backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 303 comment(s) - last by sprockkets.. on Feb 12 at 11:24 PM


“And I don't know why [Apple is] acting like it’s superior. I don't even get it. What are they trying to say?” - Bill Gates on the Mac ads
Bill Gates takes exception to Apple's "lying" ads

With the launch of Windows Vista, Bill Gates is giving it the proverbial ‘one hundred and ten percent’ in explaining to everyone in the world why they should care about the new operating system.

In response to analyst speculation that Windows Vista could be the last Microsoft operating system of its kind, as we know it, Gates replies to Newsweek, “Well, people have said that at every major Windows release. Java was going to eliminate Windows programming, or thin clients were going to eliminate people buying PCs.”

The Microsoft chairman says that operating systems keep getting better and richer and that there are no shortages of radical things that will be happening in the next release. When asked if Microsoft will be back with a new OS in 2010-2011, Gates was confident enough to say, “Absolutely.”

Gates said that the next version of Windows “will be more user-centric,” meaning that users should be able to move from PC to PC, whether or not it is their own, and still be able to access much of their own information by using Live Services, regardless of where they are. “So even if you drop by a [public] kiosk or somebody else's PC, we can bring down your home page, your files, your fonts, your favorites and those things.”

“In Vista things got a lot better with [digital] ink and speech but by the next release there will be a much bigger bet,” Gates predicted. “Students won't need textbooks, they can just use these tablet devices.”

“Parallel computing is pretty important for the next release. We'll make it so that a lot of the high-level graphics will be just built into the operating system. So we've got a pretty good outline,” he said.

Coming back to the present, one of the big advantages that Windows Vista provides is a platform for users to jump to for getting instantly caught up on a lot of new technology and security features. Although some of the improvements in Vista can already be found in downloadable updates for Windows XP, the majority of users do not take advantage of added features through Windows Update.

Take, for example, Internet Explorer 7, which is offered to all Windows XP users as an optional update. According to Gates, less than a third of Windows XP users downloaded the new browser, and even less take advantage of less advertised new additions. So how many people have upgraded to IE7? “I would say it's less than 30 percent,” Gates replied. “We’ve had this incredible desktop search [available for download] that won every review, and I’ll bet that less than 10 percent of Windows users went and got that. Now with Windows Vista, you get something better. For most users, it’s the first time they’ve seen it at all.”

With Windows Vista, Microsoft expects that the “wow starts now,” as stated by one of its advertising slogans. But in early January, one of the new Apple TV ads pushing the apparent social-cool factor of a Mac depicted poor “PC” as having to undergo surgery just to upgrade to Windows Vista (see the commercial here). While Bill Gates admits that he hasn’t seen that particular ad, he’s taking exception to the depiction of the PC. “I don't think the over 90 percent of the [population] who use Windows PCs think of themselves as dullards, or the kind of klutzes that somebody is trying to say they are,” he said.

“And I don't know why [Apple is] acting like it’s superior. I don't even get it. What are they trying to say?” Gates continues to express his disgust with the Apple ads: “Does honesty matter in these things, or if you're really cool, that means you get to be a lying person whenever you feel like it? There's not even the slightest shred of truth to it.”



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

well....
By retrospooty on 2/2/2007 9:53:05 AM , Rating: 5
It makes sense. Apple has a competing platform, and that platform has a very very small percentage of the market. Appx 3% worldwide. Of course their ads are geared to make people want to switch. If you switch based on an ad like that, with no demo of the actual OS and what it can or cannot do, then you might be a redneck. Seriously, who buy a computer based on an ad with 2 guys standing in a room?




RE: well....
By Misty Dingos on 2/2/2007 10:02:13 AM , Rating: 5
Sadly many people think that owning an Apple is a sign of intellectual superiority. I don't think that is the case at all. I think that people who own Apples are saying, whether they want to or not, that owning an Apple says that what the computer does is not nearly as important as the social statement being made. e.g. "I am smarter that a PC owner because I own an Apple." Or "I am more creative than a PC owner because I own an Apple." Or the worse yet. "I am not a lackey of the corporate giants because I own an Apple." The ugly truth is that Apples are a closed standard and because of that they will never be anything more than a novelty computer.


RE: well....
By DeepThought86 on 2/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: well....
By retrospooty on 2/2/2007 10:24:18 AM , Rating: 5
No-one that actually knows both platforms thinks that owning an Apple is a sign of intellectual superiority. Perhaps there are some underinformed consumers out there that might think that. And that is what Apple prey's on with thier ads. Oh well, buyer beware.

"The ugly truth is that Apples are a closed standard and because of that they will never be anything more than a novelty computer."

Very very true

Just picture in your mind how stupid the average person is... Now think, half of everyone is stupider than that guy! - George Carlin


RE: well....
By DEredita on 2/2/2007 10:36:04 AM , Rating: 5
While I am a Mac user, I also use Windows too. I am not a fan (yet) of Vista - I do like XP Pro. I have thought of getting a Mac Pro as my main system - but it's a Windows world out there. I reserve my Mac use to my Macbook (and Mini - which btw is grossly outdated and stupid expensive).

