For the last month I’ve been living with Apple’s diminutive MacBook Air as my sole production computer for all professional and personal use. My previous main Mac was a 2007 2.4GHz 4GB RAM MacBook Pro 17 with the highest resolution Apple offers in a notebook. So I went from one Apple portable extreme (highest resolution, most power, heaviest) to the other (smallest, lightest, least powerful, least memory, weakest video). There are a number of trade-offs, but the positive outweighs the negative.

It happened that late April through May is a slow travel period for me, so while I’ve attended local events offsite, I haven’t hit the road yet. But in a couple of weeks, I’ll be on a tour that includes D.C., NYC, Boston, and Miami. The east coast thang. I’ll give the MacBook Air a thorough travel test then. Once that’s complete, I’ll write a full long-term review of the MacBook Air on Computerworld.com.

My biggest single issue with the MacBook Air is something that you know going in: the size and resolution of the MacBook Air’s display. It measures 13.3-inches diagonally and has a maximum (native) resolution of 1280-by-800 pixels. The smaller size never troubles me on the road, where email and Web surfing are the main applications. I’m similarly unfazed by the MacBook Air’s small displays size because it’s connected to a 24-inch external LCD. But when I’m home, sitting on the sofa — where I sometimes spend hours researching, preparing PowerPoints, developing spreadsheets, juggling loads of documents, and writing — I feel the pinch of the small screen size. Like I said, I knew that going in, but the trade-off it’s not as bad as I expected.

It may be a case of just enough screen real estate. After years of using nothing but large-screen, high-res notebooks, I don’t have the “peering through a keyhole” feeling I sometimes got with pre-widescreen Windows notebooks (usually at 1024-by-768 resolution).

Another aspect that may help is the MBA display’s brightness and high contrast, both of which count a lot with me. What I’ve learned over the years is that display specs don’t matter. What matters is how it feels when you spend hours in front of it. The MacBook Air’s thin-film transistor LED technology creates the best notebook display I’ve spent that kind of time with. Though I haven’t spent the same amount of time with the newer MacBook Pro 15 models, the first to support the TFT LED displays, my guess is that they’re equally impressive.

All in all, I’ve adapted pretty well to the MacBook Air’s small display size. Even so, if Apple ever comes out with larger-screen MacBook Pro (such as a 15-inch or 17-inch) with the same incredible thinness, I’d probably break out the credit card the first week they were offered.

I’m also completely unperturbed by the on-paper lack of overall computing power that shows up clearly in the MacBook Air’s specs. My test unit has the 1.8GHz processor with the 64GB solid-state drive. Were I to spend my own money (or my company’s money), I’d get the 1.6GHz CPU and the 80GB 4,200-rpm conventional hard drive. For the things I use my main production machine 98% of the time, I don’t notice any loss of oomph. The 64GB drive is tight. In my ideal world, the MBA would come with 3GB or RAM and a 120GB hard drive, but so far I haven’t needed either.

The biggest problem I wasn’t expecting in the MacBook Air concerns the USB port. I was surprised that apparently Apple didn’t do the proper testing as part of its design work to ensure that virtually any USB device fits its one USB port. Or perhaps Apple just decided that form was more important than function. Either way, not only did I have to buy a new USB 3G EV-DO device for my company-supplied Verizon broadband wireless service, but when I paid extra for the smallest one (smallest in all three dimensions), it didn’t fit the MacBook Air’s USB port. Apple pointed out to me that the largest one Verizon offers has a fold out USB connector that does fit the MBA. But not only does that mean the darn thing flops around, it’s also massive at 3.6-inches long by 1.5-inches wide by .7-inches thick. It’s roughly half the size of deck of playing cards.

Bottom line, I think it’s a weakness in a computer using the name “Air” to refer to its wireless orientation that most USB air cards don’t fit it and it doesn’t have an ExpressCard port. Apple is quick to point out that every wireless broadband provider in the U.S. offers at least one air card that fits the MacBook Air, but to me, that’s not good enough.

Similarly, I have no issue with the MacBook’s optical SuperDrive being an external device, that’s a reasonable trade-off. But the fact that Apple’s device does not work through a USB hub and must be connected directly to the lone USB port is disappointing.

The biggest advantage I hadn’t fully appreciated — despite acknowledging it to be the killer feature of the MacBook Air from day one — is how freeing the small size and weight is. At work, I frequently just grab it and go to meetings. Since my business is Internet publishing, being able to refer to our Web site or those of competitors is a noticeable advantage to me. I haven’t even gotten to the travel part yet.

Stand by for my final Computerworld review in a month or a little more, which will address my travel experiences and also give details about my workarounds for some of the trade-offs I’ve experienced — as well as my final recommendation on the MacBook Air. In the meantime, I can tell you that I’m very much enjoying the research behind this evaluation.

