MAKING THE MAC MOVE
Our own Mitch Wagner recently switched from a PC to a Mac. His first impressions: "The Mac is, indeed, a significantly superior machine, especially in the setup. Things seem to be designed to go faster, with less hassle and mousing and clicking and messing around than on the PC. On the other hand, it's still just a computer. Switching to the Mac wasn't a life-changing decision." Has it been for you? informationweek.com/1124/blog_switch.htm

I switched from a PC to a Mac PowerBook a little over three years ago, and I will probably never own another dedicated Windows machine. I like the elegance of the design, the stability of the OS (though I do have to reboot when Second Life stalls from time to time), and its relatively painless installation processes. After having used Windows in every iteration since 3.11 for Workgroups to XP, I made the transition fairly quickly, and all the productivity software I need is available for the Mac.

I can't wait to upgrade to the dual-core Mac, but I probably won't install XP on it. After all, the only thing XP can give me is an expanded list of games, and if I wanted that, I would've purchased a game box. --Russell Brasel

What OS and what type of [PC] system were you using? I mean, if you use a business system--not designed for games and such--you shouldn't expect it to perform well. Business systems are designed to be cost efficient and perform business tasks, not render 3-D images. Personally, if I were to switch my primary OS, it would be to one of the Linux flavors, not a Mac. If you want to be artsy and creative and drink double-mocha lattes at Starbucks, Mac is your machine. If you want to do business, not so much. --R. Lawson

I bought a Mac mini about two years ago. Since I had been using Windows for the past 10 years, I thought I'd try it with as little cash outlay as possible, just in case. I never looked back. Even though the mini is tiny, it's capable of doing more with much less fuss than my much larger desktop Windows machine. What's more, I just bought a MacBook and installed Windows XP.

You could say that life with a Mac is a little boring if you love watching and waiting for virus scans to finish. Being able to just use the computer for its intended purpose is a tremendous relief and time saver. --E. Evans

Let's see now, you like the fact that you only have to plug in the keyboard, mouse, and power [with a Mac]. Same thing on a PC (with wireless), although I prefer a wired connection for the speed. And software on a PC is harder to install than on a Mac. Why? Not because it's a PC, but because there are more choices available for PC users. Where do you want it installed, do you want icons here, there, everywhere, do you want the extras or just the basics, etc. On a Mac, you don't get many choices. It just installs everything, even if you don't want it to.

You compared going from an old PC to a new Mac. How silly can you get? Of course you're going to like the new computer. Had you gone from an old Mac (say, a PowerMac 4 running 9.x) to a brand new PC, you would've said, "Wow, this thing is great! It even has two mouse buttons!" --Alan M

AN IPHONE BY ANY OTHER NAME? SURELY NOT
A recent New York Times business section included a full-page ad for the iPhone, but not the iPhone you're thinking of. This page showed three Cisco/Linksys VoIP phones, and it looked suspiciously like Cisco marking its territory in the battle with Apple for the right to use the name iPhone. --David DeJean informationweek.com/1123/blog_iphone.htm

Well, Apple could change the name of the iPhone. Think about it. If Apple could change the name of the company from Apple Computer Inc. to Apple Inc. to better reflect the wide variety of the company, why not change the name of iPhone to better reflect the product? It's not just a phone, it's an iPod, an Internet communicator, a map, and it runs Mac OS X Leopard. It's a Mac. Why not call it the Mac Nano? There's a name nobody can sue for. --Change It

Cisco snagged that name intentionally so it could, one, get money from Apple, or two, simply draw attention to itself. That's it. It's barely a step above some greasy domain-name squatter. --Mark

It's rather obvious that Cisco's campaign rides the waves of Apple's recent release of iPhone. Cisco has had the name for five years without using even something remotely close to it. So it's obvious that it's doing this to steal some attention (and perhaps market, though I don't think it would be much) from Apple. Submit to the obvious! --Cpt. Obvious

I don't want to see Apple come out on top on this one. While its products are good, it thinks it can bully its way into obtaining trademarks. It even apparently set up a face company in the Caribbean so it could challenge for the trademark without creating too much attention that it was Apple seeking it, although reports will deny this. Cisco should stick to its guns. Apple could use any number of other trademarks. IMobile is a good one. ICell, anyone? --Har