Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Bites Apple, Apple Bites Back

Posted by pudge on from the i'll-get-the-popcorn dept.

hype7 writes "The NYT (free reg reqd etc) is running an interesting article on where MS seems to be getting all the ideas for its next big OS release, Longhorn. It's only a quickie, but they look at MS's big news from WinHEC, and their possible sources for inspiration. They also pull out that fantastic Bill Gates quote: 'The one thing Apple's providing now is leadership in colors'; and that Apple execs are now having a laugh of their own over how Longhorn, 'Microsoft's 2005 version of its Windows operating system, apes features that have been in Apple's OS X operating system since 2001.'"

51 of 825 comments (clear)

  1. Flattery and Imitation by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Imitation is the scincerest form of flattery. Where will flattery take you today?

    I recall, years back, an avi making the rounds with Bill Gates speaking (at a MacWorld?) and sheepishly admitting that the Mac was the best or had the best desktop or something along those lines. As if Win95 didn't cement clearly the view that Microsoft indeed was impressed with, at least the look and feel, we get more of this, "Gee, Apple is visionary, so we'll just copy what they do", from the big innovator. Well, no surprise, but I do wonder whether there's an agreement where Microsoft pays Apple for some of this, or is it just payment 'in-kind' (meaning Microsoft products which run on Macs)?

    "As a matter of fact we do have a Research and Development department, we call it, 'Apple Computer, Inc.'"

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 5, Funny

      but I do wonder whether there's an agreement where Microsoft pays Apple for some of this

      Apple gets to ship IE with their computers ;-)

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
    2. Re:Flattery and Imitation by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The Win95 shell imitates NeXTStep in its appearance far more than it does MacOS, and its behavior is Motif-like. (Or vice-versa depending on who you ask.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Mononoke · · Score: 5, Informative
      Microsoft invested $150 million in Apple in 1997. It was definitely not 25% of Apple shares and I don't think they even had enough to vote on anything.
      They were non-voting shares, and MS has since disposed of them.

      --
      NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
    4. Re:Flattery and Imitation by LoadStar · · Score: 5, Informative
      Well this should be confirmed by someone with up-to-date news but in the late '90, microsoft bought 25% of the shares of apple. Dunno if they still have them but that could explain some of it.

      Ok, this has to be THE worst interpretation of facts I have ever seen in my life. It is SO far from the truth it's not even funny.

      August 6, 1997, Microsoft agreed to purchase $150 million in non-voting Apple preferred stock. This wasn't anywhere close to 25%. Note that it was NON-VOTING stock - so essentially it was just a goodwill investment in Apple. Microsoft was required to hold the stock for at least 3 years before selling. Another clause of this investment was that Microsoft was to continue to produce Macintosh products, including all new versions of the Microsoft Office product.

      Microsoft has since sold all of this stock - at a nice profit, I might add. Additionally, the agreement that required Microsoft to continue to develop Macintosh products has since expired as well.

      I could have just modded this down - but I thought that attempting to correct this ridiculous interpretation of events would be more beneficial.

    5. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Lurkingrue · · Score: 4, Informative

      Myth.

      Or, at least heavily in need of editing.

      What really happened is this:
      Microsoft bought $150M in non-voting stock at a rather good price, and promised to continue Mac software development (in specific, the development of their Office suite and Internet Explorer WWW browser).

      Apple, in turn, agreed to bundle IE as the default browser on all OS installation disks, license rights to several of its software products, and support Microsoft's forays into Java virtual machine development.

      The agreement was to last five years, and has since expired. Microsoft made money off the deal, considering the value of Apple stock when it sold it off. Additionally, Apple didn't really need the $150M infusion, as it had billions in cash reserves. A additional reason that MS might have made this move, was that the DoJ investigation into anti-competitive practices might have been countered by actions like this -- Redmond was essentially supporting a competing OS.

      So, no, Microsoft never "bought 25% of the shares of apple" [sic], nor does it/did it really have any say in Apple policy.

    6. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This wasn't exactly a goodwill investment. Do a search of "hand in the cookie jar" in relation to this stock purchase and you'll find where several insiders mention how Microsoft was caught using quite a bit of code directly from the older MacOS codebase in Windows. This isn't Apple advocacy btw (no interest in either platform), it's just one of those facts that no one admits to for obvious reasons.