See there are Mac users out there that aren't Elitist. LOL


.


RE: well....
By retrospooty on 2/2/2007 11:55:08 AM , Rating: 1
Well said. =)

Of course there are. I would wager most of them are't elitist, and are perfectly normal people like you and I. giggetty giggety giggetty goo. ;)


RE: well....
By gspot2016 on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By klutzak on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 9:42:00 PM , Rating: 5
Like the mac guy, you have your facts wrong, your reality backwards, and your head up your ass. In addition, you think you are superior and that everyone is impressed. But instead, we all stare at you, and like Bill Gates said, we wonder WTF you're talking about, because nothing you say has any relationship to reality. What you think will attract us to you, actually makes us really dislike you.

You sum up perfectly what the rest of the world can't stand about "mac people." In fact, you are the mac guy, aren't you?


RE: well....
By gt1911 on 2/3/2007 5:14:56 AM , Rating: 2
Amen!


RE: well....
By retrospooty on 2/4/2007 10:11:18 AM , Rating: 2
I second that. =)


RE: well....
By ScythedBlade on 2/3/2007 6:29:07 PM , Rating: 3
And Bill isn't some dumbass, that's for sure ... I don't think an idiot would be able to make it to be the richest person in the world ...


RE: well....
By Sasuke on 2/5/2007 4:51:23 AM , Rating: 3
would think a dumbass could become president either ;)

*although gates aint dumb

So can you play the latest games on a mac like dx10 ones when they come out or most current games, cause thats te big deciding factor for me ,and well yeah w00t pc cheaper great thats just icing on the cake really isnt it


RE: well....
By imattrix on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By Yawgm0th on 2/3/2007 4:01:34 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Do you guys even know the meaning of the word proprietary? Doesn't seem like it. Mac's are far more tolerant of true open standards; just not the M$ proprietary standards that M$ has forced on you. You think Explorer, Exchange, Active X, etc. are closer to open standards than the BSD underpinings of Mac OS X? You think WMV is more open than MP4? WMA is more open than ACC? man, visit a newsgroup once in a while, dorks.


Explorer, Exchange, Active X and BSD have nothing to do with open standards. Explorer is a shell, and there is no "open standard" shell. There are open source shells out there, but that certainly has nothing to do with the highly-proprietary OSX shell. Exchange is an email system based on POP3 and SMTP, and is every bit as "standard" as any other email system. Active X is simply a browser plugin that provides additional functionality for Windows users, although it admittedly is the source of more problems than it is worth.

Is .Mov somehow less proprietary than WMV? Is anything less proprietary than iTunes? Do you really think Windows somehow doesn't support AAC or MP4, or that Mac somehow "embraces" them more?

quote:
Our workforce is about 10% Mac, so there are thousands of Macs on our network. Our IT department doesn't even have to support them. Yet every single PC user that I know at my job has had to have his PC re-imaged, or repaired by IT for software corruption, installation breakdowns, and of course, occasional Malware within the last 3 years. This is all since XP was supposed to fix the problems with 2000, and 95 before that.


Hold on, are you at such a high level in your company that you have intricate knowledge of what the IT department does and doesn't have to support and how often it does? In any case, I'm sure it doesn't have to support them since they probably don't have the same level of interoperability as the Windows computers, so there's much less room for problems. Certainly though, Windows is more vulnerable for an inept user than Mac. But you can't fix ineptitude with software, and such people will inevitably have problems on Macs just as much as they will on PCs.

quote:
PC's are the prevailing platform for business because they are not just cheaper, but cheap period. It doesn't necessarily make you dumb to buy the cheapest crap on the market, but it doesn't make you a genius, either.

PCs are the prevailing platform for business because they work. They have a level of network functionality that Macs simply can't achieve. Try engineering and supporting a Mac network based on Novell or just Samba, and then try using Active Directory. It's a night-and-day difference with ease of use, functionality, and reliability.

I work at an electronics company with about an 85% PC customer base, but about 50% of our support calls are from Mac users. About 80% of our support calls that last more than ten minutes are from Mac users. The software we use is identical for OSX and XP, so how come a higher percentage of Mac users call? Because the majority of Mac users are morons. They don't know how to use a computer, and simply don't have the aptitude to learn adequately. So they go for Mac, which is supposed to "just work" and have superior ease of use. I guess Macs aren't that bad for grandma and grandpa or anyone so inclined to remain CSL, but for anyone who isn't dumb, Windows offers so much more, for so much less.


RE: well....
By little jon on 2/5/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By Obujuwami on 2/5/2007 9:18:12 PM , Rating: 3
Wow, im fairly insulted.

I own my own IT company and we have to support both MS and Apple OS platforms on a daily basis. I like OS X, its nice and things are easy to find but i agree with what alot of people have said, its not better or worse than XP, it's different.

