Commentary--CNet's XP vs OS X Death Match Revisited, OS X 10.1 is the Clear Winner

At first, CNet proclaimed Mac OS X 10.1 a slim winner over Windows XP in their death match but then revised its outcome to be a tie. The revision was based on rereading Apple's license to find that it allows a copy of OS X to be installed on only one computer at a time, same as Microsoft's license. Of course, Microsoft enforces the requirement with its new accursed activation system. Legally they are the same but technically they are quite different. The XP activation scheme is so onerous that the nod should go to OS X despite the legal equality of the licenses. The XP activation scheme plus the lack of networking in the Home Edition of XP badly cripples XP in the home market and the activation scheme plus XPs slowness (see this InfoWorld article) and cost relative to Windows 2000 cripples XP in the enterprise market. How can CNet call a tie between OS X 10.1 and Windows XP on that basis? It's probably not fair to conclude that it's because Microsoft is a major investor in CNet so let's look closely at the whole death match.

After declaring OS X 10.0.4 the clear winner over Windows 2000 in a June OS death match, CNet put Windows XP up against OS X 10.1 last Wednesday in the rematch. [As an aside, try searching CNet for the XP-X death match. All we could find with CNet's search function was the older 2000-OS X death match. Why?] CNet uses 5 categories: Installation, Interface, Software Compatibility, Hardware Compatibility and Internet Support. Let's look at the results by category.

Installation. CNet picked Mac OS X and we agree. No question here.

Interface. CNet picked Windows XP. Of course, we disagree. We think CNet was blinded by the "devil you know" syndrome. Windows XP's interface is improved over Windows ME through a more extensive use of annoying task assistants and brighter, more saturated colors but it is still basically the same. If you are used to it, it may seem more intuitive but it's mostly because you are used to it. CNet criticizes the Mac OS's intuitiveness in dragging a disc icon to the trash to eject it but, hey, wake up CNet! In OS X 10.1 the disc is dragged to an eject button icon which is pretty intuitive in my book. We could point out the lack of intuition in shutting down a computer by clicking on a Start button which is still in the Windows XP interface but this is silliness. While some long time Mac OS users who haven't used OS X much might disagree, we like OS X 10.1 and we think people new to computers will too. We also think OS X is more intuitive than Windows and we use both. Windows has gotten better over the years but in our view it still falls short. We would give the nod to OS X but it's at a minimum a tie based on personal familiarity.

Software Compatibility. CNet gave a slight nod to Mac OS X. We agree. Windows XP is incompatible with many applications and many of those compete with the "new" functions that M$ integrated into XP. Mac OS X 10.1 is widely compatible via the Classic mode with existing. However, the difference between the OSs will diminish over time. The sheer number of applications for each platform is irrelevant to this category as CNet pointed out.

Hardware Compatibility. CNet picked Windows XP as the winner in this category. We disagree and would call it a tie. CNet confused compatibility with the gross number of hardware peripherals available rather than classes of hardware. Curiously, CNet avoided this stupidity in their software call. Both OS's have a way to go to be compatible with all the hardware that was available for their respective prior editions. Both require a moderately fast CPU at a minimum and more RAM than most people have. Neither is clearly more deficient than the other.

Internet Support. CNet declared a tie. We agree but for different reasons. Ease of set up and use still lies with Mac OS X but speed of operation still lies with Windows. However, if general networking were a part of this category, Mac OS X would win decisively. The Home Edition of Windows XP is for stand alone computers. Which category includes this important issue? At best it's diffused through all five categories.

Conclusions. So CNet finished with 2.5 to 2.5. We finish CNet's categories with 4.0 for Mac OS X and 1.0 for XP or 3.5-1.5 at worst. We believe that the very important function of networking should have been considered separately which Mac OS X wins hands down. Then there is cost. Yes, a Wintel user can upgrade from Windows ME or 98SE to the networking-crippled Home Edition of XP for $99. But users of Windows 95 and 98 must spend $199. Furthermore, if either group wants networking services, they must upgrade to the "Professional" edition for $199-299. Mac OS X 10.1 with Mac OS 9.2.1 for Classic mode costs $129 for everyone and that includes terrific networking services for everyone, home user and enterprise. Then there's the issue of XP being slower than 2000 under load. Then there's the hated XP activation issue. Then there's the power of the Unix underpinnings in Mac OS X.

Mac OS X rules, no question about it in our minds. By the way, Apple is neither an investor in nor a paying advertiser on nor an owner of any part of Macs Only!