      Jobs opted for some cash and public Microsoft backing (Office for the MacOS) to make the MacOS look viable for the near future, and Microsoft was given a way out of a lawsuit by Apple for the ripped off code. Apple needed Microsoft a bit more than vice versa, but M$ avoided some bad PR and likely lost $$$ with OS rewrites (hell, maybe even royalties back to Apple).

      Frankly, I don't care if M$ rips off OS X (legally that is). I think OS X is great, but if M$ engages in fair competition then who can really bitch? They'll do what Apple could've done years ago and bring it to hardware that has more options for the end user. Competition can be good..

    7. Re:Flattery and Imitation by kwerle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Funny you should say that, since the OS X dev tools are basically updated versions of NextStep.

      Not really.

      Oh, come on.

      Mac OS X is derived from OpenStep, not NeXTSTEP. Most of OS X is derived from OpenStep, not just the development tools.

      Actually, it would probably be more correct to say that Cocoa is derived from OpenStep, and OSX is derived from NeXTSTEP + OpenStep + FreeBSD.

      NeXTSTEP != OpenStep.

      True.

      OpenStep was a rewrite of NeXT's OS done a while back.

      Mostly false. The OS rewrite failed. OpenStep was a rewrite of the appkit APIs. NeXT wanted to rev the OS, but the demand didn't justify it.

      The idea was to standardize, clean up, and open up the Objective-C API, making it something that other vendors could port/run on other platforms, removing some OS-specific stuff out of the NeXTSTEP API.

      The idea was to license it and make more money :-). It ended up not working so well (well, the money part didn't work so well - the APIs kick ass)...

      GNUstep and OpenStep for Solaris and OpenStep for Windows are the fruits of this.

      Not to mention PDO (foundation) on a few more OSs.

      I think of it this way:
      NeXTSTEP 0.x-3.3
      OpenStep was NS v. 4.0
      Rhapsody DR1 was NS v. 5ish
      OSX 10.x is NS v. 6.x ish

      I mean, really. What do you think NSWindow stands for, anyway? How can you say that Cocoa isn't derived from NeXTSTEP?

  2. The both copy each other... by ajiva · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apple copies Microsoft, and Microsoft copies Apple.
    Apple coppied the WinXP feature that lets users switch who's logged in without losing state. And Microsoft copies features from Apple. Its the Kettle calling the Pot black...

    1. Re:The both copy each other... by BJZQ8 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Jobs and Gates are two immovable objects that are colliding with irresistable force...and these are the results. They just sort of merge together. Apple becomes DRM-loving Microsoft, and Microsoft becomes touchy-feely-hippie-interfaced Apple. No surprise to me.

    2. Re:The both copy each other... by feldsteins · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm sure Bill & Co. would love to be able to present themselves as free-wheeling hipsters when it suited them (and Apple would love to be able to present themselves as the no-nonsense, utilitarian Corporate Approved Vendor.) But no, there are still meaningful differences between the two companies philosophical approaches.

      The idea that Steve copies Bill as much as Bill copies Steve is ludicrous on it's face. Microsoft copies Apple tons more, always has. Listen, I'm not saying that makes them evil. They're not breaking the law here. Let them copy away! It's good for everyone. I'm merely pointing out that they're not the "innovation powerhouse" that they make themselves out to be. Calling a spade a spade.

      And Apple has been the most consistently anti-DRM company you can name besides the P2P companies themselves. Their current nod to DRM in the iTunes Music Store is an amazing achievement in that they somehow convinced the RIAA that we all might actually buy the music if it wasn't DRM'd to death (see PressPlay, for example). Apple has been as pro-consumer as a company can get in the whole digital music thing. Tossing them in the same bin as Microsoft isn't accurate or fair.

      --
      You like your Macintosh better than me, don't you Dave? Dave? Can you hear me Dave?
    3. Re:The both copy each other... by raju1kabir · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Music from the Apple Music store can only be played on Apple computers, on Apple's MP3 software and on Apple's handheld device. The files have your name embedded in them and won't play if you want to let a friend listen to a copy. If your hard drive dies, you can't re-download it. How much more DRM-friendly can you get?