When you compare cars, you don't compare a Honda Civic to an Austin Martin DB7. You compare a Civic to a Toyota Camery or Ford 500 and an Austim Martin to a Jaguar. With that said, people comparing XP and OS X are those who are comparing apples to blueberries (no pun intended).

OS X has its place in the world and so does XP and Vista. MS has the business side of things covered. Apple has the art side of things covered. Neither OS is infalible and I say that with alot of experience under my belt. Linux isnt even infalable and I got a employee that will verify that.

Personally, I prefer XP over Vista and OS X. Not because I am a "sheep" or an "M$ Fan Boy" but because most business use Microsoft products to get through thier daily grind.


RE: well....
By WhiteBoyFunk on 2/5/2007 2:12:32 PM , Rating: 1
Not like I agree with much (or any) of what klutz is saying, but I think he has some valid points and speaks intelligently. All the MS lovers just rated him down. Klutz, good points and good diction, but I feel that your tone is just a tad hostile. Relax.


RE: well....
By BirdDad on 2/5/2007 5:03:23 PM , Rating: 1
who is talking about wmv?the point is that Cr*pintosh users are idiots.
This is so true.My one experience with a Mac user was like this-he would come into work blabbing about how great Mac is and Mac had this and that first(in many cases he was flat out wrong,the Amiga had most of the stuff he was saying first)and how it never crashes and the OS is so stable.He brought his "computer" to work many times and everytime it was "Wait a minute watch this" then it would crash on him,three boots later what was he doing?He was running virtual PC(very slowly)AND Windows in order to play any real games(and then it would be old games because the emulation was so slow)
It must have crashed twenty times before I just said "I need to get the **** out of here good luck with your G5 or whatever the number is"


RE: well....
By BirdDad on 2/10/2007 8:58:44 AM , Rating: 2
Apple is so open you can copy your ipod
last I checked you had to use a third pary software and you can't use the ipod as a harddrive as it states in the user manual you can


RE: well....
By Funkmeister on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 10:09:56 PM , Rating: 5
You mean, a little $10M project, compared to the other TRILLIONS of dollars of the global economy that runs on Windows? LOL. You mac advocates just can't think big enough.


RE: well....
By Funkmeister on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By nurbsenvi on 2/3/2007 12:08:34 PM , Rating: 2
If I had $10 million...
I will buy the best rig in the world and stick around Daily tech all day long...

I know I'm a sad soul sniff::


RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/3/2007 9:06:46 PM , Rating: 2
Well, my point is that OS X is not the only operating system that is involved in hi-reliability work. Lots of businesses rely on Windows all the time. And in the world of government projects, a $10M project is pretty small, right?

I'm neither a windows "apologist" (what is there to "apologize" for?), nor a mac hater. Frankly, I don't care either way; I just don't like seeing the debate made with incorrect facts and bad logic (not referring to your posts personally).


RE: well....
By bobdelt on 2/3/2007 10:40:29 PM , Rating: 3
Youre the same type of fanboi that probably thought intel cpus suck, and power pc was better. Now what do you have running your mac?


RE: well....
By little jon on 2/5/2007 1:05:50 PM , Rating: 2
If you're comparing Intels previous architecture, the Netburst to the PPC then yes, the Netburst sucks, but the Conroe architecture is something totaly different. The most - if not all - mac users I know (I know very few unfortunately) don't see the world b/w only, is that what you wanted to sad? They and I have chosen the Mac platform after precise research and a very good personal experience considering all the possibilities including intel pcs and the mac came out as the best choice for me. Let me ask you something: Have you even tried it?
BTW yeah, linux is great but kinda difficult to set up.

(I use the 2001 iMac G3 PPC@400MHz, 256MB RAM, I play divx fluently, run word, excel, photoshop and listen to the music simultaneously. And I use the latest Mac OS 10.4 Tiger. Try doing that on a PC with same cpu clock and memory running Windows XP. I did and when I started opera the music started skipping, that kind of pissed me off)
And sorry for my terrible english again.


RE: well....
By Cincybeck on 2/6/2007 4:05:36 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
(I use the 2001 iMac G3 PPC@400MHz, 256MB RAM, I play divx fluently, run word, excel, photoshop and listen to the music simultaneously. And I use the latest Mac OS 10.4 Tiger. Try doing that on a PC with same cpu clock and memory running Windows XP. I did and when I started opera the music started skipping, that kind of pissed me off)


That's not even like comparing apples to oranges. More like comparing apples to olives. PowerPC is of RISC design, which is superscalar so of course it is going to be able to do a lot more at only 400MHZ. Later on though it proved to be a big problem for Apple as due to manufacturing issues both the G3 and G4 were delayed and again with 64-bit G5. They weren't able to stay competitive to x86 based designs.
quote:
In 2005 Apple announced they would no longer use PowerPC processors in their Apple Macintosh computers, favoring Intel produced processors instead, citing the performance limitations of the chip for future personal computer hardware specifically related to heat generation and energy usage in future products, as well as the inability of IBM to move the 970 (PowerPC G5) processor to the 3 GHz range.
-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerPC

I think that goes to show that while parallel computing can be good it definitely has it's limitations.


