As far as the physical laptop goes, it’s beautiful. The engineering is pristine, and the quality of the construction is better than any laptop I’ve seen or previously owned. When it comes to the OS, I’m not as convinced. It took me a lot of adjustment to get around in Mac OS X after years of living in Windows, and even now–a year and a half later–there are things I miss and prefer about Windows. One of the things I missed most was Aero Snap. I loved the simple convenience of just dragging a window to the left or right to automatically fill half of the display, or maximizing and minimizing the window by dragging it up or down. It had become habit–a habit that allowed me to work more efficiently and be more productive.

I also found that there are certain software applications I rely on which have Mac OS X versions, but that the Mac versions are sad, pathetic shells of their Windows counterparts. The Mac versions of Microsoft Office and Intuit’s Quicken personal finance applications are like dumbed-down caricatures of the “real thing”. I’m not sure why Office can’t just be Office, but there are a number of small–but key–features and capabilities I found missing, and the cartoon-like balloon letter icons for the Office apps in Mac illustrate how Microsoft views the audience–whimsical and immature, as opposed to serious and professional. Quicken on Mac OS X is a joke. It’s simple features are an insult to the Quicken brand.

Thankfully, I found a solution that gives me the best of both worlds. Parallels. Parallels allows me to run a virtualized Windows operating system from within Mac OS X. The best part, though, is that I don’t have to treat Windows as a separate OS, or switch back and forth. There is a feature of Parallels called Coherence which basically merges the two platforms together, and lets me access and use all of the Windows tools and applications directly from Mac OS X, as if they’re installed natively. Parallels provides seamless access to both operating systems–and their respective software–simultaneously.

It’s not perfect, though. First, I am running two complete OS platforms with the same, limited hardware resources. It is typically surprisingly smooth, but if I try to do too much at once it can quickly bog everything down to a frustratingly slow speed. Second, the MBA only has a 128GB SSD–I don’t even keep my music stored locally because it would quickly max out the hard drive. That means I have the virtualized Windows installed on an external USB drive, and if I take the laptop on the road I’d have to bring the drive with me, or not use Windows 8 unless I’m in my office. Lastly, the Coherence feature is awesome, but if I want to be able to use Aero Snap, I have to exit Coherence, and actually use Windows as a separate virtual OS.

I still love Windows. I never have become a true Mac convert or zealot. It has its own pros and cons, and I don’t dislike it per se–but I love Windows. If I didn’t feel like I need to stay in touch with all of the major operating systems, I’d probably just install Windows 8 on the MacBook Air hardware and call it a day. But, if you have a Mac, and you’d still like to be able to seamlessly run Windows software, you should check out Parallels.

The speculation on the street is that Apple is ready to embrace ARM processors for its laptops (and possibly even Mac desktops) as soon as there are 64-bit ARM chips available–likely late 2012 or early 2013. Moving to ARM would continue the convergence of traditional PCs and mobile devices, and would allow Apple to engineer and manufacture its own processors.

Considerthat Microsoft intends to embrace ARM on some level as well. Microsoft probably won’t abandon x86 processors completely any time soon, but it has demonstrated an early prototype of Windows 8 running on an ARM platform, and it intends to make the next-generation Windows OS more tablet friendly–a market where ARM is the dominant architecture.

Because of its dominant role in server, desktop, and laptop PCs, Intel will not be hurt too much by an Apple defection to ARM. But, the rise of mobile devices–smartphones and tablets–, combined with Microsoft giving its official blessing to ARM, and Apple possibly dropping Intel chips in favor of ARM, illustrate the culture shift that is going on, and indicate that Intel’s days as a virtual monopoly may be over.

Let’s compare:

• Size: the iPad is much thinner–only about half of the HP Mini 5102′s 0.9 inches
• Weight: the iPad is much lighter–weighing about half of the HP Mini 5102′s 2.8 lbs
• Display: Both have 10-inch capacitive multi-touch displays, so if you prefer to let your fingers do the walking you can do that on the HP as well as on the iPad. The iPad has slightly better resolution and includes IPS technology that gives the display a wider viewing angle. Both support 720p high definition video, and the HP has an option that will allow it to display 1080p resolutions.
• eReader: the iPad comes with access to iBooks and native ePub format abilities, plus there is an app for reading Kindle. The HP Mini 5102 can read ePub formats using tools like Stanza, or the ePubReader add-on for Firefox, and Amazon provides free software to read Kindle on Windows as well.
• Durability: the HP Mini 5102 is enclosed in an aluminum case so it is protected when closed in transit, and it has a special coating on the keys so its designed to take some abuse. The iPad screen is exposed to scratches and impacts unless you purchase an accessory like the iPad case which protects the iPad and adds some versatility for using it, but also adds to the thickness which levels the playing field on size.
• Networking. both come with wireless networking capabilities by default. Apple will also offer a 3G-capable version of the iPad, but it will cost $130 more than the Wi-Fi version and is only truly compatible with AT&T. You can use the USB ports on the HP Mini 5102 to install a 3G USB dongle and add 3G connectivity to whichever wireless provider you choose.
• Camera. One of the glaring omissions on the iPad is the camera. It doesn’t have one. The HP Mini 5102 has a 2-megapixel webcam which includes the ability to protect the PC and log in using facial recognition technology.
• Battery Life. Both devices claim approximately 10-hours of functional battery life.
• Storage.the iPad comes in 16Gb, 32Gb, and 64Gb models. The 64Gb model is $200 more than the entry-level 16Gb model. The HP Mini 5102 has a 160Gb hard drive, plus the ability to expand memory limitlessly using USB thumb drives and external USB hard drives. 
• Software. the iPad runs apps rather than full-blown software applications. That means iPad users can run any of the 150,000 or so apps found in the iTunes App Store, and that the apps are typically cheaper and take up less space. The HP Mini 5102 can run any of the millions (haven’t verified that number, but seems plausible) of applications available for Windows, including the ability to run the ubuiqitous Microsoft Office products like Word, Excel, and Outlook.
• Flexibility. the iPad is the iPad. Unless you use some sort of remote desktop solution to connect it to a Windows desktop, it will just be an iPad. The HP Mini 5102 is available with Windows 7, Windows XP (which I highly discourage), Suse Linux, or FreeDOS. You can configure it how you choose and install virtually anything.
• Price. the iPad starts at $499 for the entry-level, Wi-Fi only 16Gb model. The 64Gb 3G-enabled iPad tops out at $830. The HP Mini 5102 starts at $399, with room for additional costs if you choose the optional 1080p high definition capabilities, or if you add a 3G USB dongle from a wireless provider.