      You conveniently left out the most important part:

      You can freely burn the songs onto a standard CD and then listen to them anywhere and in any manner you choose.

      THAT's the different between Apple DRM and MS DRM. Apple did what they had to in order to make the deal with the record companies: put some barriers in the way of egregious out-and-out mass piracy. Microsoft, on the other hand, is going above and beyond the call of duty: They're workng overtime with hardware vendors to ensure that in the future nobody, including independent content creators themselves, will be able to generate, distribute, or play any media without express permission from the distribution cartels.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    4. Re:The both copy each other... by ivan256 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If your hard drive dies, you can't re-download it.

      I don't see how this has anything to do with DRM. If they did let you re-download it people would be screaming about Apple keeping tabs on what their users buy.

      Make backups. Then if your computer dies a fiery death you can restore from your backup and keep listening to your music. Apple even made it easy to make backups to writeable DVDs. It's a single mouse click!

      I don't see anybody bitching that record stores don't replace your CDs if you scratch them...

    5. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Music from the Apple Music store can only be played on Apple computers, on Apple's MP3 software and on Apple's handheld device.

      Except after you've burned them to CD.

      The files have your name embedded in them and won't play if you want to let a friend listen to a copy.

      Except after you've burned them to CD.

      If your hard drive dies, you can't re-download it.

      Except after you've burned them to CD.

      How much more DRM-friendly can you get?

      Well, you could prevent burning to CD, for starters. But iTunes has a giant "BURN DISC" button right there in the upper-right-hand corner. Creates fully unrestricted CD's in Red Book format that can play on any audio CD player.

      If MS had come up with the Microsoft Music Store with the same restrictions, the press would be tearing them apart.

      If that's true--which I dispute, but that's an opinion thing--then it says way more about the press than it does about the Music Store.

    6. Re:The both copy each other... by suwain_2 · · Score: 4, Funny

      And UNIX copied su from SCO? ;)

      --
      ________________________________________________
      suwain_2 :: quality slashdot p
    7. Re:The both copy each other... by jdreed1024 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Music from the Apple Music store can only be played on Apple computers, on Apple's MP3 software and on Apple's handheld device.

      Actually, you can burn Apple Music Store songs to CD. But you conveniently left that out, didn't you? And once they're on CD, you can give them to whoever you want. Because iTunes will burn to a standards-compliant CD, with no DRM, or any crap, and no identifying information except for what you choose to write on the label.

      The files have your name embedded in them and won't play if you want to let a friend listen to a copy. Forgot about that feature where you can share music with up to 3 friends (provided they also have iTunes), didn't you?

      If your hard drive dies, you can't re-download it.

      And if my dog eats my CD, Tower Records or Sam Goody won't replace it for me for free. And if my hard drive dies, my prof won't re-write that term paper for me. And if I lose my Office CD, and my hard drive dies, MS won't buy me a new copy. What's your point?

      --
      There is no sig, there is only Zuul.
  3. this is what free market is about by Raleel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Competition makes the product better. MS learns, they are not stupid. They are stealing from Linux, they are stealing from Apple, Linux is stealing from both, etc.

    Feed on each other to make a stronger whole :)

    --
    -- Who is the bigger fool? The fool or the fool who follows him? --
  4. Re:Has either company by HarveyBirdman · · Score: 5, Informative
    Yes. Apple gave Xerox quite a lot of stock options for what little they used from the Alto work.

    Honestly, you'd think the Internet would have spread information to the four corners of the Earth, but all it does it perpetuate the myths.

    --
    --- Ban humanity.
  5. Where's the beef by timeOday · · Score: 4, Informative

    That article was short and uninformative. The only "innovative" feature clearly alleged stolen is the particular aspect ratio of the screen, which 1) who cares and 2) isn't an "idea", just a design choice.

  6. Ugly by scrotch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That computer looks like an iMac using a painted Commodore 64 keyboard and 2 little arms stuck on the sides. Couldn't they integrate the camera into the screen a little better? And what is that thing hanging off the left side? And why on Earth would it be there? Couldn't that be under the keyboard somewhere?

