Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft vs. Apple's "Thunder"
jaymzter writes "Cnet has an interesting article on Microsoft's attempt to steal the thunder from the upcoming Macworld show, and also to slap Apple down for not showing enough gratitude. What's really interesting, is that Microsoft supposedly helped Apple 'fix' Mac OS X, and that Microsoft doesn't think Apple is pushing Mac OS X hard enough. Oh, the tangled webs we weave." Strange story. Basically its a battle of PR.
PR is relations with the public. Manipulation is when something is falsely influenced or pushed. This is manipulation. Making OSX seem strong makes Microsoft look less like a monopoly, without actually having to take on the real competition publicly (read real competition as "BSD, Linux, (and maybe OpenBeOS someday)") which would make the public actually aware of these options.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
I believe Microsoft helped Apple fix OS X bugs in the same manner any developer would. Microsoft, in their development of Office v.X and IE for Mac, discovered problems that were not created by their code; Apple's problems. Microsoft notifies Apple, Apple fixes bugs in their OS.
The main problem Microsoft has is that they feel their Mac division is somewhat wasted; Apple isn't advertising their products enough to justify the expense of creating and maintaining Office/IE and whatever else they may be doing.
...why MS would feel even slightly threatened by this.
The Mac has 5 percent of the market. What's there to be afraid of? True, it's a lucrative 5 percent, and OSX has mindshare far beyond its marketshare, but still. Do they really see it as this much of a threat?
What do they want, a monopoly?
You catch enchiladas by picking them up behind the head and holding them underwater until they don't kick anymore -VeGas
> "What does $150 million buy you? It doesn't buy you eternal gratitude."
;)
Shit, thats a great quote. Especially considering MS poured the money in for purely (mostly, whatever) selfish reasons - we can assume the DOJ trial would look much different today had MS not participated in the 'wonton act of goodwill for which Apple should have eternal gratitude'.
"Old man yells at systemd"
- Apple doesn't promote Mac OS X enough. Fewer people shift to the platform than Microsoft would like. Microsoft Office for OS X doesn't sell as many copies as they wanted. Microsoft is pissed.
- Apple puts considerable effort into the next version of OS X, code-named Jaguar. New features are added that make competition-obsessed Microsoft nervous. Microsoft is pissed.
Microsoft is pissed if Apple doesn't promote OS X enough. Microsoft is pissed if Apple develops OS X too much or advertises the platform too aggressively. (And what flavour of nuts will Microsoft go if Apple launches an OS-specific ad campaign?) Apple can't win, so they have nothing to lose."OS X is doing very, very well," said Phil Schiller, Apple's senior vice president of worldwide marketing. "We were certainly more aggressive than Microsoft has ever been in making an operating system in making sure we built something we could move our whole market over to in a very short time."
Well of course it is doing very well. Whenever someone wishes to upgrade their current machine to a newer Mac, they have no choice but to get OSX with it. When a company controls both the hardware and the software they control what the user gets as soon as they decide to upgrade.
Microsoft could only wish to control the hardware and the software. Then whenever you wanted a faster computer, you would have to upgrade also to the newest version of Windows. So in theory if MS was like Apple in this respect, then I suppose WinXP would be 20% of the Windows user base, especially when many of the big businesses buy new computers within the next two to three years.
Could this be a sign that MS is getting a bit nervous about OS X and its potential to infiltrate their corporate and home markets?
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
Give me a freakin' break!
Gratitude, uh sure, got it right here on the end of my middle finger. Let's see, MS has repeatedly fscked Apple at every turn, stolen code from Apple, and used strong arm tactics to get their way. Does anyone out there think that $150M loan deal to Apple (which was a big profit for MS) did anything more than buy time for MS by propping up Apple? And we should believe that MS knows more about OSX than Apple? Pardon me while I gag on that nonsense. OSX comes out of the NextStep OS, BSD, and other Apple developed code. Where the heck was MS in any of that?
Ultimate gratitude: MS ought to be kissing Apple's ass for keeping the Feds off of them this long. Were it not for Apple's meager sales, the anti-trust case against MS would have been a done deal long ago.
Releasing OSX for x86 would most certainly kill Apple's hardware business. However, if they could convince Dell to sell Dell branded Apple machines, they'd gain a ton of marketshare.
Dell's acheived the holy grail of advertising. When most hear the words "new computer", they think Dell. If Dell offered a choice of OSX or Windows when buying a machine, it most certainly would be good for Apple. Dell's advertising campaigns are hugely successful, despite my overwhelming hatred for that "Dude, you're getting a Dell" guy.
