There's an article published on the CIO magazine mentioning about "5 reasons to say yes to macs, when your company says no".
While overall, the article highlight fair and argumentative argument about the pros and cons of the Mac vs. Windows machine, it is interesting to hear -- at the end of the article -- the CIO mention that he is more worry about where he is going rather than "the car" (e.g. the machine) he is driving.
While that last statement might sound smart and true, I think in reality it is probably not.
To be able to "travel somewhere" and reach the "destination" one wants to be, some things need to be considered carefully:
- You have to know for sure that the "car" that you are driving are well equipped for the journey that you are going to travel to.
- You have to know that the "car" is safe enough and not often broken down (or overheat -- need additional "RAM", "CPU power", etc) so you can have convenient journey.
- You have to know that the "car" is easy enough to drive -- e.g powersteering built in, meter panel is intuitive to use, etc -- so it makes you easy to navigate and drive its entire functionality.
In the world where things are moving into continuous creation of integrated multimedia content (video, audio, podcast, music, sound), desktop apps integrated with the web (RIA), mobility (iPhone, Android), and where work is increasingly being done connected to the web, DOES Windows (even Vista) have what it takes to take on the journey??
Sometimes now, or even today, the "car" is probably as important as the journey itself. Infact, the car manytimes now determine what journey that we can travel to.
Hence, if the CIO concludes that the journey is more important than the car itself, and "assume" that "any car" can take them "there", then probably it is about time to rethink that back.
Such "obvious idea" that the CIO initially had might not be 100% true.
Comments