RE: well....
By Accord99 on 2/6/2007 5:04:51 AM , Rating: 4
(I use the 2001 iMac G3 PPC@400MHz, 256MB RAM, I play divx fluently, run word, excel, photoshop and listen to the music simultaneously. And I use the latest Mac OS 10.4 Tiger. Try doing that on a PC with same cpu clock and memory running Windows XP. I did and when I started opera the music started skipping, that kind of pissed me off)
And sorry for my terrible english again.


A 400Mhz G4 with only 256MB? OS X is smooth only if you never turn it on, otherwise it's going to be slow as molasses and swapping like crazy...

and that's even before you log in.

Certainly XP would run a lot better on ancient machine P2 400Mhz than OS X would.


RE: well....
By AzureKevin on 2/3/2007 11:41:33 AM , Rating: 2
George Carlin is the man. Well quoted.


RE: well....
By PenGun on 2/4/07, Rating: 0
RE: well....
By marvdmartian on 2/2/2007 11:11:47 AM , Rating: 5
I wouldn't say intellectual superiority, so much as intellectual snobbery.

The funny thing is, there's a perfectly good counterpoint to any claims made on Apple's behalf, in their commercials!
1. Apples come with all these built in peripherals (webcam, etc)--okay, which is partly because so few companies make Apple compatible products, versus PC compatible. Add to that the idea that with PC, you're not stuck using the peripheral that came with the machine, you can pick & choose what's right for you, and it's highly likely (though I admit I haven't priced it out) that a middle of the road PC with all the add-on peripherals that an Apple comes with STILL costs less!
2. Apples come with all this cool software already installed. Gee, could that have something to do with the fact that no one was writing software for Apples, as compared to what's written for PC's?? So much so that Apple in fact had to come up with a Windows emulation program, just so that Apple users could use PC-based software that wasn't available on an Apple??? While I applaud the folks at Apple for finally figuring out that if they wanted cool apps, they were going to have to write them themselves, the argument that Apples are so much cooler because of it just doesn't wash!

I'm sure there's more, that's just two to start with.... :)

If Apple truly wants to capture a significant market share, they only have to do one thing. Bring the price of your machines down to where they're competitive with PC's. Let's face it, if you're an average blue-collar parent, with kid or kids harping about wanting their own computer, are you going to pony up thousands of dollars for your own machine, then thousands more for one for your kids? Or are you going to find a pc for (oftentimes) less than $500 to give them to use?? Bottom line, if I can buy one Apple for $2500, or 3 above average PC's for the same price, then Apple isn't getting my business!


RE: well....
By AlexWade on 2/2/2007 11:46:38 AM , Rating: 5
I really believe the two thing that can make Mac big is if they allow OS X to be installed on home built computers and they make something as good or better than DirectX. Those two things hold Macs down.


RE: well....
By stromgald on 2/2/2007 12:03:07 PM , Rating: 2
I think their price and the proprietary, non-standard internal structure of their computers hold them down alot too. Those are the two main reasons that I think companies don't adopt Macs. The weird locations for RAM, PSUs, CPUs, hard drives and other components inside a Mac that changes from one Mac model makes it impossible for an IT department to work with it. The cost/performance ratio doesn't help either, and I certainly agree with you on the OS X limitation.

The main reason I'm talking about business adoption is because that's how PCs became so popular in the first place. Businesses adopted it, so naturally people wanted their home computers to look and feel the same (software wise), so they also went out and bought PCs. If Apple decided to build business versions of Macs with a standardrized interior and allowed IT departments more flexiblity with installing OS X themselves . . . well, let's just say I'd be putting some money into Apple stock.


RE: well....
By kerpwnt on 2/2/2007 1:32:37 PM , Rating: 5
Yes, the extremely proprietary nature holds Apple down, but it is this same aspect that keeps them "secure, crash-free, and cool." If Apple tried to support the rest of the hardware world, they would run into the same customer-confusing flaws that everybody loves to hate Microsoft for. There is no way Apple would/could spend the amount of resources it would take to ensure that every driver for every piece of hardware on the market interacted perfectly with their OS. By having such constricted hardware and software support, they can ensure all the qualities they love to boast about.

Just remember, they aren't a computer company. They make iPods and iPod peripherals they call "Macs." Just kidding guys. Macs aren't that bad, though I wouldn't buy one until I could get the usability I need out of one. They are decent machines and, at the very least, they pass the "would you give your mom one" test.


RE: well....
By Lakku on 2/2/2007 5:49:40 PM , Rating: 2
http://projects.info-pull.com/moab/

I don't think it is any more secure, it's just few try to exploit it because so few people around the world use it. I have had my Powerbook crash/freeze during normal operation on several occasions, and I have installed very little on it outside of what comes from Apple (photoshop is one program that doesn't always play nice).