By doing something like this, Apple maintains their hardware business, AND gets a major pc manufacturer to sell products that run OSX.
Need Free Juniper/NetScreen Support? JuniperForum
Besides, when it came out, Office v.X was the most complex Carbon program to date. I'm sure Microsoft's Mac programmers found lots of bugs in the APIs and reported them back to Apple. Office v.X came out shortly after 10.1, and required 10.1 because it fixed a ton of bugs overall, but particularly with the Carbon API.
I think that is probably what Microsoft's contribution to OS X was.
Anyway, if Office v.X is not selling well, it is probably due to the OUTRAGEOUS price. $500? I bought it at the educational discount and that was still $200. I only paid $1500 for my iBook, I'm certainly not going to pay 1/3 of that again for Office.
--
The internet is the greatest source of biased information in the history of mankind.
It's funny that you mention standards, and then deride the Macintosh version of Internet Explorer, which is a far more W3C-standards-compliant (here's a breakdown of CSS capabilities for most modern browsers) than IE 5, 5.x, and 6 for Windows. Netscape 6/Mozilla's even better.
I thought I'd take some time to address the claim of Windows Internet Explorer dominance (even if off-topic), since I see it often.
It's been my experience that Microsoft's Macintosh projects are far better than their Windows counterparts.
concrete5: a cms made for marketing, but strong enough for geeks.
"As a policy, Microsoft rarely speaks out against partners. Even when bugs in Mac OS X hampered the release of Office v. X, MacBU took the heat for product delays rather than blaming Apple."
Well, there's a brilliant piece of spindoctoring! "We've screwed up so much in the past that nobody would believe us if we blamed someone else for something that didn't work" suddenly becomes "We're such a noble company we'll take the flak to protect our allies." Masterful.
High-speed Road Trip (18.000KPH)
As for Microsoft's opinion that Apple isn't pushing Mac OS X hard enough? Well, that just sounds like a software company's opinion of a hardware company. Apple's shipping machines with Mac OS X as the default OS and has made plenty of announcements about the sunsetting of Classic Mac OS. Apple's money comes from selling machines, so that's all they need to do.
And how does Microsoft intend to "steal Apple's thunder?" By simply by making announcements of its own versions of what Apple has been doing with tremendous success for years. Movie trailers will continue to be in QuickTime format, MPEG-4 is still QuickTime, and Apple will continue to sell 802.11b harware in addition to their robust and easy-to-use software.
If Bill thinks he's going to lead the game, he'd better try to get out in front on a thing or two.
Could this be M$'s new slogan?
--
If you don't have anything nice to say, shut up you stupid prick.
I hate when Apple ads state that "all" PC user know what the BSOD is. My PC has NEVER had a BSOD - kernel panic maybe but not the BSOD. Kinda make me feel like Apple's marketing department doesn't have a clue. They should say that all WINDOWS users know the BSOD.
My other car is a motorcycle!
Admittedly, most of my writing has been text based. I also have AbiWord set up under XDarwin/XFree86 if I need it (I'm waiting to try OpenOffice, as soon as goes from Developers build to beta). I've considered AppleWorks. And I have Office under OS 9 if I'm desperate.
I can't justify spending $270 for an upgrade for this. I never used Office enough to warrant those sort of numbers.
I was a testing intern in MacBU (Macintosh Business Unit) last summer. We found lots of OS X bugs and spent a good deal of time pin-pointing them. I spoke with Apple developers about what I'd found a couple of times. If OS X had significant problems, Office v.X sales would be hurt, simple as that.
MacBU is a small (~150 employees, $50 million in expenses) but profitable ($100 million+ in sales in FY2000 or 2001, as I recall) division that is also good publicity. One of the nicer parts of MS to work in, from what I saw that summer.
Grüß Gott aus Bayern!
I definitely agree that they could have done a much better job picking people for the switcher commercials. Most of the people seemed to be artsy yuppies, your typical Mac user. They would have been much better off picking more normal run of the mill housewives, businessmen, students, etc. People who buy machines because they work, not because their friends will think they're counterculture.
Hmm.. maybe to you real people talking about their experiences with PCs as opposed to Macs could be considered spreading Fear Uncertainty and Doubt. To me, it's not even close to FUD.
"In years past Apple wasn't running commercials tarrgetting Microsoft."
