In yesterday’s column, I briefly mentioned a CNN Money story, citing a report from Forrester Research entitled, “”People are Bringing Macs to Work — It’s Time to Repeal Prohibition.” The title says it all, that more and more people want to use Apple gear at their office, that some are doing it unofficially, relying on outside resources for help. The report calls it “bootlegging,” though that term doesn’t strike me as completely accurate.

Now as most of you recall, Apple has announced that 93 percent of Fortune 500 companies are testing or deploying the iPhone; some 90 percent are supporting the iPad. It stands to reason that Apple’s mainstay product, the Mac, ought to get serious attention too.

The full report is available for the usual exorbitant fee from Forrester, but, according to the author, David K. Johnson, more and more companies are supporting Macs, although 41 percent of the firms that were surveyed still do not officially allow Mac use.

Now IT objections to Macs are traditional, and go back to the days of DOS. Then and now, Macs were regarded as pretty toys, while regular PCs were the tools you needed to use if you want to get real work done. Indeed, I remember once helping a Mac user set up her computer in an otherwise all PC shop. It was the mid-1990s, and the Mac OS wasn’t quite as easy to integrate. On the other hand, I was able to seamlessly connect to the office laser printer, an HP, simply by using the standard LaserWriter driver and choosing the right device description, or PPD, file. The IT people simply stared at me, because doing the same thing on a Windows 95 box meant installing special drivers and jumping through configuration hoops that weren’t for the faint of heart. Sometimes it worked, sometimes you had to repeat the process several times.

Yes, Windows 7 is, in that respect at least, much simpler than Windows 95. Microsoft has made a few useful moves towards simplifying the setup process over the years, particularly with peripherals. But the Mac still has other advantages. The Forrester report admits that, for example, Mac note-books are more reliable and require less maintenance than PC note-books, largely because Apple uses premium, longer-lasting parts. Johnson also admits that Mac OS X is not as vulnerable to malware. All told, Mac users are more productive, simply because they spend less time fiddling with their machines — or waiting for an IT person to help — and thus can concentrate on getting more work done.

The superior reliability and higher productivity means, of course, that Macs cost less over the period of ownership even though the initial purchase price might be higher. What’s just as interesting to me is that this is the very same argument made in favor of the Mac platform since the 1980s. Even when Macs cost far more in relation to PCs than they do today, upkeep was cheaper. And getting more work out of an employee was a given, since they could not complain about PC problems near as often.

I suppose if someone wants to goof off, of course, using a Mac is a bad idea.

But the Mac’s growth in the enterprise isn’t necessarily happening because Apple has suddenly become more active in seeking enterprise customers. Yes, there is a business sales division, and yes, there are different product bundles to accommodate larger purchases of hardware and software licenses. In the end, however, the impetus for the Mac comes from the consumer, employees from the top down who prefer Apple products and demand that their system admins get with the program.

While resistance may deter a regular employee, when the boss says they are going to use an Apple machine, so figure it out, it’s not as if the IT people have much choice in the matter. They can object, of course, but I also think they’d want to lighten their workload; that is, unless they fear that the workload will become so light that some of them will end up on the unemployment lines.

The other big change in the Mac ecosystem these days is that regular users seldom repeat the old PC myths. They can’t, for example, tell you that there are no apps for Macs, since that’s not true, although some software for vertical markets may still have no Mac equivalent.

I remember sitting at a copy center waiting to get some business cards, some years ago, when several Mac users arrived. I know they were Mac users because they came with their note-books. But they weren’t real Mac users, since they did all their desktop publishing work on PCs. When I asked them why, they remarked that they had font matching problems, not realizing that the ability to use lots of high-resolution fonts originated on the Mac, with the invention of Adobe PostScript. Thus, their font problems were either due to not having Windows equivalents, or simply not understanding how to manage cross-platform compatibility issues. In passing, it’s very likely the Mac platform wouldn’t have survived had there been no PostScript, an Apple LaserWriter and the original desktop publishing app, PageMaker. I wonder what kind of computers we’d be working on now if things were different then.

Meantime, it’s good to know the business world continues to take Macs more and more seriously.