In the same article (scroll down to find it), I also presented the results of my performance testing of four USB devices, including the 4GB IronKey Secure Flash Drive. In my tests, the IronKey was not very fast. In a March 2008 secure USB drive comparison review in Computerworld, the same model IronKey (although, about six months newer than the evaluation unit that I tested), turned in excellent performance.

The Computerworld review tested a much slower Lexar device than the one I’ve recommended. It didn’t compare the JumpDrive Lightning, which has decent software-encryption security. Instead it compared the results of Lexar’s JumpDrive Secure II, a model I rejected because it was much slower and I didn’t believe the security it added was critical to my needs. As the Computerworld article states, “The Lexar JumpDrive Secure II offers three ways to protect data, but two of its methods [are] so awkward that the reviewer found them to be being more trouble than they were worth.”

Back to the IronKey, the in-depth Computerworld secure USB drives comparison review summarized that product with these words:

The IronKey’s numerous security features — hardware-based encrytion, random password generator, two-factor authentication, secure Web browsing, and self-destruct mechanism — along with its longer-life, single-level cell NAND memory, put it over the top as the highest quality, most secure drive of the bunch.

My own assessment matches precisely that of Computerworld’s expert reviewers. The IronKey is the most secure and most conveniently secure product I’ve ever tested. While it’s not inexpensive, and it only works with Windows XP and Vista, this product is the best product for enterprises seeking to equip employees with a highly secure USB drive. For more details on the IronKey, please see Computerworld’s IronKey review.

So, I love the IronKey for pure security. In particular, I recommend this device to IT managers who are concerned about exposure of data when USB memory sticks are lost by employees — despite how expensive the IronKey is. But the stick I use and continue to recommend above all others is the Lexar JumpDrive Lightning.

Shame on both me and Lexar, though, because I looked at the Lightning’s product pages for multi-platform security support before I tested and selected Corsair’s Flash Padlock. In fact, I looked at all the major USB drive products for the ability to support Windows, Mac, and Linux, and also provide security across all three platforms. Very few offer that flexibility (in fact, the Flash Padlock is the only one I’m aware of that does all three OSes).

Initially, I crossed the Lexar off the list because its JumpDrive Lightning product page lists only Windows XP and Vista support; nowhere does it say it supports the Mac. It wasn’t until I went back to Lexar a second time that I learned that the Lightning does support the Mac (though not Linux). I had to resort to contacting the company’s live chat tech support to get that information. I never did receive a response to my inquiry through Lexar’s public relations. Mind you, I’m not beating myself up too much about this, since Lexar’s support area doesn’t list any downloadable software for the JumpDrive Lightning. The software is apparently available only on the USB stick itself, or behind closed doors somewhere on the Lexar website, once you’ve registered your purchased product. It’s almost like Lexar is intentionally hiding the Mac support.

That is, though, the sum total of my criticism about the Lexar JumpDrive Lightning. The product is ideal for my purpose: casual but effective security for a user-selectable portion of the disk, fast performance, and enough GBs you won’t be pressed all the time for storage space. At about $75 including delivery, this drive costs a bit more than some others, but it makes up for that with its smart design (including built-in keychain loop), the ability to store its cap on the other end when its in use (so you don’t lose the cap), and incredible performance.

The JumpDrive Lightning’s superior performance is noticeable in everyday operation compared with some of its competition. To quantify the difference, I set up a collection of 13,500 files displacing 1GB. I timed the process of copying that set of files from my testbed Windows XP PC to each of four USB drives in turn: the Lexar 4GB JumpDrive Lightning, the Corsair 2GB Flash Padlock, the IronKey 4GB Secure Flash Drive, and the Kingston 4GB Data Traveler Secure. The Lexar and Kingston devices were speedy, while the Corsair and IronKey USB drives were markedly slower:

You’ll be hearing more about the IronKey from me in the near future. This product may not be that fast, but it’s an incredibly cool device with serious security. It’s the best USB drive I’ve seen for security-conscious enterprises. So don’t cross that one off your list. Currently, though, it supports only Windows XP and Vista, so it’s not ideal for me.

The Kingston product is interesting because it’s nearly as fast as the Lexar product and has similar security. Like most USB devices, Windows, Mac, and Linux can mount them. But the Kingston device offers encryption security software only for Windows. So you won’t be able to access the encrypted space from Mac or Linux.

With it’s multiplatform security support, it’s fast data-transfer rates, and smart design, the Lexar 4GB JumpDrive Lightning is ideal for my needs. It’s clearly a Scot’s Newsletter Top Product! And it’s knocking the Corsair Flash Padlock off that perch.