    I know it's a prototype, but isn't this the stage where you make it beautiful - because it doesn't have to work well yet?

    This is why MS gets accused of copying more often than anyone else. It's a second class rip off. When you steal from something, you should be able to look at the original and improve upon it. This is just playing catch up.

    1. Re:Ugly by phillymjs · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And what is that thing hanging off the left side? And why on Earth would it be there?

      It's the handset for the integrated telephone. It does look stupid there, it (along with the camera sticking out on the otherside) ruins whatever sleek appearance the computer might otherwise have.

      This is a perfect example of Microsoft's true innovation-- they do really stupid shit when they're not copying someone else outright <cough>MS Bob<cough>. If you're going to integrate a fucking phone with a computer, do it in a way that leaves people's hands free to operate the computer while they talk! What next, are they gonna hang a memo pad and a pencil on a string off the side of this thing, so you can jot down ideas while you're using the computer?

      If I were designing this thing, I'd build in Bluetooth, and use a rechargable wireless headset for the phone. Hide the recharge bay on the rear edge of the display. Let the headset's mic also be used for speech-to-text and giving verbal commands to the computer. And build in a good mic and speakers so you can use a speakerphone if you don't want to wear the headset or so you don't have to fumble for it if you're not wearing it when there's an incoming call.

      /me runs off to the Patent Office with a hard copy of this post, just in case anyone from Microsoft reads it.

      ~Philly

  7. one of the features they haven't told us about yet by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 5, Funny
    The mandatory registration will automatically register you for the New York Times. Then, Internet Explorer will automatically remember your registration ID and password. Oh yeah, maybe mandatory registration will automatically sign you up for MS Passport as well.

    Heck, it reminds me of the Dilbert cartoon where an "InstalSHIELD" type program displays the message "Install Wizard is now placing orders for products you will probably need... Found your credit card number..."

    --
    Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
  8. Re:Yawn by HarveyBirdman · · Score: 4, Funny
    Everyone here is a Microphobe.

    Uuummm.... fear of microphones?

    Fear of germs?

    Fear of tiny gay men?

    --
    --- Ban humanity.
  9. Here's a summary... by Dthoma · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...of the responses this story will no doubt get when more people start commenting, for the benefit of those lacking time to read them all:

    • Apple copies Microsoft
    • Microsoft copies Apple
    • Everyone copies the hell out of everyone else
    • All of these features were in BSD/Linux/AIX/VMS/SysV since 1995/1990/1985/1930
    • Fuck you all, Apple rulez
    • I know I'm going to get modded down for saying this, but Microsoft has innovated
    • Give one example where Microsoft has innovated
    • An example of Microsoft innovation
    • Five examples of Apple's innovation
    • Somebody screaming that all of these features were copied from an obscure OS from thirty years ago
    • I use Multics! I love it, and you should too!
    • Fuck Linux
    • Fuck Microsoft
    • Shaddap all of you, copying is part of innovation
    • Imagine a Beowulf cluster of iMacs!
    • The latest Microsoft PCs are copies of iMacs
    • Here's a reg-free link to the article
    • Steve Jobs hasn't had an original idea since 1990
    • Bill Gates hasn't had an original idea since 1970
    • ...plus the standard trolls
    --

    Note to M1-ers: a curt but otherwise insightful message is not "Flamebait" or "Troll".

  10. More to come.........uhhhhhh...yeah by curtisk · · Score: 5, Funny
    "We only showed glimpses of the future of Longhorn,Wait until the fall when we'll go into more detail at the Professional Developers Conference."

    Yeah, after they check out Apple's latest OSX version "Panther" in July :)
    They only need a few months to emulate what they see there, right?!

    --

    Sehr geehrter Toilettenbenutzer!

  11. MS did this with Apple before by marian · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Am I the only one who remembers the "Look and Feel" lawsuit Apple lost after MS first released Windows? MS already knows they can steal anything they like without any significant retribution from either the government or other corporations, which is exactly what they do. The only real innovation coming from Redmond is new and better ways to take other people's technology, add it to their own, then put the original creators out of business.