RE: well....
By Felofasofa on 2/2/2007 6:58:14 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
They make iPods and iPod peripherals they call "Macs."


That says it all, most of their revenue comes from a little music box, must be gutting to the engineers who actually design their "computers". They are fortunate to have an installed base that love being told to "bend over take it in the rear, because that's the way you like it" as Apple continually shafts their customers with their platform ping-pong. A novelty? well on the way to total irrelevance I would say.


RE: well....
By gspot2016 on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By RussianSensation on 2/2/2007 1:20:19 PM , Rating: 5
How about we get back to reality?

Dell Inspiron E1405 laptop:

Core 2 Duo 2.0ghz
Vista Home Premium
14.1 inch WXGA+ UltraShaprt Display
1GB DDR667mhz Dual channel ram (although it would be wise to get 533mhz and save another $50)
120GB hard drive
8x CD/DVD burner
Price: $1,214 or $1,164 with DDR533

VS.

MacBook with
2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
1GB 667 DDR2 SDRAM - 2x512
120GB Serial ATA drive @ 5400 rpm
Superdrive 6x (DVD+R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
AirPort Extreme Card & Bluetooth
Price: $1,499

Ok so you are saying Bluetooth and firewire are worth a 23% premium? Let's not forget coupons and sales at Dell every other month.


RE: well....
By sprockkets on 2/2/2007 1:55:40 PM , Rating: 5
How is it that apply justifies a $2800 dollar laptop?

Well, it does come with a case (WOW!)

The power cable is smart...

But all it is is a pearl white Asus Laptop with an extra $800 tacked on for bitten off apple logo


RE: well....
By McSporran on 2/2/2007 4:22:16 PM , Rating: 3
I was curious about this so I went through the many hoops for customizing a Dell. The process is a right pain in the rear. Apple's is significantly easier, albeit less flexible. Still, I wouldn't want all the bundled crap Dell pushes anyway...

Anyway, I got $1321 (Dell) vs $1449 (MacBook), getting the two systems as close as possible, both being BTO using your original specs above as a guide.

So, for 10% more you get a smaller, lighter system that also has a built-in webcam, a better power connector design (I've had too many laptops break there) and a slightly higher battery capacity (~5%). Many people will prefer the aesthetics of the MacBook, too. The Dell ain't exactly pretty...

Hardly wildly more expensive, especially considering Apple's reputation. It comes to what, ~8% more for a slightly better-specced machine. For those that prefer OS X, that's not exactly going to be a dealbreaker...

Oh, and let's not forget Apple's refurbs can often be had at a significant discount, too...

For the record, I don't own a Mac, I've never owned a Mac, and my desktop systems are XP Home/Pro. Hell, I don't even own an iPod.


RE: well....
By ogreslayer on 2/2/2007 1:43:33 PM , Rating: 4
If you compare a Quad-Core XPS710($3,479 w/8800GTX) to a dual dual-core Mac Pro($2,968.00 w/ X1900XT) its a yeah, barely though if you take into account performance. Then if you look at the quad-core Precision 390($2,528 w/Quadro NVS 285) there is a $440 difference in favor of Dell. Enough to fill that PCI-E16x slot with a 8800GTS. And thats w/ the 16x DVD burner. Sure no webcam or bluetooth but who cares, and even if the system doesn't have firewire so what a IEEE1394... a card for the 390 is like $30, and the 710 doesn't need it.

No, its not that ridiculous 500-600 you would pay for G4s but its still higher if you shop around. Oh, and add in the 20" widescreen monitors and the XPS hits only $100 more than the Apple...


RE: well....
By TheDoc9 on 2/2/2007 5:43:51 PM , Rating: 5
I don't know what is true on these boards in reguard to the pricing, but if the apples have gotten that much in line with pc's I'd be very surprised. I remimber the days 10-20 years ago, when you would pay 50-100% more for a machine from apple that did 50-100% less. Maybe that's changed? I don't know, I still wouldn't get one just because of the damn one button mouse.


RE: well....
By Lakku on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By rmaharaj on 2/3/2007 9:53:11 PM , Rating: 4
And how about when you want to use the touchpad on your Apple laptop?

The fact remains that you need to jump through hoops to get the same mouse functionality on a Mac than you get on a PC.


RE: well....
By mn98 on 2/4/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By McSporran on 2/2/2007 6:53:10 PM , Rating: 2
Many now come with Apple's "Might mouse" as standard, I believe. It's the one with no "buttons" but touch sensitive areas, and emulates at least two buttons.

I've used one briefly, I didn't really like it, but perhaps in time one would get used to and prefer it *shrug*.

I know you can just plug a regular USB mouse into a Mac tho' -- which leads to the irony of people using MS mice (and keyboards) on Apple hardware.


RE: well....
By senbassador on 2/3/2007 9:50:33 PM , Rating: 5
Well actually these days you only pay 20% more for Macs that do only 5% less. So yeah, things have changed.