The week after the column appeared (after I returned from a vacation), I received a call from Apple acknowledging for the first time that, yes, it has an enterprise division headed by Al Shipp, senior vice president of enterprise sales. Only hitch was, Apple’s PR department wasn’t authorized to let me talk to Mr. Shipp or, in fact, anyone in Apple Enterprise.

Because Apple wasn’t talking, I reached out to Dale Frantz, CIO of Auto Warehousing Co., whose company was the focus of a case study about enterprise adoption of Apple servers, desktops, handhelds, and software in Mac Attack! An enterprise PC shop switches to Apple, July 16, 2007, Computerworld, by Julia King.

My interview with Frantz was far-ranging and fascinating. Not many CIOs these days have the brass to dump everything Windows-related and start all over again with Apple. He’s in the middle of doing it. He’s met with Al Shipp and has more than 20 business cards from the Seattle office of Apple Enterprise. His several-hundred-thousand-dollar overall deal with Apple comes with all the discounts, support, and engineering help that you’d expect from Microsoft. Apple is in every way doing exactly what I called for (except for selling enterprise-specific desktop hardware) in it dealings with Tacoma-based Auto Warehousing. So what gives?

I’m working on a follow-up story to the Enterprise Prize piece. In the meantime, though, I couldn’t resist passing along Frantz’s best guess as to why Apple has reached out to some medium-size businesses like his but isn’t making a major push to reel in larger enterprises. His belief is that Apple is quietly preparing to enter the enterprise market — and doesn’t want to tip its hand until it has the infrastructure in place to support enterprise customers. By infrastructure, Frantz means documentation, trained software engineers, and sales support.

Frantz also readily agreed with my analysis that, during this time when Vista is floundering a bit, Apple has an unusual window of opportunity — call it 18 months — to make some inroads with businesses of all sizes.

Apple has made a lot of smart moves over the past few years. Maybe the next one, the move to enterprise sales, has just yet to be played.

If you’re an enterprise IT manager whose company has recently moved to Apple, I’d like to hear from you. Drop me a line. (If you let me know it’s what you prefer, I will keep what you tell me confidential.)

I still like the thinking behind the Flash Padlock, but there are a couple of issues with it. Thanks to SNB (Scot’s Newsletter Blog) reader Jonathan March for writing with his concerns about it, which prompted me to go back to Corsair for more answers.

What I found is that the evaluation unit Corsair sent me came in shrink-wrapped retail packaging that contained incorrect information. The Flash Padlock comes with a small battery (commonly available in drug stores) that allows the device to lock or unlock when it’s not connected to your computer. The instructions accompanying my review unit gave step-by-step instructions about how to remove and replace the battery. I assumed that they were correct. But it turns out that Corsair has decided that too many people might damage the USB stick when they attempt to replace the battery, so the company has determined that the battery is not user replaceable. Notice, this is all marketing. The device has a case screw that allows you to split the case and access the inner parts. Of course, that compromises the security of the USB drive, since Corsair isn’t using any encryption and someone could just lift out the memory and mount it separately from the padlock.

For the way I want to use this device, for personal storage carrying stuff back and forth from work, this isn’t a big deal. I’d prefer something that disables the memory if the case is split, but for me that’s not a requirement. However, IT managers have already begun evaluating this device on my say-so, and I should have been explicit in saying that I don’t consider this to be secure enough for many widespread enterprise applications.

The battery issue is annoying. If the battery fails, you can still unlock the Flash Padlock while it’s connected to your computer (although, from personal experience, that’s an awkward maneuver). Theoretically, you can send the unit back to have the battery replaced if the unit is still under warranty. There seems to be some confusion about whether Corsair is offering a two- or three-year warranty. A specific Corsair support forum thread (worth reading if you own this device) says two years, but the review materials I have say three years. Corsair estimates that the battery will last three to five years. So maybe this is a moot point. As Jonathan March implied in his message to me, by the time the battery dies, this unit will be obsolete anyway. Still, I don’t like the fact that the life of this product is determined by a battery that, at least theorectically, isn’t replaceable.

Apparently, Corsair is planning to add software encryption to a future version of the Flash Padlock. For my money, though, what’s the point? What I wanted was a no-fuss USB drive that’s easy to lock and unlock.

Make It Lexar Instead?
Since I wrote the Corsair review, I’ve learned that even though Lexar’s JumpDrive product pages only mention Windows XP and Vista support, the products in fact come with both Windows and Mac versions of the Secure II encryption software. (Unfortunately, no direct Linux support though). I purchased the 4GB JumpDrive Lightning for $75, and I’ve been testing it for the past week or so. The encrypted Vault can be created with one OS and accessed by another. And while the Lightning isn’t cheap, it’s well named. This is the fastest USB drive I’ve ever tested. And I’m already finding that to be a bigger advantage than I’d expected.