    --
    "Suppose you were an idiot..... And suppose you were a member of Congress... But I repeate myself."
  12. Did anybody notice the photo (of the MS/HP Athens) by rgoer · · Score: 4, Funny

    I mean, sure, we can go back and forth with the same old MS vs Apple BS... but there is something new and humorous to point out here:

    Did anybody notice the desktop image used in the promo photo of the MS/HP Athens (top right of atricle page)? It's as if MS said: "you're damned right we're copying Apple. Fuck them! We'll copy their default desktop image, too, pompous bastards that they are!"

  13. Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Sanity · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The last Linux UI innovation I can recall is themeability - and I am still not sure whether that was a good thing or a bad thing.

    Surely there are adacemic researchers out there probing the frontier of human-computer interaction that could use Linux as the basis for their work? Could it be that X is slowing us down somehow? I mean, think of how much fuss there was over minor and superficial enhancements antialiased fonts and transparent windows. Where are the big ideas?

    The Open Source community has demonstrated that it can play catch-up and play it well, but when are we going to see Windows and Apple stealing important UI features from Linux?

    1. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by aussersterne · · Score: 5, Interesting
      The Linux community is throwing innovation away. There are things about X that drew me from PC/Mac to Unix/X then Linux back in the early '90s:
      • Total configurability... you can choose anything from wm2 to KDE to act as your environment and at least once, you could make your environment behave in almost any way you wanted (remember dotfiles?)
      • Nice UI features like focus-follows-mouse, horizontal/vertical maximize, "user placement" of applications (used to always use this in TWM, FVWM, etc.) and so on.
      • Total network transparency.
      • Multi-display, Xinerama, multiple-input, etc. etc. etc.
      • Multiplatform application support (using Basilisk and Crossover, I have Windows applications, Mac OS applications and Linux/Unix applications all on the same desktop).

      The Linux community has recently been rabid in its desire to get rid of such things. The "choose your environemnt" philosophy has been sacrificed in favor of the KDE/GNOME wars, and /. posters regularly bemoan the fact that even TWO choices are available. GNOME and recent distros have done away with focus-follows-mouse, user placement, and similar features totally; you can't even choose them as options in the default installs. Every X story on /. is met with a flood of "WE HATE NETWORK TRANSPARENCY" posts about the X11 protocol. People are more and more pushing for framebuffer+toolkit options that will make the more flexible output/input options unfeasible or at least less abstractable.

      The current Linux community hates innovation. They wouldn't know innovation if it rose up and bit them in the ass. Anything new and different is seen as a kind of dangerous superceding of Windows, which is apparently what users REALLY WANT and Linux is talked about as being WAAAAAAY "behind" (aside from X-hating, KDE/GNOME-hating posts, witness the diatribes the other day against Unix in general in the Gobo story).

      Linux began as almost pure innovation, an OS written from the ground up by GNU and Linus Torvalds. It is network-centric, runs on devices ranging from tiny to supercomputer, supported SMP, software RAID, IPV6, and a million other features before any of the other consumer operating systems. It's still one of the only free pieces of "major" software in the world. The marriage of Unix, new ideas, new technologies and new languages in Linux has created probably the single most productive large-scale computing environment in history, and at one of the lowest price points, too.

      And yet Linux users (especially the converts over the last 3-5 years) can't stop moaning about how Linux will never be successful until it apes Windows and MacOS. And then they complain about a lack of innovation...

      Methinks Linux users are confused. Or maybe they can't see the forest for the trees. Or something.
      --
      STOP . AMERICA . NOW
    2. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by nathanh · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The current Linux community hates innovation.

      That's because the majority of Linux users are ex-Windows users. They don't want a UNIX system; they want a free version of Windows.

  14. osx by jest3r · · Score: 5, Insightful

    OSX is a dream OS ..

    I can compile GNU fileutils .. play Warcraft3 .. run Adobe Photoshop .. and use Cron .. all on the same machine in the same OS -natively- without dualbooting .. and you can actually watch fullmotion video (ie DVD's) behind a transparent terminal window thanks to a true OpenGL rendered desktop.

    Apple has done in a few years what many in the Linux community have been trying to do for ages ..

  15. Microsoft is speeding up... by TFloore · · Score: 5, Funny

    Really... Windows 2005 will have things that have been in MacOSX since 2001, huh?

