Henry Kalir tapped out this message on 1/10/2003 12:58 PM >For Apple to survive it has to have a firm base. You're looking at things >from a Mac loyalist point of view, something like: "If t'aint running on a >Mac - we don't need it". There are many applications which NON Mac users >use - just go to ANY computer store, and see what's available for the PC >and what's available for the Mac. If those programs could run on BOTH Mac >and PC - OTHER people might be tempted to go with a Mac. Sometimes it's just a problem of nomenclature. For example, Office is the same program and named the same for both, so the GDP (generally dumb public) sort of knows that Mac can "do it". On the other hand, they may have some program they like to use a lot on their PC, but even if there is a similar BETTER one for the Mac, if it's named differently, they have no clue. They need to start putting COMPARABLE TO or BETTER THAN on the boxes for the benefit of GDP. I saw a "frantic" ad on tv for some PC company's photo editing software that was included in the bundle. The details were unmemorable -- can't remember which company or the name of the program being showcased -- because the interface was so ugly the camera did not linger on any real shots of it, the window commands, etc, choosing instead to concentrate on the supposed delightful expression on the users' faces. It did not even tout ease of use...just capability. Now, I KNOW this software is not nearly as good as iPhoto, or iMovie and GCon for both Mac Classic and X yet there are people who will think that the Mac "hasn't got anything like it". Bottom line, it was da**** ugly and I'll bet just as hard to use but those PC folks just don't know any better.