Andrew Kantor's tech article in USA Today just took Apple's Boot Camp to task. His column is embarrassingly called "CyberSpeak," which neatly nails two computing cliches: the use of the word "cyber" and having a gestalt title with a capital letter in the middle. How out-of-touch can you get.

Anyway, here's what he gets wrong:

The Mini will set you back about $1100 for a machine with 512 MB of RAM and a 60-GB hard drive — that's when you add in a keyboard, mouse, midrange monitor ($150), and a full copy of Windows XP.

The iMac is about $1600 (with 512 MB RAM, a 160-GB hard drive, and Windows). The MacBook Pro, with an 80-GB hard drive, is about $2000 with Windows. (All these prices come from the Apple Store. I mention the hard drive sizes in particular because you'd need the space to load two operating systems and two sets of software.)

In contrast, a 3 GHz Gateway DX210 PC with 1 GB of RAM, a 160 GB hard drive, and the same monitor I suggested for the Mac Mini — that'll be only $900.

If you own a business, it's a pretty easy choice.

I'm not going to debate the poor-boy numbers he quotes, so I'll assume they're true. But as usual, the PC guy comes to the comparison chart dishonestly... and this time, the disparity is blatantly obvious. That $900 Gateway can't run OSX. Is there no value to OSX or all the pre-installed software (and built-in iSight webcam on the iMac model) that comes with it? How much would it cost me to take a $900 Gateway and run iLife + OSX on it? Oh that's right, it's impossible.

One other thing you forgot... that business that bought the $900 Gateway also needs to buy a $50,000/year IT professional to service it.

By the way, I certainly hope you haven't bought into the argument "graphics are better on the Mac." Yeah, in 1992. Go to a bookstore and grab a book on using Photoshop; you'll see that the Mac and Windows versions are identical. In fact, Photoshop isn't yet optimized to take advantage of the Mac's Intel processors.

He's right about the Intel thing, but that will happen soon enough. But look at his careful word choice: "Go to a bookstore" and compare Photoshop on Mac and Windows. Here's my suggestion: "Go to some fucking computers" and compare Photoshop on Mac and Windows. There's more to using Photoshop than just identical toolbars. There's how Photoshop interfaces with the OS, and, speaking as somebody who has to use Photoshop on both platforms, the experience is not identical.

Oh, and the whole "no viruses on the Mac" business? Besides the fact that it's no longer true, you can get this neat stuff called anti-virus software.

WHOA. Where's your proof that "it's no longer true"? The two theoretical exploits (not viruses) that have shown up in, like, five years of OSX? As compared to the Critical Windows Security Updates that come every week? And the world-crushing mega-virus alert that shows up every other month?

Anti-virus software. There's typical PC thinking for you. Like that's any kind of solution when some new killer virus shows up. You know how it goes. Some stupid virus appears, wipes out a couple businesses before the anti-virus companies catch up to it... and then you still have to rely on your company IT staff or your smart nephew to make sure your Windows is all patched up against it.

A guy at work allowed a virus to mess up his PC when he mistakenly clicked an unfamiliar link in an IM. He knew right away he fucked up, and he's been through hell trying to repair the damage. And you know what, it's still fucked up. How's anti-virus software helping there?

Boot Camp doesn't allow quick switching between OS X and Windows. You have to reboot:

"John, can you get me that info from the accounting system?"

"Sure, but hang on a few minutes while I reboot into Windows."

Ha ha, the old fake-conversation-to-prove-a-point bit. Dude, Boot Camp is BETA software. It sucks. Beta software sucks. At least Apple has the decency to label it beta software, instead of just pushing shit out the door and telling users it will be patched later, like most PC software companies.

Maybe at some point, Boot Camp will work better and have a less stupid name. Will your opinion of it change once you can share data between the two partitions? Or once you can run the two simultaneously on one machine? Or are you so eager to keep justifying that Calvin-Pissing-On-An-Apple sticker that it doesn't matter what comes out of Apple, it's awful?