    Windows 95 copied things that had been in MacOS since... 1986 or so?

    The way I count things, MS is getting better, right? They went from 9 years behind to 4 years behind, in only 10 years.

    --
    This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is... Oops. Frank, I've got your sig again! Where's mine?
  16. Re:Apple leadership? by melatonin · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The same company that didn't offer a preemptive, protected multitasking OS until OS X

    Wrong. The Apple Lisa had a pre-emptive multi-tasking OS with protected memory, but the hardware cost too much (the Motorola 68k in particular had a paging bug at the time that required them to use their own MMU). The Lisa was $10K in 1983. The Mac didn't have those features (and a lot more), and was $3K in 1984. The Mac won in the marketplace over the Lisa, therefore it can be argued that co-operative multi-tasking and a simple memory model are better.

    After all, if pre-emptive multi-tasking and protected memory are so important, everyone would have used OS/2 instead of Windows 3.1.

    dork.

    --
    Moderators should have to take a reading comprehension test.
  17. Re:Apple leadership? by AxelTorvalds · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Never mind that fact that they offered a seemless transition over the years from 68000 to PowerPC, from MacOS Classic to MacOS X.

    If you invested in Apple 15 years ago, they still honor your investment. I can't say that the same is true of MS where different versions of Office don't even like to talk to each other and they are constantly pushing for their customers to spend more money.

  18. Re:Sign Needed: by ausoleil · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do different companies in the same industry steal ideas from each other? Yes. Is it news? Not unless they get caught doing it before the other fella, i.e. industrial spying.

    When a company has made a living off of copying other ideas and then proclaiming their "innovation" they are going to draw the ire of those who know better.

    Microsoft, more than any company since at least the halycon days of IBM, does more to make informed people dislike them than anyone else. And they do a better job of that than they do creating computer programs.

    Even died-in-the-wool Microsoft bigots have a lot less than love for the new licensing plans that Microsoft has "offered" ... so it is more than just a few malcontents sitting infront of their keyboard after their third triple espresso of the day.

  19. Re:What's so funny? by bbc22405 · · Score: 4, Funny
    Yeah, but MS didn't steal the "Bliss Screen" and color scheme from Apple. They stole it from Teletubbies.

    "Time for Tubby Bye-bye"!

  20. Re:BSD by Mikey-San · · Score: 4, Funny

    Do you know who they both steal from? BSD.

    Stealing from a dead man is called scavenging.

    --
    Mikey-San
    Karma: +Eleventy billion (mostly affected by watching Celebrity Jeopardy)
  21. That Won't Stop Microsoft from Winning by Greyfox · · Score: 4, Interesting
    OS/2 had all the features of Windows 95 back in 1992, and those features were for the most part better implemented. Look where OS/2 is now...

    While OSX does enjoy several advantages over OS/2, I am not convinced that it's going to be enough to buy Apple any long-term gain. I suspect that any move Microsoft makes against the Open Source community will also be very dangerous to Apple. At the very least, Apple is going to have to remain vigilant if they are to avoid any potential dirty tricks.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  22. Arrogance is Dangerous by repetty · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I remember when IBM announced their first personal computer. Of course, Apple said something like "Welcome. Serioiusly."

    Then Apple got it's head kicked in.

    In our world, quality does NOT sell computers. This new Microsoft machine doesn't have to be nearly as good as a Macintosh to be good enough for people who don't know any better. That principal, already, has been proven.

    Thankfully, there is one important difference between those days and today: Apple is working its arse off and not just talking shit.

    Apple is definitely pushing the industry -- that has always been its charter. Let us all hope that they don't forget all the obligations that role entails.

    --Richard

    1. Re:Arrogance is Dangerous by thatguywhoiam · · Score: 4, Funny
      I remember when IBM announced their first personal computer. Of course, Apple said something like "Welcome. Serioiusly."

      Ah, but you forgot the most hubristic - and funniest - ad that Apple ran.

      At the launch of Windows 95, Apple ran a full-page ad (NYT?) that said:

      C:/NGRDLTNS.W95

      Priceless.

      Your point is taken, though. Let's see if Apple is awake this time. Something tells me they are.