True. It's kinda hard not to eventually get around to targeting Microsoft, when they have an operating system monopoly, and are therefore your only competitor. It's not exactly like the goliath Apple is getting ready to stomp on lowly Microsoft. ;-)
"If you want to think so..."
It's not that I want to think so, it's that the timing and content of Microsoft's announcements seems to be aimed squarely at disrupting Apple's Macworld announcements. Does it seem coincidental to you?
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
The article seems to portray the idea that Microsoft is unhappy with Office v. X's sales performance and is blaming Apple for not marketing OS 10 enough.
Well, I think I may have another theory on why Office isn't selling very well: $459.95. While the new version of Office is nice and quite pretty I still don't see it warranting almost half a grand. I can't think of the last time I ever used Word for anything more than writing my resume and the occasional label and envelope printing. AppleWorks can do all that for more than one fifth the price. While it's true that Office has quite a few more features than Works it can probably get most people by.
So this is probably just good (or bad) old Microsoft marketing work. Some people will believe whatever they read, despite their mothers telling them not to.
Microsoft's pre-emptive strikes against Apple come as Apple CEO Steve Jobs prepares to announce a new flat-panel iMac with a larger 17-inch liquid-crystal display and Mac OS X 10.2's readiness ahead of schedule.
OK, nothing new there. Microsoft shouldn't have a problem stealing the thunder at all, I mean those announcements aren't much of anything. Now, Steve Jobs has been known to pull some surprises from time to time, maybe MS is worrying about that...
~ now you know
It's perfectly fine for Microsoft to grouse about Office v.X sales, although they should be well-aware from their own experience with Windows 95 and later that transition to a new operating system and its applications takes time.
Mac OS X's acceptance rate is increasing, and will continue to do so as more games and general software is moved to work in OS X only. This transition will happen strongest in the businesses that use Macintosh systems, then homes, with educators last. Businesses can afford the transition and have already scheduled new systems. Homes have a mix of old and new things that Mac OS X must use, but the purchase of a new computer typically calls for a new printer to replace the ratty one.
Educators are moving very slowly to OS X client since a lot of their software for students and administrators doesn't yet run in Mac OS X. However, Mac OS X Server may have a big acceptance in their IT shops because of its NetBoot and Macintosh Manager network-based client services.
I think that Office v.X gives a lot of users a reason to switch. But $500 for an office suite, especially since AppleWorks comes installed on an iMac, is a price that only a few are willing to pay. Apple users have never really subscribed to the "upgrade annually" mentality that IT pros and home PC users have only began to shake off. Office 2000 for Macintosh works fine in the Classic environment of OS X. Why hasn't Microsoft given them a reason to switch? (One idea: MS should accept a trade-in on old original MS Office software disks--PC or Mac--for a rebate on Office v.X)
The fine line part is that Microsoft must not cut the cord on Mac Office development as lawsuits would be cut for antitrust violations faster than you can do a gaussian blur in Photoshop on a G4. Microsoft can't generate further news that shows how they can bully other companies by threatening--the current distrust by stockholders in Wall Street could lead Microsoft into a different court.
For now, however, I think MS is correct in its criticism. They aren't starving for money, but MS has been watching their revenues drop, too, and want as many dollars as the market will give them. Whether this comment from the MBU has anything to do with Apple's new aggressive marketing is a guess.
Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
-- office xp sales have deen dismal. is this the fault of windows xp's slow adoption rate?
-- ms has split office v.x into a number of baffling skus, such as an entourage/word combo, a word/excel combo and so on. were sales of these packages counted in the single number they're tossing around?
-- is the soho/home productivity market saturated?
-- has the sudden stop on hardware upgrade sales affected sales of os x, new macs (which all ship with os x as a default boot) and office?
-- is office v.x just not that great of a product? either in enticing sales or enticing upgraders?
PARC
It's an abbreviation for Palo Alto Research Center, and thus should be in all caps.
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
Microsoft, for example, was instrumental in helping Apple resolve problems with Mac OS X, the next-generation version of the Macintosh operating system released in March 2001.
Could this mean helping Apple resolve problems with Mac OS X being able to run MS Office?
Back in the late 80's that was the norm. Apple had to doctor the OS in order to keep existing MS programs (Word,Excel) running properly. MS was well known in the industry to play fast and loose with the Mac API. (I was privy to seeing some of this first hand, related to a product I worked on at the time.)
Those who would give up liberty in exchange for security and DRM should switch to Microsoft Palladium!