I’ll offer a full review of the JumpDrive Lightning in the near future.

The Iron Man of USB Drives?
Several readers also wrote to suggest that I check out the IronKey USB drive, which contains a cryptography chip and also claims 20Mbps write times, in the neigborhood of the JumpDrive Lightning. The company claims that its device is tamper-proof, water-proof, and even has a self-destruct feature (after 10 attempted password entries). The only drawbacks that I can see with this device (without having tested it yet) are that it doesn’t support the Mac or Linux yet, and the 4GB unit costs $149 (1GB is $79 and 2GB is $109) direct from its maker.

A 4GB IronKey just arrived and I’ll be putting this thing through its paces and letting you know about it. Enterprise IT managers might want to look this over too.

Post comments or send email if you have input on any of these devices, or want to suggest others that you think the fast and conveniently secure criteria I’ve set up for this evaluation.

I’ve been searching for a USB stick with large storage that I can use as my everyday portable storage. I require this device to have security protection. USB sticks are too easy to lose, and I might have sensitive personal or corporate data on it from time to time. I don’t want to worry about prying eyes should the darn thing fall out of my pocket.

For the past few years I’ve been using a highly portable 5GB Seagate USB 2.0 Pocket Hard Drive, which contains a 1-inch mini-drive.

It works with Macs and PCs, but unfortunately the built-in security is software-based, and it requires Windows to run. While almost every USB storage device works on the Mac, most of them are using Windows-based software — not hardware — to encrypt or lock up your data.

So when a press release arrived from Corsair about a self-locking USB stick with a built-in numeric keypad called Flash Padlock, I had to check it out.

The Flash Padlock currently comes in 1GB and 2GB sizes at the list price of $29.99 and $39.99, respectively. I’d love to get one that was at least 4GB and preferably 8GB. I sometimes move large sets of software or images around. The business of software reviews is data-intensive. But 2GB handles most of my needs.

Flash Padlock contains a small, user-replaceable lithium battery that allows the five-button numeric keypad to work even when the USB stick is unconnected to your computer. In fact, you set your combination, change it, lock the device, and unlock it — all while the stick is removed from your computer. This makes total sense; doing anything else would endanger your USB port and also be awkward. The black case offers five number buttons and a Key button (think of it as Enter). There are also two LEDs that light up the Locked and Unlocked icons. The Flash Padlock is about 33% thicker than the average USB stick. The added heft accommodates the battery and keypad, and is well worth the advantage the hardware security brings.

The user interface for the Flash Padlock is very well thought out. Once you set your up to 10-digit combination, the device locks automatically 15 seconds after it is removed from your computer. If you try to reinsert it five minutes later, you’ll see the red Locked icon display. To unlock it, you remove the device from your computer, press the Key button, enter the combination, re-press the Key button, and the green Unlocked icon will flash. Then you can insert it into your computer. If you don’t insert it within 15 seconds, it will lock again. So long as the device remains in your computer, it will remain unlocked.

The specs for the Flash Padlock include a 30MB/sec. read speed, 7.8MB/sec. write speed, USB 2.0 and 1.1 support, and support for Windows, Mac, and Linux platforms. The Flash Padlock’s read speed is about as good as it gets, but the write speed is only average. If write performance is your goal, check out the Lexar JumpDrive Lightning as a starting point. It offers sustained write speeds up to 21MB/sec. For my purposes, a faster write speed would be a nice-to-have, not a have-to-have. Plus, in real-world tests, the Flash Padlock’s write speed bested that of my Seagate 5GB Pocket Drive. Still, I look forward to the day when flash storage makers realize that buyers of premium USB sticks want the whole enchilada, not just speed OR security OR readouts OR durability.

The downsides to the Flash Padlock are few. The stick is a little thicker than the average USB stick, as mentioned. The rest of the dimensions are typical of enterprise-oriented USB sticks. I don’t consider the extra size to be a serious drawback, although the device lacks curbside appeal as a result. The stick comes with a removable cap that is sure to be lost sooner or later. The biggest shortcoming is that Corsair isn’t offering a larger-capacity version of the Flash Padlock.

I asked Corsair via email whether it planned to offer a larger-capacity version of the Flash Padlock. Corsair vice president of marketing, Jack H. Peterson, responded through the company’s PR agency by writing:

“Possibly. The issue is that if the user loses [his or her] PIN, the drive becomes ‘useless’ and might as well be thrown away. Like the locks from your school days, if you forgot the combo, you just threw it away — but then again, such a lock was not that expensive. We are assessing the mindset of a user throwing away a $60+ item.”