      --
      If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
    2. Re:Arrogance is Dangerous by repetty · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Its all about marketing."

      There's some truth to that. Not as much as you probably believe, but some, at least. I used to say they same thing about Microsoft. I've come to realize that it's really more about politics than marketing.

      Also, I disagree with your supporting example. The iMacs have done very well, but it's hardly the case you describe wherein Joe Six-Pack sees a colorful iMac and buys it over a beige PC.

      People decide to purchase Macintosh systems because they make the conscious decision to do so. Same case exists for people who make the decision to run Linux or Unix or OS/2 or Be or any of the many other non-Microsoft operating systems.

      By definition, no Windows user has ever made the decision to run Windows--instead, they are born into the situation. Almost to the last person, Windows users lack any meaningful understanding of the alternatives available to them. What motive do they have? What opportunity for knowledge of the alternatives are available to them?

      I'm not blaming anybody for this situation. It's just how things are.

      By virtue of proportions, Linux users and Macintosh users are well exposed to Windows and Microsoft's World(TM). How familiar are Windows users with Mac OS X or Linux? Which type of user has had the opportunity and resources to make the most informed decision?

      Joe Six-Pack doesn't buy iMacs. He bought Packard-Bells by the truckload, then Gateways, and now Dells. In the future, Joe Six-Pack will buy whatever commodity PC is being produced for the masses by the most successful commodity PC maker, and he won't burn any brain cells doing it.

      And somewhere inside this mess is marketing.

  23. Oh, wow by The+Bungi · · Score: 4, Interesting
    These stories should be posted on a Mac advocacy website. This is the home of the folks whose crowning achievement remains cloning whatever Microsoft does.

    Oh, and BTW, Apple has a definite point here. The difference is that Apple took an unfriendly OS and turned it into a consumer product.

  24. Macintosh OS = Windows 95 by taaminator · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Let me see --

    Windows (19)95 was a brand new operating system concept never conceived before -- with the exception of Macintosh OS (1988)

    iWin (2004) is a brand new computer concept never conceived before -- with the exception of iMac (1997) then iMac FP

    Reverse engineering is the sincerest form of flattery. Plagiarism is the sincerest form of flattery. Copyright violation is the sincerest form of flattery. -- M$ ripping you off is the sincerest form of flattery.

    Run, Apple, run!

    This is reminiscent of Sony. Sony was only 15% of the consumer electronics market (compared to National/Panasonic), so Sony had to innovate or die. As Sony innovated, others would take Sony's ideas, reverse engineer them, modify them, and create competing products. [Revive Beta versus VHS argument, here] For example, Sony developed and sold the only digital camera with memory card and modem in the early 80s. It did not catch on and Sony was about to cancel the product line when a reporter took pictures of an aircraft crash, sent them to his editor, and his newspaper scooped everyone with pictures. Now, few remember the original Sony digital camera with stick and modem and how Sony helped lead the digital revolution .

    Sony leads, others follow.

    Apple innovates, M$ assimilates ...

  25. Its in keeping with Windows XP and the rest of M$ by crovira · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Its NOT about churning out a first rate product. First rate products are hard to build take time and don't make you very rich very quickly.

    GM, Ford and AMC don't churn out great cars. No Lamborghini's, no Roll's Royces, not even a Beamer. But they churn out a lot of crappy ones and make some money on each one.

    Its all about the Benjamins. M$ would churn out Goethes, Bachs, Rembrants and Piranene's if anybody figured out a way to make a buck doing that.

    But that's not likely is it? So you get "wanna-be" "rip-off" crap that doesn't work well, look good or last long because there's more money in churning crap.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  26. Re:Apple leadership? by Build6 · · Score: 4, Informative


    BTW, I can read a Word'95 doc into Office 97, Office 2000, and Office XP. It's really a non-issue

    Yes and no - MS has put in a lot of work (although in the grand scheme of things it may not mean all that much since they have so many resources to throw at any problem) in maintaining forward compatibility for apps etc. (e.g. when Win95 was first released I was reading about how they had specific code to modify behaviour (i.e. reimplement bugs :-) in Win3.x to suit certain commonly used apps so that customers who upgrade-installed Win95 could use their old apps).

