X
Business

iMac: The easiest PC to use?

One of Apple's long-term strengths has been the ease of use of the Macintosh. In head-to-head competition with Windows, the Mac OS is always easier to use.
Written by Don Crabb, Contributor

One of Apple's long-term strengths has been the ease of use of the Macintosh. In head-to-head competition with Windows, the Mac OS is always easier to use. Mac OS 8.6 carries that tradition forward, as it easily beats Windows 98 in newbie usage tests.

But what happens when Apple begins shipping Mac OS X early next year? Those of you who have tried Mac OS X Server already know that Mac OS X is a real departure from previous Mac OSes -- even if those departures offer underlying reliability improvements. And what about all those iMac buyers who still aren't quite sure they are getting the most out of the Internet -- that "i" portion of the iMac?

The truth is that using the Internet is not the no-brainer that some would like it be. Finding the right Internet Service Provider (ISP), learning how to configure your computer to get on the provider, then learning how to use a Web browser and e-mail program may not be rocket science, but it's not a walk in the park, either. Especially not for the kinds of buyers attracted to the iMac.

Why use AOL?
No wonder so many iMac buyers stay with America Online (AOL) even though they kvetch about the slow connections, bad service, and endless advertising. They stay with AOL because its proprietary software combines Internet access with its own content in a user interface that's manageable for most of them. Except, of course, when it breaks, goes haywire, or just plain refuses to work the way they think it should work.

Up until now, if you wanted to get on and use the Net as easily as AOL offers (when it's not fouled-up), you had exactly no options. If you dumped AOL and went with another ISP, you'd get a CD-ROM in the mail, along with the promise of easy installation of their version of generic Net and Web software -- and precious little in the form of real help with your particular circumstances or training on HOW to use anything for Net access. Even if they provided help, directions often assumed you were running Windows, not a Mac.

Those ISPs act like you were born with the knowledge of how get on the Net. You were not. That makes the slow connections, bad service, and obnoxious and relentless advertising on AOL somehow seem tolerable. At least newbies could get on the damn thing by clicking a few buttons.

Web Training 101
That no options choice just got changed in Chicagoland thanks to a local ISP there called YourNet Connection (www.ync.net or 847-524-3900).

Beginning immediately, all YourNet Connection subscribers will "receive one full month of training in using Internet Explorer, Netscape Navigator/Communicator, basic Internet usage, and Windows 98 for free," said Gary Alec Spies, Executive VP of YourNet Connection.

The training is all Web-based, supplied by an experienced corporate computing training vendor, DPEC, Inc. So the training is the real deal, not some rehashed junk from other Web sites trying to pass itself off as training. I tried several of the DPEC courses that YourNet will offer, and they're quite good, especially for newbies and those who need a skills refresher.

If a small local Chicago ISP can add value to its service and its customers with free Web-based training, why can't Apple do that with its iMac buyers?

As Apple moves closer to Mac OS X and the next generation of iMacs, wouldn't a free Web training setup that helps those buyers really get the most out of their Macs (far beyond what the Macintosh Guide can provide), cut Apple's support costs, sell machines, and add value?

I think it would. And Apple being Apple, they could integrate the interface of such a training tool into the OS and cut a deal with a national Web-based training provider like DPEC to provide the course content.

And then Apple can sit back and claim a new ease-of-use advantage over Windows 98 and Windows 2000.

Sounds like a plan to me. Tell me what you think in the talkback below.



Editorial standards