts of interfaces at users, even the non-techies are getting used to understanding how different interfaces work.

OS X is great, but I don't see it as being amazingly more consistent than other platforms.

I think this is an extremely poor article, particularly as this largely seems like just a random selection of vague talking points while giving anything concrete. I'm slightly frustrated that people think that this sort of article is worthy of being upvoted when it has little more substance than "Apple! Yay!".

I think the real reasons developers, compared to all other users, are beginning to use Macs is down to 3 reasons:

* Unix tools, software and terminal. Unix, and Unix software, is the bread and butter for a lot of developers, and getting them to work on Windows is pain and even then is regarded as a second-class citizen. People have been crying out for a truly good Unix workstation for years, but Apple are the first ones to gain enough traction to matter and truly create a good out-of-the-box user experience for it.

* Universality. Mac OS X runs notoriously poorly under virtualization, so buying a Mac is the only simple choice if you wish to develop for all current platforms, something that is increasingly common, and run all the software available.

* Fashion, particularly in areas where programming has overlapped design such as web development. People follow each other and their trends, and Mac OS X and the Macbook Pro has become a fashion among a certain type of developer.

I picked up a 13" Macbook (unibody) at the end of last year because I was looking to do some iPhone/iPod Touch development. I'd always wanted to give OS X a go because of the underlying system and I've become a big fan of the OS.

I'd have to say that the biggest thing holding me back from doing extensive development on the OS, though, is the lack of "Home" and "End" buttons (it's the small things, I guess). I know there's Command+Left/Right but it's just such a weird keystroke and if I want to select a line it's not End, Shift+Home. I have to press Command+Right, Shift+Command+Left and it just feels like a lot of unnecessary keystrokes.

I also don't like the fact there's no built-in solution for mouse acceleration. I want it turned off but from what I've read in my searches there's no way to do it without running a separate program to do it for you.

I've come to like my iBook G4 more since I've been running Debian on it. The advantage, which no fanboy can dispute is this, free upgrades. I got sick of this or that not working under 10.3 (no Java updates, for example) and so I thought "I'm just not shelling out $100+ for a new OS."

I do appreciate that OSX is now an official UNIX, more power to 'em.

What about brand appeal. Macs are also a status symbol. A way to make a statement about yourself, telling others that you are 'in' that exclusive club, you are cool and happening.

Blah, they need to reword "Developers" with "Web Developers".

A systems or applications developer won't switch to OSX for those reasons at all (for other reasons maybe).

I read this and was underwhelmed.I'm not a Mac hater (I used one for over a decade), but nothing on the list seemed all that compelling. The Unix base and virtualization are the most compelling reasons, but the only reason virtualizing Macs on generic x86 boxes is problematic is OS X's license.

Macs are nice machines. But if you have some other reason for using Windows (cost, compatibility, prior experience), I don't see a compelling case for switching.

I didn't read the list in detail, but was there realy anything on that list(except the hardware and the mac only apps) that i don't have in KDE4? Im seriously asking and im not really bashing apple this time(i sort of have a history with that).

I like the Macbook Air except for the glare type display. And im not sure how well it supports linux.

Currently i think about buying one of the sony vgn-z notebooks. Any expriences with these?

nice article. I have to admit, that after Apple and Intel "teamed" up I actually spent a thought on buying one, but my wallet was clearly against it since I'm a full time CS student. perhaps sometime in the future I'll buy a mac or I'll give OSx86 (http://www.osx86project.org/) a try.

undefined

I do despise animation in user interfaces. When I click a window I want it to just appear and not spend 3 seconds animating.

I don't like OSX but I am not going to deny it's power or appeal.

Both operating systems are comparable, each with their own pros and cons and neither OS has a killer feature nor a debilitating feature.

Just find what works for you.

I buy Macs because they work fine and I can afford them and I spent far too many years of my life dicking around with Linux on the desktop when it clearly belongs in the datacenter.

I don't use Windows because it isn't Unix, not even if you use Cygwin and squint and tilt your head sideways.

http://www.paulgraham.com/mac.html

Vista.

Edit: OK, how am I wrong?

Although I haven't read any of the 56 responses here, I'm probably safe in assuming:

1) No new insight into this earth-shattering issue will arise, even from the mighty minds on HN. 2) Even if 1) were wrong, it wouldn't change anyone's mind anyways.