RE: well....
By Pythias on 2/2/2007 1:40:54 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
2. Apples come with all this cool software already installed.


Strange, isn't it, that Microsoft gets sued for that?


RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: well....
By Pythias on 2/2/2007 2:00:38 PM , Rating: 3
Another interesting one, I think, is how apple claims to be a hardware company and then they launch an ad campaign against a software company.


RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 2:05:35 PM , Rating: 1
Yea, that is interesting. I worked for a company once that called itself a "hardware" company. I told them that customers don't buy hardware, they buy solutions to their problems. Calling yourself a "hardware" company is just an excuse for limiting yourself as to what areas you're willing to work in to meet customer needs. It's a self-imposed limitation.

Apple is smart in this way - they will go into whatever area they feel they need to. They really aren't a hardware company any more than Microsoft is a software company. These labels may represent their core strengths, but they do not limit the domains of their offerings.


RE: well....
By FITCamaro on 2/2/2007 3:16:11 PM , Rating: 2
Best comment here.

Microsoft gets sued for including stuff in. Mac does the same thing, boasts about it, and people applaud them.

With both, if you don't like whats included, you can just not use it.


RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By Pythias on 2/2/2007 4:31:01 PM , Rating: 2
I would argue that greater market share does not constitute a monopoly. Moreover, even if it IS a monopoly, it isnt a coercive monopoly because there are FREE alternatives.


RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 4:41:36 PM , Rating: 3
From the article I linked above:

Judge Jackson issued his findings of fact on November 5, 1999, which stated that Microsoft's dominance of the personal computer operating systems market constituted a monopoly

Also, Microsoft has like 90-95% of market share, not just greater market share.

But I agree with your idea, that alternatives exist, and no customer is forced to purchase Windows. Therefore it is a "monopoly of choice" if that makes any difference.


RE: well....
By Locutus465 on 2/2/2007 8:13:19 PM , Rating: 2
Of course in reality microsoft offered a free web-browser that was better than anything the compition had (Netscape Communicator), which incedently you had to pay for. I think the turn to Mozilla has proved that customers will use the product they persive to be better even if there happens to be something bundled with the OS.


RE: well....
By McSporran on 2/2/2007 8:22:29 PM , Rating: 2
The vast majority will use what is shipped with the computer.

That IE6 stagnated for several years, had numerous major security issues, yet Firefox barely broke a 10% market is pretty demonstrative.


RE: well....
By Locutus465 on 2/3/2007 12:13:18 AM , Rating: 2
No... If IE had sucked at the time like Netscape (or worse) just integrating it into the OS would not have been good enough. People use what their "computer people" tell them they should be using (whether it be someone in IT or the kid down the street).

At the time IE was the best, most innovative and standards complient browser on the block... Then, as you point out it stagnated and lost market share and would have continued to do so till it's demise if MS haddn't stepped up with IE7... Now there's actually competition again so who knows what will happen.


RE: well....
By DOSGuy on 2/2/2007 12:49:44 PM , Rating: 5
I agree that they're trying to say that intellectuals use Macs. Well, I'm an intellectual. I'm a member of Mensa, in fact. I don't own a Mac. When it's time to upgrade, or to get a new computer, I pick the parts I want, find the lowest prices, and I build it myself. When Apple decides to court intellectuals and the computer-savvy by letting us build our own Macs, maybe I'll consider switching.


RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 1:01:56 PM , Rating: 5
Sorry, you won't have the opportunity to built your own Mac, because you might be tempted to put in non-Apple components, and surely that cannot be tolerated.


RE: well....
By VooDooAddict on 2/2/2007 6:03:39 PM , Rating: 2
(Disclaimer - I don't own one)

They only sell hardware they have certified for use with the software. In theory, this helps limit hardware driver conflicts and enables more optimizations at lower levels of the OS. To a degree this has worked well for them. It also limits the range of support issues.

Microsoft has come a long way in this area thanks to driver certification.


RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 6:14:29 PM , Rating: 1
I agree. Microsoft realized a while ago that most of the problems with Windows crashing were related to faulty third-party device drivers, faulty applications, and faulty hardware, none of which are of course under Microsoft's direct control. But of course to the end-user, these types of problems are otherwise indistinguishable from "Windows crashes." So their actions were to, change the wording of dialog boxes indicating when your application crashed (circa Win98, IIRC), driver certification (as you pointed out), and more built-in hardware diagnostics (Vista and Office 2007).

Also, I find it interesting that Vista ships with around 20,000 device drivers. I wonder what the same indicator for OS X is?


RE: well....
By zsouthboy on 2/2/2007 2:50:19 PM , Rating: 2
Marketing

I don't know if the "insult your target demographic" thing is working out for Apple though RE: computers.

Then again, I work in marketing. What the hell do I know?:)

I don't want Apple to disappear, though. I wish they'd just license OSX and be done with it.


