However, for me it’s panning out as much more of a work machine than I’d originally thought it would. A lot of my day is spent reading and responding to email and the iPad has become my main mail machine. I never intended it to be, but somehow it’s snuck up and taken over to the point where I actually forget where the laptop is.

It’s not even that the mail application is spectacularly powerful or any better than the desktop equivalent, more that the iPad just makes the whole process faster. It happened invisibly. One day I was using my laptop, the next the iPad had seduced me and I hadn’t even noticed.

I’ve been really surprised by the accuracy of the keyboard. I was very, very dubious at first and bought the Bluetooth keyboard, but honestly I’ve only used it a few times.  It really is “good enough” for 90% of all the typing that I do. 2,000-word feature? Not really. 200-word email? No problem.

With this in mind, it’s perhaps no surprise that Pages isn’t going to replace Microsoft Word any time soon. It’s one of those Apple products that lacks basic functionality at launch, but for the price it’s very good. Numbers and Keynote aren’t products I use a lot but they offer just enough to get the job done. Those looking for a fully featured spreadsheet or presentation tool will probably find they lack the bells and whistles needed, but then that’s true of the whole platform.

I’ve never used the calendar on my iPhone at all, but on the iPad it’s much easier to manage your diary and I’ve been using it much more than I expected. Admittedly this falls away from the remit of work, but the wife and I planned childcare and holidays with it over dinner using the accelerometer to view it in the right orientation; it’s a proper interactive digital calendar.

The address book is good and it’s easier to edit multiple contacts on the iPad than on the iPhone, but it’s not the most groundbreaking of features.

But perhaps the iPad’s most surprising invasion on my working life has been the way it’s changed the way I browse the web. On several occasions I’ve found myself  sat in front of my desktop Mac using the iPad to search. Ludicrous I admit, but somehow it’s easier, faster, better.

There’s something about how the iPad fits in without standing out that’s impressed me. I expected to use it as a living room machine for browsing or Twittering in front of the TV and I do, but I’m also finding myself taking it everywhere I go too.

Even as an Apple user I never expected to use the iPad so much in my work. I got an iPad to write about it, not with it. Some have argued that the tablet is a solution looking for a problem and until I started to actually use the iPad I’d have tended to agree.

Over the years I’ve been called an Apple fanboy more time than I care to recall. It’s a fairly commonplace occurrence wherever you write about Macs. If it makes any difference I’ve been called an Apple hater about the same number of times. But I urge you to try an iPad out. I’m not pretending this is a device for everyone in fact it most certainly isn’t, but you really should give it a go.

The iPad has changed the way I work and not because I’m some slavish Apple fanboy, but because it’s excellent. Compromised yes, perfect not at all, but the iPad is showing the way for tablet computing and, so far, the sales figures imply the same too.

However, I’ve been asked whether iPads are really just for Mac lovers. And the answer is a decisive no: the iPad requires no previous Mac experience or love whatsoever. Sure, some of the applications are similar – even the icons are identical – but that is where the similarity ends.

You need a copy of iTunes to register and sync the iPad with your computer, but by far and away the majority of iTunes users are using a Windows-based machine so no Mac love needed there. You can buy apps, music, movies and books from the iPad too, so you don’t even need an external computer. You can email, browse the web and play games on an iPad as well. There’s little need to ever have even used a computer, let alone love one.

You could argue that the Apple logo itself is the only thing that makes the iPad fit into a Mac lovers life. As I sit in trendy coffee shops with my smug white earphones and my pretentious iPad, I can rest assured that everyone knows the iPad is made by Apple. I am, therefore branded by association. Of course, only a very few really care about the logo, but it’s about the only area I can think of where an iPad is significantly linked to the Mac line.

This is, perhaps, Apple’s master stroke. Instead of making a tablet computer with a slightly modified copy of its desktop Mac OS X, it has created a new one very loosely based on the look and feel of the desktop OS. So loosely based in fact that few users would know they share anything in common whatsoever. Instead of trying to beat Microsoft at its own game Apple has clearly decided to play a different game and so far it’s working.

It’s still very early days for the iPad, but I don’t imagine Apple will make the same mistakes it did in the late 1980s and early 1990s this time round. I doubt it’s the end for the Mac, but the iPad fits more readily into the iPhone or iPod touch lover’s life than it does a Mac user’s.