I think I can speak for a large portion of Corsair’s prospective customers when I say: We don’t care give us more GBs now! In my very first test of Flash Padlock, I got the error message telling me there wasn’t enough storage space to accommodate the files I wanted to transfer to the lockable USB stick. Besides, Corsair has a solid way to protect you from forgetting your Flash Padlock password. The company website provides a page where you can register your PIN and retrieve it later if you forget it:

It’s also possible to disable the password protection. In fact, the device is shipped with the locking feature disabled; you enable it by setting your password. I don’t know about you, but I don’t want a USB securing device that has a back door. I like that I can lock myself out if I’m dumb enough to forget my password. The Web-based storage of my password means that even if I forget the password when I travel with the Flash Padlock, I can still retrieve my password — without keeping the password written down on paper.

Overall Assessment
The Flash Padlock’s hardware-based security is a definite advantage over the software security offered by most other USB flash drive makers. No secure USB stick is truly secure, but I’d place my money on the hardware-based security over software solutions. Plus, this method also enables support for Linux and the Mac. The locking mechanism is also very well thought out and easy to use. My retail-packaged evaluation unit came with two sets of directions, and the Corsair website offers online tech support (although the brand new Flash Padlock wasn’t yet listed among the products at press time). Corsair offers a three-year warranty.

Bottom line? I’m hanging up the Seagate Pocket Drive and making the Corsair Flash Padlock my daily-driver portable storage device. Kudos to Corsair for thinking outside the box to take USB security in a new direction. I may just have to get two of these until Corsair comes out with a 4GB version of the Flash Padlock.

• Mac vs. PC cost analysis: How does it all add up? (Computerworld)

It seemed to me that people who criticized this story missed the key points I was trying to get across:

1. This was a pure, hardware-based, speeds-and-feeds kind of comparison. I was comparing the hardware goods only, including CPU, chipset, RAM, video, display, hard-drive capacity and specs, ports and upgradeability, dimensions and weight, and so on. In other words, I was attempting to make an objective comparison that did not inject any evaluation about the hardware, anything at all about the software, or my personal experience with the operating systems and hardware involved. It was an on-paper comparison.

I did that purposely to lay the groundwork for further analysis about the value of Macs vs. Windows PCs. I started with the objective measures.

2. The main point I was trying to make is that when you compare Macs with comparably equipped Windows PCs, it may surprise you that, overall, Macs sometimes beat Windows PCs in the price/performance comparison. Sometimes Windows PCs do. Overall, there’s relative parity.

There is a time component to this kind of analysis. The Windows PC makers lagged behind Apple for a while on the CPU front, but with the release of the Santa Rosa platform (Intel’s marketing name is Centrino Pro), many are catching up again. The value meter may be tipping a bit toward Windows PCs now as a result. But this ebb and flow is a natural part of computer valuations. It never rests. Pricing is always in flux.

It’s definitely true that Apple Mac pricing has not always approached parity. I’ve made this comparison before. Macs have clearly been more expensive than Windows PCs in the distant past. But if you’re talking about name-brand Windows PCs from reputable manufacturers like Dell, HP, Toshiba, Acer, Gateway, Lenovo, and others, the out-the-door pricing is more or less on par.

There’s an important point of comparison you need to recognize to fully understand the logic of my position. For a direct comparison to be made, there has to be a Mac SKU that directly equates to the exact set of features *you* want. And that’s where we enter into the completely subjective realm and get away from intrinsic value. Just because you don’t want this or that small feature that the Mac has, doesn’t mean that everyone else doesn’t want it. And vice versa. So if your desire is a specific set of features that fits in between a specific Mac SKU and the way it can be configured, then some Windows PC somewhere may, in fact, be a better value — for you.

This point isn’t unique to computer sales. Buy a Honda automobile, for example, and you’ll find there are three or four models for any car type, and the only options are dealer installable. Like Honda, Apple has smartly positioned its specific models.

There’s also a corresponding point to be made: The Macintosh lineup consists of five model lines and 12 basic SKUs (or specific models), each of which offers additional configuration. There are three desktop model lines and two notebook model lines. When you look closely at these model lines, there are economy, middle-of-the-road, and high-end models. Macs are no longer just premium computers. Apple changed its stance on that markedly over the past 10 years. If you’re not that familiar with Macs, you have to open your mind, take a look at the different Mac models, and closely compare the specs to understand.