Just the other day, I heard an interview with former “PC” character John Hodgman, the actor/writer who played the fall guy in those now-discomtinued Mac Versus PC ads. Turns out that Hodgman is a Mac user in real life, and, I suppose, most people thought of him as the more sympathetic person on those ads, which also featured actor Justin Long.

Certainly these were the kinds of ads people might have occasionally stopped to watch, rather than fast forward through on their DVRs. Compare that to those pathetic spots for Windows computers, which are noisy, foolish, and, by and large, fail to demonstrate why anyone would stick with the PC.

In the real world, it seems they’re not.

Apple has continued to report that Mac sales are growing faster than the overall PC market, and that 50% of the people who buy a Mac at an Apple Store are new to the platform. Sure, some might be buying their first personal computer, but you can be assured a large portion of those purchases are to Windows switchers. Indeed, beginning with OS X Lion, Apple has made the switcher path much simpler by offering direct support through the Migration Assistant.

Now the Mac’s ongoing growth has come without a recent major advertising push. I can recall occasional TV spots for the MacBook Air awhile back, but most these days are about the iPhone or the iPad. With the iPhone 4s spreading across the landscape, you can be assured Apple has put loads of marketing muscle behind the task of getting tens of millions of them into the hands of eager buyers; that assumes they can find the one they want. You still have to wait one to two weeks for an online order, though you might be lucky and find that a store near you has just the one you want.

When it comes to Macs, Apple seldom stages a media event to introduce a new model. Quite often it happens with a major product upgrade, or the launch of a new version of Mac OS X. But this week, there was a MacBook Pro refresh. No surprise, since it had been rumored for a while, after Intel released faster versions of their i5 and i7 processors. That, larger hard drives, and newer and faster graphics processors, forms the sum total of this upgrade.

Now in the past, those changes would be sufficient to merit a press release. Not this time. Indeed, there isn’t even a “NEW” badge on the product listings at Apple’s online storefront. Unless you remember the old specs, and now compare the revisions, you’d never know there was a model refresh. It just happened, although savvy Mac journalists, who probably check these listings every hour of every day, realized there were changes afoot and wrote stories about them.

At the same time, Apple isn’t having any problems moving those machines. Mac note-books comprise 74% of the product lineup, although the Mac mini and iMac appear to be doing well. Less obvious is the Mac Pro workstation, which hasn’t been upgraded since last year, and probably won’t be until early 2012, when a delayed Intel Xeon processor upgrade becomes available.

As far as the Mac itself is concerned, it does appear the legendary halo effect remains in full force. People buy a new iPhone, iPad, or both, and want to spread the joy. When it comes to buying a new personal computer, perhaps they recall all the problems they’ve had with a Windows computer, and they’re looking for something better.

Certainly those radio and TV ads for Windows fixer apps can’t help Microsoft. You hear about products and services that promise to speed up your dreadfully slow PC, rid it of viruses and malware and other ills. One of those products comes with the claim that your PC’s speed will be doubled, and while I do not personally know of anyone who actually benefitted from such products, the implications are obvious. PCs are troublesome. Yes, Macs can be troublesome too, and there are some fixer-upper utilities around, but most of you don’t really need the extra help. You watch out for the occasional online Trojan Horse malware that occasionally is directed at the Mac platform, stay away from installing too many system enhancements, and you’ll do fine.

Meantime, it appears Macs are gaining in the enterprise, witness this story from CNN Money, about Forrester Research urging IT personnel to support Macs. It’s about time.

I can also see why Apple made Lion superficially resemble the iOS in some ways, not because it was necessarily the better way to go, but to ease the process of moving from iOS gear to a Mac. But it does seem that long-time Mac users prefer to switch off such things as reverse scrolling and vanishing scrollbars.

This doesn’t mean that Apple will never, ever, stage a major promotional event for new Macs, aside from the OS where it’s also necessary to educate developers about what they need to do. If there’s a major change in a Mac design, I expect Apple will make a big deal over it. Some suggest the next generation of MacBook Pros might inherit the slimmer form factor of the MacBook Air, including the lack of an internal optical drive. But that will be next year’s story.

The story this year is that Macs just work, and they just keep selling and selling.