RE: well....
By dkos on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By Bluestealth on 2/3/2007 11:32:49 AM , Rating: 5
Extending on your car analogy, Macs can access all the major highways but can only enter a few small towns. Whereas PCs can access all the major highways but can also access many more towns and cities, but cannot enter many of the towns the Mac can.

I am a Windows/Linux user, and I absolutely hate Macs, mostly because of their refusal to join the rest of computers and get 2 "real" mouse buttons. I was actually thinking of getting a Mac Book except for the fact that I couldn't see paying money for a computer with 1 mouse button or a broadcom wireless chipset. They are pretty price competitive nowadays.


RE: well....
By trupti on 2/3/07, Rating: 0
RE: well....
By senbassador on 2/3/2007 9:34:29 PM , Rating: 5
Did you know that Apple computers are the leading cause of smug?


RE: well....
By macgabriel87 on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By shamgar03 on 2/2/2007 11:14:15 AM , Rating: 2
You do realize that for every ilife, every iwork, every mac app there are 100 apps that do the same thing on PC. Do you really think that out of the 100 applications that are equivalent to the mac versions none of them are better? And how about this? Linux has even more software that is free. I fail to see how using a computer that is incompatible with 90% of the computers on the planet makes you a better computer user.


RE: well....
By theapparition on 2/2/2007 12:19:03 PM , Rating: 2
How dare you say that Macs are incompatible with 90% of computers. That statement is completely false and outrageous.........

It should be more like 99%

I just couldn't resist.

In all serious though, that is probably more accurate, because the 3% market share apple enjoys now is for shipping DESKTOPS only. Add in workstations, servers, and legacy hardware in the WORLD, and I'd bet the farm its less than 1%


RE: well....
By djcameron on 2/2/2007 11:24:26 AM , Rating: 1
But much of the built-in software is not superior, take iPhoto for example... hideous.


RE: well....
By JCheng on 2/2/2007 11:28:37 AM , Rating: 5
(disclosure: I'm a Microsoft employee)

Office 2007 >> iWork
Picasa >> iPhoto
iWeb sucks

iMovie is great, iTunes of course is great (available for Windows too though), I don't know about iDVD or GarageBand (the latter of which I have zero use for).

There's plenty of apps on Windows that are better than anything on Mac. Vista's Media Center is just awesome, Apple has a looong way to go to catch up there. Tons of games and peripherals are Windows exclusive. If you blog, check out the app I work on, Windows Live Writer.


RE: well....
By ZeeStorm on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 12:49:21 PM , Rating: 4
I don't see where the OP said Microsoft was responsible for Picasa. I also don't see where the OP said that Windows Photo is better or worse than anything.
quote:
Watch the next OS require a specific built PC and only XXX gfx card, XXX ram, and XXX kinds of HDD's.

No, that's what Apple does, not Microsoft. You can use any hardware with Vista.
quote:
If it wasn't for the fact that our government is so tightly wrapped about your finger (I work for the government and IS dept), then MS would surely lose a great deal of market value. Let alone more anti-trust and monopoly accusations.

Having a monopoly is not against the law. It's only when you do certain things with it that it becomes illegal. For example, the local cable company has a government-created monopoly, and I don't see anybody upset about that.
quote:
Apple does NOT have a long way to catch up

Oh, really? You mean you expect Apple to go from 3% to Microsoft's current >90% in how many years? Seems like they have a long way to go.

Finally, I don't see why you have to jump down the throat, just because the OP is a Microsoft employee. You obviously have anger issues with Microsoft, but I doubt this person has anything to do with your problems.


RE: well....
By ZeeStorm on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: well....
By ZeeStorm on 2/2/2007 2:39:10 PM , Rating: 2
Disregard my views on Picasa, it was totally irrelevent.

Anyways, I appreciate your replies. You gave much more thoughts than I wanted to give the initial OP, thanks :)

The idea of copying Apple wasn't regarding the fact that Microsoft made Zune (to the other comment BELOW this one, I wasn't referring to Windows at all -- sorry if I didn't make that clear enough), it was the way they marketed it. I don't own an iPod nor a Zune. My reasons behind it where in regards to an article I read from a MS employee that bashed Apple for their iPod and talked about how Zune will steal all of it's market share just because it has the MS name on it (which, in some cases, could probably happen).

As for the pro-employer piece, it makes sense essentially. I don't know many people that worked at a company they simply *hated*. However, I wouldn't say I necessarily agree with the stances of the managers at my job (and will voice my opinion to them), I respect the work they have to deal with.

I was wrong to say that the majority of MS employees are like the few articles and blogs that I HAVE read, however I will do some more reading on the URL you have provided. Maybe I came off a bit too much anti-MS.

Again, thanks for the argument, it was thoroughly enjoyed. :D

P.S. To the idiots who -1'd my comments, screw you fan boys, accept another opinion.