Dean Abanila, technology specialist at the Rhode Island School of Design, said it well:

“I work with more than a few students and faculty looking for computer buying advice. Many are making PC-to-Mac transitions. Your analysis is dead on. At least twice per week I spec out both Macs and PCs for folks. More often than not, the Mac is cheaper, and this has been the case for some time now. Before I start to sound like a Mac fan boy, let me say that I often recommend PCs, and will continue to do so. I support both platforms here at RISD. As I am sure you are aware, recommendations depend on the user’s goals.”

One last hardware point: I agree with those of you who wrote to say you’re with me on the comparison, but as purchasers of corporate microcomputing hardware they feel Apple doesn’t have a product that meets their needs. I’ve written about this in the past and am contemplating a Computerworld column on the point again. Apple has a huge opportunity right now with the pushback on Vista and the upswing in Mac sales to release a Mac designed for business.

At my company, where there are many new Mac users, the MacBook Pro 15 has become the standard. But that’s a pretty expensive computer for some companies to justify. I think the MacBook might be a solid alternative for some companies, and its pricing is more in line, or even advantageously priced, when compared with small-screen Windows notebooks from Lenovo and others. But there’s room for a MacBook business machine that has a better keyboard, a better-looking case, and probably some other minor tweaks. I also don’t think the iMac is a great desktop computer for business. I don’t like the integrated monitor from a support perspective.

There’s room for Apple do something here, but the real problem for Apple is that it doesn’t have a corporate sales channel to speak of. It’s a retail-oriented B2C company, not a B2B company. Some enterprises are ignoring those downsides, though. Computerworld’s cover story this week is about Tacoma, Wash.-based Auto Warehousing Co.’s decision to dump a major part of its IT infrastructure and PCs in favor of Apple servers and Macs. It does happen.

Software?
So much for the recap from last month. A lot of people have asked me to dive into the software comparison between Macs and PCs. Software needs, however, are far more variable than hardware needs. For example, some people are required to use Microsoft Word, Excel, and/or PowerPoint. They would be forced to either buy or get their companies to buy Microsoft Office 2004 for the Mac, which sells for $399 list.

I know that some of you believe that alternative office products negate the need for anyone to use Microsoft Office for the Mac. That simply isn’t true. There are interoperability issues with even the best alternative office apps. Trust me on this, some of us are required by our companies to use the Microsoft product.

On the other hand, some people don’t have those constraints. They might be very happy, indeed, with a product such as NeoOffice, the free, open-source Mac office suite based on the OpenOffice.org office suite.

So how do we figure this out? Do we tote up $400 or no? It’s much harder to generalize about software. It’s not easy to draw fair comparisons about software on a level playing field. I believe each person has to make his or her own assessment on the software front. Here’s are some factors I think you should weigh in considering the software side of analyzing Mac vs. PC costs:

1. There is plenty of software available from the Mac, both from established software houses and from individuals. Surprisingly, there are more products in some product categories than there are for Windows. For example, every time I turn around, I stumble across another project management tool for the Mac. There are more browsers for the Mac than there are for Windows. I don’t think Windows users realize just how many software product categories Microsoft has come to own. It’s true, though, that in some categories, there are only two or three Mac offerings. All in all, though, there is a very solid, rich spread of software makers creating Mac applications. As a long-time software reviewer, I’ve been surprised by the quality of these applications, too.

2. The $80 Parallels Desktop for Mac virtualization application lets you run Windows and Linux very seamlessly on your Intel Mac and switch between Mac and Windows, for example, with a simple keyboard command. It’s even possible to run Windows applications as if they’re running in the Mac interface, and to associate data files on the Mac with Windows applications. This extremely powerful tool literally gives you access to all your Windows applications on your Mac. Parallels is one of the best software utilities I’ve tested in years. It adds a huge chunk of software value to any Macintosh purchase. Apple’s free Boot Camp beta software is less convenient, but it offers the same ability to run Windows on your Mac. VMware’s forthcoming Fusion virtualization tool for the Mac will compete with Parallels.

3. You don’t need security software. OK, so I’m not one of those Mac users who chortles up his sleeve about security. I take it seriously. And I don’t think the Mac is inherently immune from security threats. But the real-world truth right now is that most security threats are aimed at criminal financial gain, and the Mac’s market share is just too small to be a cost-effective target. I mean, really, which would you pirate? The giant cargo ship with the gangplank resting on the dock, or the buttoned-up tugboat moored 100 yards offshore? Other than software to block spam, Mac users don’t need any of the security products that Windows users absolutely require — antivirus, anti-malware/spyware, identity-theft protection, anti-bot, and so on. (The Mac comes with built-in firewall software.) There’s definitely a cost savings because of this. And I suppose we could work up some numbers based on annual subscription fees and the need to upgrade to new versions of security products every year or two. This does add up over time, but it’s not really a big chunk of change.