The other huge difference, of course, is that Apple's PR machine usually would quash incompetent quotes like that "gratitude" thing. Oh, man. Generalissimo Jobs would have that guy's head.
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
1. Treat your customers like criminals by filling your software with "product activation" to stop the 'thieves'.
2. Send flesh eating lawyers after every mom & pop business the instant it appears their licensing is out of order.
3. Refuse to fix security holes. Blame the user for being too dumb. Then, refuse to give people the ability to remove defective/insecure software.
4. Cater to the content pimps (RIAA, MPAA etc..) and promise a new version of your system whose only benefit is to further limit how people can user their computer.
5. etc....
Result: My next computer will be a mac.
Do not spread "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0" over the internet, thank you.
CNET seems to have crafted more pseudo-news on the cynical premise that, when you need some quick hits, try a "Microsoft vs. Somebody" story or an "Embattled Apple" story, or, if you really want hits, a "Microsoft vs. Apple" story.
See if this sounds like a plausible timeline:
This isn't to say that it's either impossible or implausible that Microsoft would time their announcement to undercut Apple; but where's the supporting evidence for this, beyond a little anonymous insider grousing?
You post that stupid cartoon every freaking day.
Call it "flaming by proxy". Sheesh.
Fact is, Most mac users are regular people who appreciate a computer that ACTUALLY WORKS and doesn't require a lot of work to get it working.
I'm a flat out computer and operating expert, having worked on OSs at microsoft (I disclaim responsibility for their craptitude, though) and am proficient at every platform-- I don't need training wheels to get things done, but I get a LOT more work done per minute on a Mac than any other platform I've used.
Its not that we're elitist- we're tired of idiots calling us and our platform idiots because it ACTUALLY WORKS. So fsck off with your attitude.
Sometimes what you perceive is arrogance is actually the simple knowledge of superiority.
Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23
This could be a case there the Office v.X people are trying to justify their poor sales performance but I doubt it. I think MS sees OSX as a threat and they are gearing up for big fall out with Apple.
This purported article was a flame troll based on M$ trying to complain that the industry (who's?) isn't keeping up with M$ Windows.
Apple is in the hardware business. They give away the OS of their choice (X with 9.x for compatibility,) on the machines they make and sell.
M$ is in the coercion business.
To OEMs: "Sell your PCs with the latest version of Windows... Or else watch you proces hit the ceiling and your sales go through the floor..."
To businesses: "Upgrade to the latest version of Office, or kiss your data goodbye..."
Consumers buy the hardware and the OS is not an option in either case. Choice doesn't exist.
At least Apple uses pretty candy-colored/flavored lubricated condoms. M$ just rams it up the end-user's poop chute.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
What bothers me most about this article is that the author implies that Apple owes M$ gratitude for "helping" them out in the past. I'm sorry but it's entirely too obvious that the only reason Microsoft has ever helped Apple was to make sure that they had a competitor to point to and say "we're not a monopoly, see? People can buy Macs if they don't like Windows."
And if MS really did help Apple fix "bugs" in the OS that allowed them to run Office, it was again only for their gain. Apple cannot be blamed for the lack of sales on Office Mac. Seriously, if I had a Windows box I wouldn't even pay the $500 MS wants for office Mac. That's just ridiculous considering it comes bundled with a new PC.
CNet: if you really want to be a respected new outlet, you really need to stop producing MS FUD. This is a disgrace to the media in general and worth only of a publication like the National Enquirer.
MacCentral's coverage included this comment from Phil Schiller; about time someone clues MS into the fact that their prices are rediculous. You are selling consumer-level software for professional-level prices! " Browne's comments drew criticism from Apple's senior vice president of worldwide product marketing, Phil Schiller. Schiller told the Wall Street Journal that Microsoft's concerns are 'very, very misplaced' and suggested that the $499 price tag of Office may be a reason why Microsoft's sales are sluggish."
"Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity" -Alvy Ray Smith
Unfortunately for Apple, they're likely to turn away knowledgable users with those ads.
I don't think Apple is after knowledgable users. Knowledgable users appreciate strength in numbers - if you use the same setup as a whole lot of other people, you're more likely to find someone, either in real life or on the net, who's dealt with some of the problems you're facing.
This, to me at least, is what makes Linux such a dream to use - because 99% of its users are tech-savvy and net-connected, a quick google will usually help you out when you're stuck. It works for Windows too, but only because of the sheer number of Windows users. Try feeding obscure Mac problems to groups.google.com.
News and bla for computer musicians: http://lomechanik.net/