Further, your IT department now has to support two operating systems, which — given that the majority of IT pros aren't Mac people — means hiring or training. But let's say you're blessed with a staff that already knows both. You're still faced with two OSs, two sets of problems, and double the headache. Oh, joy.

Oh, so IT people are the one group of employees on the planet whose jobs get to become easier as technology progresses? Sorry fuckers, but if The Company wants to introduce an OS that is virus-free, easier to use and maintain, and preferred by some employees, you whiny shits are going to have to learn how to integrate it.

I know that if you have a ton of people, there are a ton of problems no matter what system you prefer - because stupid people will always screw stuff up... but ask any small business that runs an all-Mac shop. They probably don't even have IT personnel. If my office was allowed to go all-Mac, I'd never see my IT staff again.

So there's the true scare: it's job security as long as Windows remains a half-assed, contradictory, befuddled mess of an OS where the average user can't even find a printer on their network.

So if Boot Camp isn't going to convince legions of Windows users to join the Cult of Mac, what's the point? After all, Steve Jobs (praise be unto him) wouldn't introduce a product without a plan.

AHAHHaHAHaa STEVE JOBS IS TEH JESUS LOLOLLLLLOL

Seriously. Are you phoning in your jokes from 1997? I guess I should revert back to calling the competition Windoze or M$. I'm trying to avoid getting personal here, but you are a complete fucktard.

But the notion put forward by some Mac folks — that Boot Camp will improve the Mac's position in the business and gaming marketplace — is backward. Instead, it's more likely to convince Mac users to switch to Windows once they've used it long enough to be deprogrammed.

That's the most ludicrous statement yet, even after the random virus comments. You go find me any Mac user who uses Windows and then decides to switch to it fulltime. You think we've never touched a Windows machine before? You think seeing the majesty of XP for a week is going to convince us that it's a better operating system?

Dude, unless we're really lucky, we're in Windows all the goddamn time. It's unavoidable, thanks to FUD'ers such as yourself who have convinced upper management that we should all stick with the virus magnets and just learn to manage it better. Thanks to bargain basement bundles that sell unsuspecting relatives super-cheap PCs that crash on a pindrop. We're always forced to use a Windows machine for something, and it's always a miserable experience.

We already know that Windows is awful. We've already made the decision. Boot Camp isn't targeted at existing Mac users... except for the adventurous few who want to get into gaming or some other app that was never ported to OSX.

Boot Camp - when (and if) it is finally massaged into something that isn't beta - is going to help average Windows users who already own a heap of software (and are fed up with all the terrible terrible bullshit that comes along with running Windows) change their workspace into a Mac. Maybe they bought an iPod and they want to see how it runs on native soil. Maybe they want a computer that is virus-free. Maybe they just like This Year's Hardware Design. Whatever the reason, they're interested in switching... but they're not interested in having to buy Office again.

This is exactly the conversation I had with a pal who was considering buying a Mac to replace his aging Windows box. It was the software issue that killed it for him, because he would have to buy Office all over again... not to mention the currents Windows apps he likes for which he would need to find suitable replacements (if any even exist).

In that situation, you're obviously interested in having the Mac take over all of the everyday tasks - email, web browsing, instant messaging. Step one, that's where you start. Step two, you start to tinker with Apple's home media stuff, the iPhotos, iTunes, iMovie, etc. By that point, having abandoned IE and Outlook and that absurdly arcane way you have to burn data CDs in XP, you're probably pretty happy with the switch. But you have the Windows partition as your failsafe, until you decide to buy Photoshop or Office for OSX, you jump to OpenOffice or some other such suite... or, Apple reinvents iWork as something that doesn't suck. (Pages is terrible.)

Mr. Kantor is simply flaming, and, even better, he's ignoring the well-informed public response showing up on his own website, most of which is far more reasoned and measured than my posting here.