To me, the far more important cost is the system overhead, user distraction, system instability, and the need for user troubleshooting that Windows security software entails.

Kenneth Burton, a technical director for a school system, emailed me with the same thought:

“What about the issue of spyware and antivirus software? One of the reasons I switched to a Mac at home two years ago was because of the hassle of cleaning up the computer after my 16-year-old son.”

Another reader, Rudy Wolf, agrees:

“Having just made the switch myself (we now own four Macs), I have to take exception to your [first article in this series]. You didn’t go far enough! Where is the discussion about the hours I used to spend messing with Symantec’s Norton utilities and Windows utilities to keep my Windows PCs running and optimized? I have personally gained one to two hours per week because I no longer have to maintain four Windows PCs. My MacPro is now almost two years old. In that time, I have not run one utility to defragment its disk, optimize the system, or upgrade software. The worst I’ve had to do is press the Enter key a few times when the computer upgraded itself (flawlessly each time). I don’t know about others, but getting back 50-100 hours a year is a savings that has to be factored into the equation.”

4. Software is cheap. Unless you’re talking AutoCAD, Photoshop, or Microsoft Office, software isn’t all that expensive, folks. Just two hours of my time spent working on a Windows PC problem is worth far more than the average cost of most software programs. Even if you’re retired, you have to factor in the time wasted wrestling with problems. The point I’m trying to make is that, OK, so you may have to back your Mac purchase with an investment in software, but you had to do the same thing with your Windows purchase at some point. It’s a cost of doing business. But more important, you can amortize the cost of the software against the time you’ll save not wrestling with stupid PC problems. There is a very real savings there that’s difficult to measure or quantify. That benefit is at once supremely valuable and difficult to quantify. The problems you face with Windows are very definitely a cost to using that operating system and hardware.

Remember the Yugo, a car introduced to the U.S. in 1984 whose main claim to fame was that it was incredibly cheap, woefully underpowered, and highly trouble prone? Yugos spent a lot of time in the shop. In considering the savings on the purchase price, Yugo buyers probably didn’t factor in lost personal time, aggravation, repair charges, and what they were paying for transportation when their cars were being repaired. This is the very definition of penny wise and pound foolish. I’m not saying that Windows is a Yugo, believe me. But reverse the picture: The Mac represents the most reliable vehicle you can buy (perhaps a Toyota?). There’s a hidden value to having far fewer problems than average. And a big segment of the computer-using market place doesn’t seem to want to acknowledge that.

No Lie: Impressive Reliability
The single most frustrating thing about being a Mac user is the disdain with which some Windows users view Macs. Apparently you’re not a real man or woman unless you’re suffering with everyone else.

The thing is, I don’t think Windows users (I know, I was one myself for many years) give much credence to the notion that Macs are far more trouble-free. Because it’s difficult to quantify it must therefore be false. It’s a subjective data point. As a long-time Windows author, reviewer, and expert, I know that I felt that I could solve any Windows problem (and probably could), and as a result, the Mac’s advantages held less benefit for me.

But I was wrong about that. The unexpected advantage I gained is that using my computer is more enjoyable. My concentration isn’t broken periodically by problems, updates, security pop-ups, and the like. I’m not thinking that I’m using a Mac. I’m thinking about what I’m using the computer to do — what I’m reading, writing, figuring, buying, watching, etc. The Mac becomes just so much chrome wrapping the data I’m interacting with. You’re not conscious of your television set while you’re watching it. That’s the way it is with a Mac. I found that much harder to achieve on Windows PCs, which are constantly drawing attention to themselves.

Another reader, James Sugrue, put it this way:

“I’ve been saying this for a while now. If you compare Apples to Apples (pardon the pun) then Macs are more often than not cheaper or at least price competitive. The thing your article didn’t touch on was the value you can’t quantify with Macs: Not having to worry about malware, not having to rebuild your machine every six months because the registry has gotten corrupted, or not having to deal with some dodgy driver that takes the system down. Your article didn’t describe the [overall pleasant] Mac experience.

“A recent switcher to the ‘Cult of the Mac,’ I’ve often wondered why I waited so long. I am a professional software developer, using Windows and Visual Studio, so I have a lot of Windows pain most days. I wish I could do all my dev work on the Mac. I see that being a major barrier to switching for most of my peers, even though there are great apps like Parallels and Boot Camp that could help. There’s a lot of ignorance about Apple for some reason among us technical types. A programmer at work said yesterday that he hated Apple. I asked whether he’d ever used a Mac. Nope.”

James, he’d probably hate chocolate if he hadn’t tried it, too.