And since my Apple iPad arrived I’ve only taken the bag out once.

The big padded bag has been dumped for a small and light rucksack. The iPad itself has a case to protect the screen, and there’s still plenty of room in my lightweight rucksack for the tiny power adapter. That’s if I need it: the iPad will last all day, two days even.

Now, my setup is unique to me so I’m not advocating everyone simply drop their laptop and get an iPad, but for what I do it’s perfect. My mobile needs are fairly basic. I have to get email, be able to browse the web, write and fill in the odd spreadsheet. The iPad can do all this and be a games console, book, magazine and newspaper.

Luckily I don’t have to commute to work anymore, but I’m often on the train to exotic locations such as Leeds, York or Halifax. For shorter journeys I rarely bothered getting the laptop out as it was a bit of a pain. With the iPad you whip it out and it’s on.

That might sound simplistic, but really, the fact it’s on instantaneously makes an enormous difference. I know that Office barely takes any time to launch, but the word processor on my iPad is open as soon as I tap its icon. The on-screen keyboard isn’t perfect, but it’s by no means bad – certain no worse than the physical one on the netbook I currently own but no longer use. Where it’s standing room only you can still use the iPad too.

On my longer journeys I’ve been catching up on TV and movies and not had to worry about battery life. Again, it’s a tiny thing, but it really makes the iPad a better solution than a laptop. In fact, since I started using my iPad I’ve barely had the need to open the laptop – the iPad can perform around 90% of the tasks I used the laptop for. The other 10% can usually wait.

When Steve Jobs, with his famously unassuming and respectful manner, dismissed netbooks as useless I was a bit skeptical. However, I have a netbook and it’s gathering dust, the iPad has become part of my leaving the house ritual: keys, wallet, phone, iPad.

I’m sure some of you reading this will need access to bespoke applications and work-related security regimes that rule out anything but the ultra-secure Windows XP, and for this the iPad is irrelevant. However, for anyone whose mobile working needs are basic I’d seriously suggest you put an iPad to the test. Your shoulders will thank you.

Since my iPad arrived I’ve been downloading and reading as many of the magazines and newspapers as I could find. It’s an incredibly compelling and eye-opening experience. There have been a few false dawns in the publishing industry with the CD-ROM and then the internet supposedly one step from killing off magazines and newspapers. The iPad might just succeed where they failed.

The interesting thing for me is that, although some of the magazines designed to give an “experience” are indeed very good, a plain PDF can be just as compelling. For instance, MacUser is available on the iPad and it’s essentially a copy of the print version with some page-turning trickery. It works and reads just like a paper magazine and that’s great.

The screen is a real boon for magazine reading too. Unlike the iBooks application (which Stuart Turton covered in a separate blog), where it’s just the printed word vs your eyeballs, the magazines and newspapers mix things up a bit. This not only makes them easier on the eye, but also much more compelling and, to borrow a phrase from marketeers the world over, “adds value”.

Some of the PC Pro staff have complained that the iPad is just too heavy to use comfortably, and this issue was brought up in the Apple iPad review as well. Personally, I’d suggest they eat more crusts and work on their wrists the next time they’re down the gym. However, iPad magazines may just be the right format for them. A magazine is much more of a visual treat than a book and takes much less reading than one. Hence, the time holding the iPad is reduced so it’s less of a pain. I don’t find the iPad too weighty, but perhaps I’m made of sterner stuff.

Being able to sit in a coffee shop and buy a range of magazines is also a “game-changing” experience. No longer do you have to shlep to WHSmith to buy your favourite titles. Better still, if you get bored you just get something else without leaving your seat. It might sound minor but if you get fed up looking at the pictures in National Geographic you’re not stuck with it, simply download the latest GQ and read the articles (they’ll be glad of your custom, as they’ve only sold 365 so far).

Buying magazines is easy: download the app and tap, tap, donk. The charge is then debited through your iTunes account. Some of the newspapers are free and others offer a selection of free articles with a subscription required for more content. It’s the very model of a working and profitable paywall. No forms to fill in, no email sign-ups to which you must reply, no credit card details to enter. Simple, easy and bank-account-emptying.

I’m not sure the printed word is doomed even with the iPad and the many competitors about to be launched. However, this is the best digital magazine experience I’ve ever had. I fully expect to see a host of iPad magazines and newspapers soon available.

