Other Sites
Windows PC machines seem to appeal to one sort of person and Macintoshes to another - at least they have historically. The lines have become more blurry now that Macs have Intel inside and can run Windows at native speeds.
However, traditionally Windows has been widely perceived as the OS preferred by no-nonsense business and techno-geek hacker types, with Macintosh popularly pegged as the tool of artists, writers, and other creative individuals. This arbitrary pigeon-holing reflected practical reality to a degree, although Macs can be superb business computers, and plenty of writers and graphic arts people use Windows these days, and I know an awful lot of conservative Mac-users.
Back on September 30, 1994, Italian novelist Umberto Eco (Foucault’s Pendulum; Name of The Rose) published in a back-page column of La bustina di Minerva in the Italian news weekly Espresso a whimsical piece contending that the Microsoft/Apple rivalry is “a new underground religious war which is modifying the modern world.” Eco says he is “firmly of the opinion that the Macintosh is Catholic and while Microsoft computers are Protestant. Indeed,” Eco declaimed, “the Macintosh is counter-reformist.... It is cheerful, friendly, conciliatory, it tells the faithful how they must proceed step by step to reach -- if not the kingdom of heaven -- the moment in which their document is printed,” pointing out that with a Mac you deal with simple formulae and sumptuous icons, and “everyone has a right to salvation.”
On the other hand, Eco argued, the PC is Protestant, "or even Calvinistic,” demanding difficult decisions and interpretations, and taking “for granted the idea that not all can reach salvation.” The PC user “is closed within the loneliness of his own inner torment.”
Writing in 1994, Eco noted that when the Windows graphical user interface was added to erstwhile command line only DOS, there came a superficial resemblance to the Macintosh’s "counter-reformist tolerance.” Sort of like Anglicanism, said Eco, with “big ceremonies in the cathedral,” but “there is always the possibility of a return to DOS to change things in accordance with bizarre decisions: When it comes down to it, you can decide to ordain women and gays if you want to." Hmmmm. I'm an Anglican Catholic member of the Traditional Anglican Communion, and we take the "Traditional" part very seriously, but Eco was and is right about contemporary mainstream Anglicanism.
"Naturally, the Catholicism and Protestantism of the two systems have nothing to do with the cultural and religious positions of their users," noted Eco. "And machine code, which lies beneath and decides the destiny of both systems (or environments, if you prefer)? Ah, that belongs to the Old Testament, and is talmudic and cabalistic. The Jewish lobby, as always...."
Umberto Eco’s only partly tongue-in-cheek theological analysis of the computer wars has stood up well and is still entertaining, capturing a great deal of essential truth.
You can read Umberto Eco's complete essay here:
http://www.themodernword.com/eco/eco_mac_vs_pc.html
Anyhooo, in a politically-oriented riff on Mac vs. PC, NYTimes.com's Noam Cohen has posted a piece proposing that "Styles make fights - or so goes the boxing cliché. In 2008, they make presidential campaigns, too.
"This is especially true for the two remaining Democrats, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.... On one thing, the experts seem to agree. The differences between hillaryclinton.com and barackobama.com can be summed up this way: Barack Obama is a Mac, and Hillary Clinton is a PC...."
Mr Cohen notes that "Mr. Obama's site is more harmonious, with plenty of white space and a soft blue palette. Its task bar is reminiscent of the one used at Apple's iTunes site."
And he's right. There definitely is a thematic familiarity on the Obama site for those of us who spend time on Apple's Websites. Check it out:
Mr. Cohen continues: "In contrast to barackobama.com, Mrs. Clinton's site uses a more traditional color scheme of dark blue, has sharper lines dividing content and employs cookie-cutter icons next to its buttons for volunteering, and the like...."
Right again. Just look at tthoseWindows-esque, squared-off buttons. It also reminds me a bit of the Firefox browser, but never mind....
Noam Cohen concludes that ".....it is not clear that aligning with the trendy Mac aesthetic is good politics. The iPod may be a dominant music player, but the Mac is still a niche computer. PC, no doubt, would win the Electoral College by historic proportions (with Mac perhaps carrying Vermont)."
Yeah, well maybe, but like Mr. Obama, the Mac is the one with momentum right now, having doubled its market share over the past three years, and projected by Gartner Group to tripled it from it's mid-'00s level by 2011.
And what of Republicans John McCain and Mitt Romney?
I would say that http://www.johnmccain.com is even more Apple-esque in its button bars and general look than even the Obama site. That would be thematically and stylistically consistent with Mr. McCain's rep. as the maverick, non-establishment candidate.
On the other hand, Mitt Romney's site, http://www.mittromney.com/ , reminded me a lot of Mrs. Clinton's, although he has a more attractive button-bar than she does, but his was horribly slow to load and was the only one that wouldn't fit comfortably on my Pismo PowerBook's 1024 x 768 display.
I would have to say that in the Republican context, John McCain is the Mac and Mitt Romney the PC.
But what do I know?
Charles W. Moore
Tags: Blogs ï Commentary ï Hot Topics ï