Apple’s Mac mini is a Trojan horse (not the malware kind) whose entire purpose is to be low-cost enough to entice Mac-curious Windows users to give the Mac a try. The Mac mini is neither powerful nor portable. But it works just fine and will definitely give you the Mac experience. Or consider this: You can rent Macs. They’re not cheap, but it’s a lot less than buying even a new Mac mini.

You’re not going to believe it until you try it yourself. I didn’t.

I expect to write another installment on this subject. I hope to address Macintosh total cost of ownership (TCO), the average length of time people keep their Macs, and Mac resale values, among other things.

I welcome your input on this subject. What I value especially are fact-based arguments on either side of the question.

The new 17-inch MacBook Pro also came with a surprising set of upgrades. Finally, the 17-inch model offers 1,920-by-1,200-pixel resolution. That had been a glaring omission in the previous MBP line. The new higher-resolution display is a $100 option. I vastly prefer this resolution for this size screen. It gives you a lot more screen real estate. Some people may find that some things are too tiny for comfort, but Apple does a much better job than Microsoft at creating UI structures that work well in multiple resolutions. So, for example, the tiny colored dots that let you close, minimize, and expand Finder and program windows appear to be the same size no matter what resolution you’re in. The only issue you may have is with the text of some Web pages. Safari has an optional toolbar button pair that lets you increase the font size of the current Web page up or down one notch. (The Command+ and Command- keyboard combos also handle this.) That was only the only adjustment I needed to make for my aging eyes.

In addition to the new high-res screen, the new MBP 17 has Intel’s faster Intel Santa Rosa chipset running a Core 2 Duo at 2.4GHz and an 800MHz frontside bus. The new MBP 17 comes with 2GB RAM standard (supporting up to 4GB of RAM), and there’s a $150 7,200-rpm 160GB hard drive option. Standard equipment delivers a 5,400-rpm 160GB drive, and there’s also an optional 4,200-rpm 250GB drive.

Graphics moved up a little to Nvidia’s GeForce 8600m GT graphics processing unit with 256MB of GDDR3 SDRAM. It offers dual display and video mirroring and external display at resolutions up to 2,560 by 1,600 pixels.

The new MBP 17 is identical in appearance, size, and weight to the previous generation. In fact, in all other details that I could find (see Apple’s spec page), it’s identical to the previous generation.

Computerworld’s Ken Mingis and I each bought this new machine, and we wound up configuring our purchases identically (with the glossy high-res screen and the 7,200-rpm 160GB hard drive). You can buy the new MBP 17 for $2,799 (same price as the previous generation). With these two upgrades, the list price increases to $3,049 (see Apple’s options configuration page). I paid a lot less because of one of the benefits of signing up to Apple’s ADC developer program, which costs over $500, is a decent discount on one Apple hardware purchase during the one-year membership period. My price was just over $2,400.

I followed Ken’s lead and tried a new RAM vendor to upgrade to 4GB of RAM. Large RAM upgrades under Windows often leave you wondering why you bothered, since there’s rarely more than a minor noticeable performance improvement. But this 2GB upgrade on the Santa Rosa MacBook Pro had a noticeably positive effect. It runs much faster after you double the RAM size.

Apple charges way too much for RAM upgrades. It’s cheaper to take Apple’s default 2GB of RAM on this computer and then purchase two 2GB RAM sticks, replacing the Apple RAM, than it is to buy the 4GB upgrade from Apple at the time of purchase.

Ken and I each bought two 2GB DIMMs for the new MacBook Pros for $215 from OtherWorldComputing.com. Unfortunately, the price has gone up to $228.50 since then. But it’s still a pretty good deal. Other World Computing also offers a $50 rebate on your original 2GB of Apple RAM if you fill out a form and ship your RAM to them.

Another low-cost RAM vendor with which Mr. Mingis and I have had good luck is Data Memory Systems. DMS’s version of this 4GB kit is $238, but without a rebate option.

The OWC DIMMs have run perfectly on both new Macs.

After several weeks using the new MacBook Pro 17 as my main computer, it’s hard to imagine a better notebook computer. It is the best notebook of any operating system that I have ever used. There are no tiny miscues or fit and finish issues. Other than the keyboard, which isn’t on par with that of a Lenovo notebook, I have no wish list at all. The only nit I can find with this computer is that it runs hotter than the 2.33GHz Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro 17 it replaces. In particular, whenever I launch Parallels running Windows XP, this Mac forces me to find some sort of large magazine or pillow to place on my lap as a heat buffer. Otherwise, my legs start baking. My guess is that the 2.4GHz MacBook Pro 15 gets even hotter because the case is smaller and can’t dissipate the heat as well.

For excellent additional information of the new MacBook Pro 17, check out the Computerworld review by Ken Mingis: First look: The new MacBook Pro 17, now with hi-res screen.