RE: well....
By aos007 on 2/2/2007 3:20:59 PM , Rating: 2
[quote]After all, they don't have a brainwashing or electric shock therapy session when they start there that renders them thoughtless. [/quote]

Actually they do. By all accounts, Microsoft working environment was like a cult, at least it was several years ago. I remember reading multiple articles about this. Microsoft is definitely an environment where people really believe in what they are doing, for better or worse. Just last year there were articles about Microsoft employees not daring bringing iPods to work. I cannot imagine a normal company dictating the private life of their employees to such an extent. I worked for a big telecom and I had no qualms about using a competitor's cell phone.

As for not working for a company you hate, I used to work for many years for a big company where employeee satisfaction in certain departments was only 30-40%. Most people don't have much choice - you have to work to put food on table, and the fact that you don't like your employer and their products, while probably not healthy in long term, does not alone make you quit them.


RE: well....
By Pythias on 2/2/2007 3:55:37 PM , Rating: 1
And we all know that if its in print, its true.


RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: well....
By DarkIntegral on 2/2/2007 2:18:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
As with most MS employees, they will never compliment opposition, even when they KNOW that they copied off a company because they made a successful product.


I so sick of this being the reason people are negative towards m$

Does one complain when company A releases the first blue ray player and company B releases a similar product 2 months later? Does anyone complain that company A releases the first portable video player and company B release a similar product 4 months later? NO

Then why does everyone complain about similar products in software (and specifically features of os's)

M$ is a company and if they want people to use windows they will continue to offer the features that they see that people want. No different than all of the other similar products on the market. Products that are *implemented differently*, created in the companies view of the customers needs to achieve the same end function.

When making purchases of similar products what do you look at? You look at what sets them apart. I use windows because i game (although i run solars on my laptop as there is certain features i need for school) and Gaming is a feature that i cannot get anywhere else. This is a difference that draws me to windows. For every *good* file system/ gui /search bar / app /........ that m$ "steals" from competition (when in fact its not stealing as they write it) that they implement, that is just one more thing that creates similarity between windows and other OS's and one less thing that can define and draw users to the others.

There are thousands of mp3 player and it is not a company's job to create a device with 100% new features it is a company's job to make a device people want to use. in a similar manner It is not m$'s job to *invent every desktop OS feature its there job to give customers the features they want. You cannot ask ANY company to reinvent the wheel for every aspect of every product.

ps
No disrespect to ZeeStorm this inst pointed at you just vented frustration /end rant


RE: well....
By Garreye on 2/2/2007 4:40:00 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I said that Microsoft will end up turning into Apple if they continue (being as, Apple forces you to use their specific hardware, etc.)

I don't see where you're getting this from Vista is great for supporting various pieces of hardware, even out of the box. When I installed it every single piece of hardware I have had drivers installed without me doing a thing. That's more than I can say for XP. All the drivers may not be bug free, but the only way to get close to that is to have controlled hardware like Apple does. From what I've read it sounds like MS is putting their driver signing program which should help decrease driver bugs...Also the OS is brand new so drivers should get better over time...
quote:
As with most MS employees, they will never compliment opposition, even when they KNOW that they copied off a company because they made a successful product...and as such, a one-track mind to pro-MS only.

The MS guy said:
quote:
Picasa >> iPhoto

and
quote:
iMovie is great, iTunes of course is great

how do you figure he's not complimenting the opposition?

From your earlier comment:
quote:
Google has you beat, get over it. If you start making more allies instead of enemies, then there might a future to your "next-gen" OS. Now you're just trying to monopolize every market that deals with your software like Mac has done.

So MS should just give up on their software, because Google's is better? I think it's great that companies are improving there software due to competition. Especially in this case as MS is improving the tools they bundle with windows so people that buy window get more value out of the box. If you don't like the bundled MS software then use something else, simple as that. As for Apple monopolizing there software, don't a lot of Mac enthusiast claim thats one of the things that make Mac's so good?


RE: well....
By ZeeStorm on 2/2/2007 8:04:07 PM , Rating: 1
I never once claimed to have LIKED what Apple has done. Please read my response to TomZ above these. I do with the "N" versions of a better installation plan of Vista, etc. was more publicly released. I, for one, never use Windows Media Player, Internet Explorer, nor MSN Messenger, just to name a few. It shouldn't come preinstalled with those (or at least, give you the option for others, or none at all). Shrugs, oh well, we're all "into" MS and will have to accept what we get. :P


RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: well....
By stromgald on 2/2/2007 4:00:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
As with most MS employees, they will never compliment opposition, even when they KNOW that they copied off a company because they made a successful product.

You do realize that Apple copied many features from Microsoft for OS X. With several of these features, Macs have even accused Microsoft of copying because they got the feature into the baseline of an operating system first. IIRC, most of these features were patches of XP and were not overtly advertisied. Nevertheless, it had Apple jumping up and down that M$ was copying, and they're better because they got there first.
quote:
I haven't used the other mentioned, but I think as time progresses and the pricetags on Mac's drop (and the quality of Intel processors rises), then they could steal a