Ounce for ounce and dollar for dollar, the HP Mini 5102 netbook compares quite favorably against the iPad. It has many of the same features that make the iPad desirable, many of the features that users wish the iPad had, more flexibility, and a lower price.

All its missing is the Teflon reputation of Apple, and the legions of rabid followers who won’t read this because they aren’t interested in how it compares with other products. If the logo on the case is the right shape, that is all the comparison-shopping they need.

Looks bad-ass. Sign me up.

But, alas, Microsoft did not take advantage of the premier gadget event of the year–the 2010 International Consumer Electronics Show–to unveil the coveted device. All Ballmer showed us was a semi-functional tablet PC from HP running Windows 7.

Woo hoo?

Fast-forward a couple weeks, and now Apple has revealed its much rumored, hyped, and speculated tablet PC dubbed the “iPad”. The iPad, despite all attempts by Steve Jobs to paint it differently, is essentially a very large iPod Touch. However, despite myself I still think it looks cool and I can think of some reasons I might be willing to part with $500 to get one.

That said, there are still a variety of reasons that a Microsoft tablet PC like the mythic Courier, or even the tablet PC’s running Windows 7 from the likes of HP or Lenovo, will make much better business tools than the iPad.

That said, there are also some good reasons that the iPad could be uniquely qualified as a business tool. And, for the millions of iPhone and iPod Touch users, the iPad provides a consistent, familiar experience–not unlike that which Microsoft customers could enjoy across different platforms if Microsoft ever releases Windows Mobile 7.

If you can’t be with the one you love (Courier), love the one you’re with (iPad).

Publishing statements like this–no matter how true–is a sure-fire way to spark a debate of epic religious proportions between the two sides. The arguments from the Apple faithful are schizophrenic in nature though. The statistics either mean everything or nothing depending on where they fall.

A tenth of a percent increase in Mac OS X market share is proof that Windows has fallen from grace and Mac OS X is poised to conquer the world. But, Any mention of the fact that Windows dominates more than 90 percent of the desktop operating system market is met with objections from Apple fanbois that either:

A) Windows is pre-installed by default on most hardware that is sold, so customers have a gun to their heads and the operating system doesn’t dominate on its own merits.

B) Apple is not trying to compete head-to-head with Windows and is content as a luxury, high-end niche operating system.

C) all of the above.

It is hard to question Apple’s success, though–if you’re an investor. With a virtually negligible fraction of the overall market Apple has still managed to rake in half of the total revenue for the desktop market.  

As an end-user though, that statistic would make me think twice (or three or four times) about my purchasing decision. The Mac OS X operating system is nice, but I am not sure its worth paying nearly three times the price on average for a comparable desktop or laptop system.

Here is what I learned: Security is important. Enterprises and consumers both want a secure operating system. If Windows 7 is not secure, there will be an exodus of enterprises and users as they migrate en masse to Linux or Mac. Also- if Windows 7 is not secure Apple will make fun of it and attackers will exploit its weaknesses.

Seriously?? I did link to it up above, but you can save yourself the time and trouble. You already got all of the pertinent information in the preceding paragraph.

Yes- Microsoft has a dominant share of the PC market and huge bullseye on its back which both attackers seeking financial gain and rival operating systems seeking a competitive edge. Yes- there are alternative operating systems, office productivity applications, and web browsers that users can switch to if they are unhappy with Microsoft.

I was looking for something more than a lengthy re-hash of the obvious. As it is, the 10 reasons aren’t even all related to users at all, so it wasn’t even 10 reasons Windows 7 security is critical for users. It was more like 10 reasons Windows 7 security is very important to Microsoft so it doesn’t embarrass itself and lose market share.

I guess that title was too long or lacked sizzle though?