It’s been pretty clear that Apple’s hobby, the Apple TV, is just a test bed to experiment with new methods of cracking the set top box dilemma. The major impediment to making it work is the fact that the cable and satellite providers already give you a set top box, often with a built-in DVD, free or with a modest monthly payment. How do you compete with that?

So the Apple TV, and similar devices from Roku and the few licensees of Google’s failed Google TV initiative, are consigned to second-rate status. There’s also some level of duplication of services, meaning you can get Netflix streaming, YouTube and other features on a Blu-ray player, or even one of those new-fangled “connected” TVs. Having another device, at an extra cost, seems less relevant.

Apple TV separates itself from the pack by offering integration with iTunes and, now, iCloud. Nobody else can match that, although there are competing services being offered or readied by the likes of Amazon and Google.

Where to go from there is a huge question mark. According to the best-selling authorized biography of Steve Jobs, written by Walter Isaacson, the secret to making Apple TV was “cracked” by Jobs shortly before he died. Thus begins a new round of speculation as to what that solution might be.

The larger portion of that speculation has it that Apple will, at long last, build their own connected TV, using Siri voice recognition and iCloud to separate itself from the pack. So, instead of navigating through sometimes arcane menus to record a TV show, you’ll simply announce that you want Siri to set a timer, say, for the remainder of the season for Fox TV’s “Fringe.” Of course that assumes the low-rated cult show is going to have much of a season, though there’s always hope.

But seriously: While I assume such a TV would have the usual round of HDMI ports for you to connect a cable or satellite set top box (yes, one of those!), a Blu-ray player, and a gaming console, it would seem that Apple is striving to establish their own subscription system, although that would require striking deals with the content providers. Would live TV be a part of it, or will Apple still expect you to use existing services, or a TV antenna, to fill that need?

Now other than having an elegant interface and voice recognition, just how does Apple differentiate itself from all those commodity TVs? The rumors have it that Apple is looking to use LCD panels, which may be OK, although purists will tell you that plasma delivers richer blacks, cleaner pictures for action scenes, not to mention a virtually unlimited viewing angle. Would Apple strive to solve the limitations of LCD, or will they go plasma?

But that’s a minor part of the equation. From there, what about other critical facets of the TV viewing experience, such a delivering great sound? Your average TV delivers merely adequate audio, but nothing that will truly immerse you in a theater-like experience while watching an action film with flashy and noisy special effects.

Now Bose has a possible solution, the $5,349 VideoWave, justifying the high price by offering a sophisticated built-in home theater audio system, along with a feature called ADAPTIQ, which promises to tailor the audio to your listening environment. Otherwise, the specifications seem pedestrian. The set has a 46-inch LCD display, four HDMI inputs (three rear, one front), and a universal remote (one that can control other gadgets). The promotional information at Bose’s site doesn’t mention a thing about apps or direct access to streaming services. You still need your set top box, Apple TV, and so forth and so on.

So it seems that Bose is asking you to pay an over $4,000 premium for better sound, which seems rather extreme, even though the sonics are said to be superior to any other TV on the market. But it’s clear you can save lots of money if you are willing to put up with a separate audio system, even if you pick a system from Bose’s own catalog.

I’m reaching here. I just need to know how, other than providing their own content delivery service and a prettier interface, Apple can make a difference.

Now the latest published reports have it that Apple software VP Jeffrey Robbin, someone I know from the 1990s when he was instrumental in coding such great apps as Conflict Catcher and SoundJam (acquired by Apple to form the basis of iTunes), is shepherding development of the software for Apple’s new TV. Now Robbin is surely up to the task, since he was also one of the creators of the iPod.

I have little doubt that Apple is actively testing prototype TVs in their test labs, just as I’m sure there are loads of products that are in various stages of development. But I also think it’s a reach to assume that, because Steve Jobs discovered the secret of succeeding in the living room, that a TV set is necessarily that secret. What can Apple offer when it comes to built-in features that cannot be delivered in a refreshed version of today’s Apple TV, perhaps with the A5 processor for true 1080p decoding, Siri integration, and perhaps extra content?