I’m now at the end of my Windows 7 experiment and I have to return the PC users’ suit and tie to the PC Pro cupboard and put on my blue jeans, black turtle neck jumper and New Balance trainers.

It’s been a steep learning curve for me, but not in the ways I thought it would be. I had Windows up and running with all the applications I needed to do my job much more quickly than I thought. I’d arranged my desktop, partitioned the hard drive and worked out the basics in less than a day, and that includes installing the software.

I’ll admit that I made errors; some based on ignorance and others assumption. However, I can tell you with good conscience that everything I’ve talked about during this experiment has been my true experience. I’ve not said anything simply to stir the Mac vs. PC hornets’ nest or to get a rise.

What’s interesting is that despite the fact that the Mac market poses no threat or real competition to the PC world, there’s so much animosity between the two camps of users. Can you imagine Tesco customers arguing the toss over bread and cheese with Spar fans?

I’ve always been aware of the potential for Mac users and PC users to become heated in defence of their OS (I used to work for MacUser, which sits in the same office as PC Pro), but I’m surprised that even after all these years the arguments are the same. The row hasn’t changed even though Microsoft and Apple are largely transformed.

As I said at the start of this experiment, I’ve used Window XP, but that’s on an office machine and an IT manager maintains it so I’ve never really had a chance to play around with the system. This truly is the first time I’ve had the chance to snoop around and install questionable freeware and other such stuff on a Windows box. Nothing has really made me long for my Mac in that time. There have been a few differences, but none insurmountable and none that required me to go back to my Mac to get the job done.

I’m not sold on the “my PC is £800 cheaper than the equivalent Mac” argument because the price differential just isn’t that high. Not to mention the really, really dirty secret that no-one dare mention: price isn’t a factor for many people. Well, enough people to keep Apple in business, at least.

Honestly, I don’t think I’ll be switching my main Mac Pro for Windows 7, but my next laptop might be a Windows machine and that’s quite an achievement. I’ve set out to use Windows 7 in exactly the same way I would a Mac and I’ve found exactly zero problems. I still prefer my Mac, but whereas I find Windows XP a chore Windows 7 draws no such response.

If I were an XP user I’d upgrade to Windows 7 without hesitation. As a Mac user I’m a touch more hesitant, but that’s quite a shift in my opinion.

Click here to read the rest of Chris Brennan’s blog on converting from Mac to Windows 7

In the latest part of our bid to convert a Mac user to Windows 7, Chris Brennan explores the ever thorny issue of pricing

I’m nearing the end of my month with Windows 7 and so I’d thought it would be a good idea to have a look at the pricing structure. If I’m going to invest it’s probably best to know just how much I’m going to have to spend on this OS.

The laptop I was supplied with came with Windows 7 Ultimate, but having listened to the PC Pro podcast on the subject I’m under the impression that Home Premium will be more than sufficient.

It’s a bit odd as a Mac user to have the choice of operating system as the Mac OS comes in just two flavours: Standard and Server. If I step back to Home Premium from Ultimate am I likely to see any difference whatsoever? No, not at all seems to be the general consensus which begs the question why does Microsoft put that doubt in  my mind?

If you’re going to make your Home Premium product so all encompassing why bother with a Professional or Ultimate edition? Did the extra capabilities in the other versions really cost that much more to develop?

Apple makes great play of its single version approach and though I’m not exactly confused to the point of delirium by the three Windows options the pricing does seem to add to the overall complexity of making the right choice.

According to my local PC World the difference between a full boxed copy of Windows 7 Professional and Ultimate is £20 which seems an odd sum, why produce two editions so close together? Of course, the ability to upgrade is a simple solution to this problem and should I find that I’m missing out on that desperately needed feature that’s only available in Ultimate I can always add it at a later date.

Having said all that, the simplicity of the Macs single upgrade approach does have its drawbacks too. My copy of Leopard cost about £90 if memory serves, and Tiger the same before that, and Panther come to think of it.

The latest OS upgrade, Snow Leopard cost me £25. There was just the one version of each of these and I was getting the full copy for my money. However, I’m sure they’re nowhere near the value of a full new version of Windows, with the exception of Snow Leopard that is.

I’m not really sold that Apple OS iterations are simply service packs, there’s more to them than that, but they’re not complete new systems that’s for sure. So, despite the slightly more complex approach to choosing the Windows OS that’s right for me it certainly feels like it’ll be better value over its lifetime.

