Internet Newsletter for Lawyers
November/December 2005, by Delia Venables

Are there alternatives to Windows for a small professional practice?
By Robert Newey

I am a practising solicitor specialising in tax consultancy and this article is based on my own thoughts and experiences. It is written primarily from the perspective of a small practice with a client-server network (currently running Windows) but with no in-house IT support staff.

New technologies eventually overshoot users’ needs

An Economist survey of Information Technology, October 2004, focused on the need to master complexity. It said:

  • Like IT, technologies such as motor cars and electricity were originally difficult to use. Over time, the trend with new technologies is to hide complexities from the user.

  • At the same time, successful innovators tend to defend their positions by adding more features, to the point where users no longer need them. When that happens, there is an opportunity for a new generation of innovators, who introduce something simpler, or cheaper, or both.

    Arguably some of the current problems with Windows arise from this process of overshooting users’ needs. It is difficult to eliminate vulnerabilities to viruses and spyware, for example, because of the need for consistency with existing software.

    Mac OS X and Linux offer advantages over Windows

    Apple’s Mac OS X and Linux, an open-source operating system, are both arguably “simpler, or cheaper, or both”. I believe that both systems are currently, for practical purposes, free of viruses and spyware. This is partly because they are minority systems but also, probably, because their design makes them less vulnerable to the problems associated with Windows.

    Linux is aimed at specialists. It is more common on servers than on desktops. I am not well qualified to comment on its merits on the server and I have not tried spending the time and effort needed to run it on a desktop. (Apple also makes servers.)

    Mac OS X is much better suited to non-specialists than Linux. This article will therefore focus on Apple. (For general information, see www.apple.com/uk/.)

    Apple

    Apple computers run Mac OS X, which was introduced in 2001. To quote from the Apple web site: “All the communication ports are closed and all native services … are turned off by default. The Mac OS X administrator account, unlike the Windows admin account, disables access to the core functions of the operating system.”

    Apple has a reputation for usability, summarised by their slogan: “It Just Works!” I have to say that my own recent experience bears that out: on average using an Apple is easier, faster, more reliable and more enjoyable than using a PC. Apple currently seems to be best at “hiding complexity from the user”, making for a quieter and more productive life.

    Another reason why Apple offers a smoother, more reliable, experience is that Apple designs and integrates both the hardware and the operating system, whereas Microsoft relies on hardware manufacturers to create products that work with Windows. The traditional drawback is that one gets less power for one’s money. Arguably, however, computers now tend to be overpowered for the tasks they undertake - another example of overshoot - so factors such as stability, security and usability are more important than sheer power.

    Personal experience

    In the light of the thoughts set out above, I recently bought my first Apple. I am running Microsoft Office for Mac OS X, including Word, Excel, Powerpoint and Entourage (a similar application to Outlook).

    Briefly I have found:

  • There is no problem with accessing files on a Microsoft Exchange server, or saving files onto the server (on a network where all the other computers are currently Windows PCs);
  • Wireless networking is much easier and more reliable with Apple than with Windows;
  • Mac OS X is much better than Windows at managing numerous applications and documents open at the same time, and at finding documents etc;
  • Microsoft Office for Mac OS X works very smoothly and there have been no problems with document compatibility between Windows and Mac versions;
  • Users of both Entourage and Outlook can access emails and share calendars, address lists etc in a Microsoft Exchange Server environment;
  • Internet browsing is easy;
  • I do not believe that clients can tell the difference between emails or Word documents sent to them from either system.

    Go hybrid?

    There are more applications available for Windows than for other operating systems. Besides the mainstream tasks, such as web browsing, email, word processing, spreadsheet and presentations, a business will use other applications. In my practice these include accounting, OCR and document management.

    For such applications, there are three possibilities:

  • Switch to a Mac OS X version, or find an equivalent for Mac OS X;
  • Use emulation software - Microsoft Virtual PC - to run the Windows application under Mac OS X;
  • Keep at least one Windows PC to handle these functions.

    The first solution may prove disruptive and expensive. The second is likely to have a cost in terms of performance. I feel the third solution - a hybrid setup - may prove most resilient in the long run.

    The bottom line

    In the last analysis, Apple saves me time. For a professional, the value of time hugely outweighs hardware and software costs. I would be interested to know how far my own experience is transferable to other practices. I suspect that, the smaller the practice, the greater the attractions may be.

    Robert Newey is a solicitor specialising in business and international tax consultancy. His practice, Robert Newey & Co, www.taxlaw.demon.co.uk, is a member of the Chown Dewhurst Tax Group, www.chowndewhurst.com.

    Back to Contents.