Of course, I don’t pretend to know what sort of gear Apple might be considering, but I’m still skeptical about all this. On the other hand, if Apple does build a TV set, and avoids the temptation of a sky-high price, I’d be seriously tempted to consider buying one.

What the best-selling biography of Steve Jobs, by author Walter Isaacson, confirms is that Apple’s late co-founder was both a genius and a jerk. While the details are far more extensive, and no doubt more accurate, than what you read in those unofficial bios, the same overall picture emerges of the amazing creativity, and equally amazing flaws of this era’s most famous corporate leader.

Sure, there are surprises to be found, such as the fact that Jobs put off critical cancer treatment for nine months in a foolish quest to focus on exotic treatment methods, such as colon cleansing schemes and exotic diets, all because he didn’t want anyone to open up his body. But whether such delays shortened his life is anyone’s guess, as precious few people survive pancreatic cancer for any length of time anyway. I remember my late mother-in-law, who succumbed within weeks after her condition was diagnosed.

But the new meme in the media, at least a small portion of it, has it that, now that the public realizes that Steve Jobs was not such a nice person, maybe they will somehow rebel and embrace other products instead. Besides, isn’t Apple going to lose its mojo now that their mercurial and micromanaging co-founder is no longer around to keep things on an even keel?

For this theory to have even an iota of credibility, you have to consider whether the new revelations about Jobs would necessarily come as a surprise. Even though Apple has received over a million messages of condolence from people around the world, I think few of them had any illusions about Jobs. But they didn’t have to live with him, associate with him as business colleagues, and, except for a small minority, they didn’t have to work for him either. Their exposure to Apple came in the form of Macs, iPods, iPhones, iPads and so on and so forth. If they didn’t like the products, they wouldn’t buy them and keep on buying them. And I hardly think knowing that Jobs’ true personality was more extreme than they might have suspected is going to dissuade them.

I suspect that, of the tens and tens of millions of Apple customers, few know or care about the intimate details of the life. Sure, many people know who he was, and perhaps have a broad sense of his personal quirks, but it still comes down to the quality of the product. If they didn’t like the stuff Apple builds, they wouldn’t keep buying gadgets with the Apple brand on them.

What’s more, I do not see why, except in the minds of some ill-informed bloggers, that knowing the alleged truth about Steve Jobs would dissuade people from buying Apple products, or convince them to sell off what they have. Well, I can think of one blogger, but Apple will, as always, have to market their gear on the merits, with no guarantee of success in the court of public opinion.

Also remember that, for quite a number of months since Jobs was first diagnosed and treated for cancer, Tim Cook was in charge. Sure, you can bet that Jobs was calling the shots in many cases, but not when he was under the knife, or otherwise incapacitated. The Isaacson book also makes it clear that Jobs heavily relied on Cook to do the right thing. Certainly Apple’s ongoing performance shows that the company is in good hands. And, after a curious drop in the stock price because inflated expectations of iPhone sales in the last quarter weren’t realized, I see the price has gone up again. Reality appears to be setting in.

At the same time, it is interesting to see where Jobs’ head was at over the years, that, for example, his views about life and death influenced the way off switches, or the lack of clearly-defined off switches, found their way into Apple’s product designs. From pressing the power button on a Mac and having to wait for five seconds for it to turn off, to having to pull the plug on an Apple TV, it’s clear that Jobs didn’t want you to ever switch that stuff off. Idle (or sleep mode) was fine, but you had to work a little bit more to stop things cold.

Jobs’ feelings of betrayal in the way that the Google Android OS mimics the iOS in a number of ways clearly influenced Apple’s decision to file lots of lawsuits against alleged patent violators. That Apple has been more and more successful in some of those actions only goes to show that Jobs was right. Then again, it may well be that the bigger threat to Android is the fact that Microsoft has coerced many of the handset makers who build gear powered by Google’s OS to pay license fees. One report had it that Microsoft has signed up 50% of the Android OS licensees so far. Once it becomes evident that this supposed free OS isn’t free, you wonder how many handset makers will try to roll their own, or go to Microsoft and license the latest and greatest Windows Phone system instead.

But now I want to get back to that Steve Jobs bio. He was definitely a character, and I expect there will be more intriguing revelations beyond those in that book in the months and years to come.