Click here to read the rest of Chris Brennan’s blog on converting from Mac to Windows 7

In the latest part of our bid to convert a Mac user to Windows 7, Chris Brennan compares the adverts of Microsoft and Apple and draws some interesting conclusions

The current Windows 7 advertising campaign can’t fail to have grabbed your attention. Essentially, Microsoft is saying that you, the user, designed this latest incarnation of the world’s most popular operating system. They listened to what you wanted and put it in Windows 7.

Does that mean you were responsible for Vista too I wonder? Could an advertising campaign convince me to switch?

The I’m a PC campaign was launched in 2008 in response to the I’m a Mac advertising campaign, which believe it or not started way back in 2006. I have never liked the I’m a Mac campaign as at its heart is a childish message: you’re not me and I’m better than you so ner.

There’s no doubt the Apple campaign has been successful, it wouldn’t have run and still be running all these years later if it wasn’t. The ads are slick and well produced, even dare I say it amusing. But perhaps the most important thing about them is that there’s rarely a price or product in them. It’s your own imagination, with a nudge from the caricatures that sells you into the brand.

The I’m a PC adverts are altogether more friendly and human. The man at the gym, the woman in a taxi, the mum at home with the kids; they’re real people in the real world that I can associate with. Do I really want them designing an OS though? Is Microsoft saying that after 20-odd years of designing operating systems, it turns out Mimi, Crystal and Ramin were the missing link?

There’s a tale that’s probably not true, but it makes a nice story. The Microsoft Word team were praised to the high heavens for Word 5.1 for the Mac; it was slick, quick and just what people wanted, then they listened to the users and added all the extra features that those users demanded.

Today users complain about a bloated, creaky and crash-prone application when all they wanted was Word 5.1 with this ‘one’ extra feature. It’s not because the developers are poor that Word for Mac is so maligned - it’s because users are sometimes the worst judges of what they need.

Perhaps, that’s the difference between Apple and Microsoft laid bare in the marketing and their products. Microsoft listens too hard to too many users and tries to please everyone, where Apple doesn’t listen to anyone; it’s already perfect, you just didn’t realise. The Microsoft adverts aren’t really having much of an effect on my opinion of Windows 7, but they’re better than the wow starts now of Vista. It’s a start.

Click here to read the rest of Chris Brennan’s blog on converting from Mac to Windows 7

In the latest part of our bid to convert a Mac user to Windows 7, Chris Brennan compares Finder to Explorer and wonders what all the fuss is about

The Finder on the Mac seems much maligned by many Windows users and I have to admit I’m not sure why. Since using Windows 7 I’ve found the methods of storing and finding files much the same. The Finder and Explorer windows look strikingly similar and can be viewed in much the same way.

After using the Windows Explorer I’m not really convinced it’s necessarily better than the Finder, but as I’ve already said that may well be because I’m more used to the Mac way of doing things. I have to admit that the smart folders of OSX are a much better solution than libraries in Windows 7. Unless I’m missing something (and there’s a rather large chance I am) they’re not as flexible.

I have a smart folder on my Mac desktop that has all the .jpg files I’ve opened in the last month and one that has all the PDF files with Invoice in the name that are created between April 2009 and 2010. As far as I can tell I can’t have a library that does the same. If I’m wrong I’m sure you’ll point it out in the comments.

The search box in Windows Explorer also seems much slower than the results provided by the search box in the Start Menu, which doesn’t seem right. For instance, if I go to the Start Menu and type editor@pcpro I get all the most recent emails I’ve sent to Tim and documents that contain that address almost instantaneously, If I do the same with the search box in Windows Explorer the search takes much longer. The two search boxes should surely be equal surely?

There are some elements of Windows 7 that really don’t make any sense to me at all. The control panel window in my setup at least, has 51 separate entries. A couple of those are for installations I’ve performed: QuickTime and MobileMe. However, that still makes for a window that has 49 items.

Obviously, Microsoft has thought about this and come up with the category view, but  I’m not sure it truly makes things clearer for the user. There’s inconsistency too, when you click any of the control panel items – some open a new window, some take you forward like a browser would and finally some take you to a different style of window altogether.

I also received a number of ‘The page failed to load’ errors when clicking the various control panels. This, I’m going to guess isn’t indicative of normal service, but it hasn’t made my experience in this area a particularly positive one.

I’d be the first to say that my problems with Explorer are mostly trivial rather than serious concerns, but the deeper I go into the Windows system the more I find that feels odd to me. Perhaps, I’ve become so ingrained to the Mac way of doing things that I’ve grown accustomed to the inconsistencies of that OS, but that doesn’t mean that Windows 7 doesn’t have its share of weird and not so wonderful design flaws.

Click here to read the rest of Chris Brennan’s blog on converting from Mac to Windows 7

One of the things you need as a Mac user is patience. Patience with PC users who think you’re an idiot. Patience with IT help desks that don’t know anything about Macs, despite claims they support them. Patience with software developers who don’t have Mac versions of their products.

Actually, that last one isn’t true, as despite the numerous and seemingly never-ending claims that the Mac doesn’t have the necessary applications, I’m still to find a Windows application that can’t be matched on the Mac.

On my Mac I use Microsoft Office with Adobe Photoshop. I have Skype, Firefox, TweetDeck and iTunes, and this PC I’m working on now is capable of running all of those applications too. So, I’m wondering what are all these applications that the PC has that my Mac doesn’t? It’s supposed to be one of the major benefits to having a PC, isn’t it? Plenty of people in the comments on this blogs have cited it as a reason they use PCs over Macs.

Perhaps I’m not looking in the right place, and you could point out in the comments which applications it is I’m missing out on. As it stands I’m pretty much replicating what I have on my Mac. I’m not saying that all the applications are exactly the same or that they’re even from the same developer, but there are equivalents nonetheless.

The only thing I couldn’t do on my Mac that I can do on this PC is run my Virgin Mobile 3G dongle, as there’s a bug in the Mac software. Apparently, there’s a fix on the way, though I’m told there are already workarounds to the issue. So as it stands my only real reason to switch to Windows 7 is to get a 3G dongle working properly, which I’m sure you’ll agree isn’t that good a reason to jump ship.

At the end of my third week of using Windows 7, the applications have been pretty much the same and compatibility a non-issue. I know that games tend to make it to the PC before the Mac, but in all honesty I’ve got a Playstation 3 for gaming so that’s not much of an incentive either.

As it stands I have a fast, mostly reliable operating system with all the applications I need -  and that’s exactly what I had before. So, what do I gain by switching? If you’ve got a killer application or a really good reason I should dump my Mac I’d love to hear it. But unless I’m missing something, I’m looking at an operating system that offers no real advantage over my Mac.

Click here to read the rest of Chris Brennan’s blog on converting from Mac to Windows 7

I’ve had my first major concern with Windows 7, and it all stems from a news story that appeared  on this very site yesterday. Apparently, Windows 7 is susceptible to eight out of ten new viruses. This is something I rarely have to worry about on the Mac. No one is likely to write a virus that affects only 4% of the computing world.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t claim that bad things can’t happen to a Mac.  It’s just not a major worry. I have the firewall turned on and I don’t open suspect attachments from people I don’t know, but that’s as far as it goes. So the news that even the latest and greatest Microsoft OS is still at risk from hackers leaves me a little uneasy.

In the story was the line: ‘However, the chances of any PC Pro readers running a machine with no anti-virus software are, we hope, pretty remote.’ Ahem, I’m going to admit to gross incompetence now and confess that for the past few weeks I’ve been running Windows 7 without any antivirus software. It just never occurred to me.

Finding that Microsoft provides free protection software called Security Essentials was reassuring. I downloaded it and did a scan that let me know I have no unwanted or harmful software on my laptop. Great.

But how do I know I’m safe? Is this software from Microsoft going to protect me from the various forms of attack? The PC Pro review says that Security Essentials is “far from a comprehensive security suite”. So is my data still at risk? Do I have to invest in a subscription service to get my peace of mind back? If so, which one is going to protect me and how much should I pay? Is this the Microsoft security tax equivalent to Apple’s design tax?

The couple of weeks I spent online without security software could mean that my personal data is already on a website in a dark corner of the internet. My tardy approach to security may mean I face problems further down the line, even with the security software now loaded.

Say what you like about the whys and wherefores of Mac security, but I never had serious worries about my computer security as I do now with Windows 7. The reality of the situation may be very different and I might not be at any risk whatsoever, but the fact remains Macs have fewer, if any, viruses.

Click here to read the rest of Chris Brennan’s blog on converting from Mac to Windows 7