    But let's not forget how when Word97 came out the .DOC format changed and Word95 users could not read it, unless the document was saved in "compatibility" format, by which they meant RTF and therefore losing the majority of the Word functions (tables etc.).

    We may be facing this with the next "XML document format" MS Word on the way... .

  27. I'm amused that by porkchop_d_clown · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Even the background image on the Athens PC looks vaguely like the default OS X background image.

    I'm also amused that no one seems to have noticed that while none of the individual ideas MS is pushing are wildly new, the level integration of basic work tasks will be very impressive if it works as hyped...

    --
    Clear, Dark Skies
  28. Senseless debate . . . by xyrw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Consider:

    Would anyone be surprised if Longhorn turns out to be BETTER than OS X?

    Would anyone be shocked if, alternatively, by 2005, OS X had progressed to a further point than Longhorn then?

    And which of you would switch just because of that? As for me, I'm sticking to the Mac anyway.

  29. And to misquote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    "... I don't think." -- Bill Gates

  30. what are you talking about? by twitter · · Score: 5, Informative
    The Win95 shell imitates NeXTStep in its appearance far more than it does MacOS,

    Exacly what features of the Nextstep does win95 offer? "windowblinds"? Sure, if you download a serious modification. 95 shipped with the clumsy three button junk from win3.1 plus an extra button and a pannel. A root menue anywhere on the screen? Nope. The way it resizes windows? Nope. Menues that you can leave up on the screen? Nope. Can you name one feature that is not simply part of any GUI? I'm not going to go into the tremendous difference in the unerlying systems but just look at the apearances alone.

    Nextstep was made from MacOS and was better. Windoze never did much more than follow along the GUI path, never evolving much from the first one they made. The evolution and lines of influence are clear when you look at screen shots from each.

    For those of you not familiar with Next, check out this 1993 screen shot of the first web browser. The client was developed in 1990. There are many free implementations of the Nextstep such as Window Maker today. It still kicks any GUI Microsoft has ever made. After using a reasonable window manager on X, few people can go back to the M$ GUI confines.

    For those of you fortunate enough to have missed Windoze 3.1, here is a little screen shot from 1993 or so when Netscape became one of the first available browsers for Windoze. 95 added the X button on the top right, so I suppose you could say it coppied Nextstep in one way. Here is a typical Win95/98 desktop. Windoze XP (screen shot to compare), is more of the same and annoying as all hell.

    Please don't compare reasonable software, such as Nextstep or Sun's Common Desktop Environemnt, to junk from Microsoft. People might get the idea that one was better than it is or that the other sucks in ways it never did.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:what are you talking about? by fucksl4shd0t · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The only reason not to have scrollbars on the top and left is if there was some other useful clickable stuff already using that space. The top of windows is devoted to menus or buttons- traditionally, there hasn't been anything on the left, although recently some button bars or "Sidebars" show up there.

      Indeed, as a consequence of english being left-to-right, paper books have required us to reach to the right, with our right hand, to turn the page. Since that is essentially what a scrollbar does, it seems to be more fitting with more traditional media to have scrollbars on the right.

      If you think about it. :) Also, since the language is left to right, you're more likely to find a sentence ending closer to the right-hand side than the left-hand side, and your eyes will be closer to the scrollbars.

      One more thing: Since most people are right-handed, and they use their mouse on the right-hand side of the screen, it feels more natural to them to reach to the right to scroll down.

      Final point:

      There isn't any *right place* to put a scrollbar. Windows sucks because you don't have any choice. The closest thing to the right place for a scrollbar is a preferences setting that lets the user pick.

      --
      Like what I said? You might like my music
  31. Re:5 huh? by Reverberant · · Score: 5, Informative

    From an MS press release:

    Apple demanded $1.2 billion from Microsoft for alleged patent infringements...

    The negotiations that resulted led to a strategic agreement between the two companies in August 1997, one part of which called for Microsoft to invest $150 million in Apple and for Apple to install Microsoft's Internet Explorer as the default Web browser for its customers... As part of his videotaped deposition, however, Microsoft Chairman and CEO Bill Gates testified repeatedly that his primary goal was to resolve the patent issues with Apple and obtain a patent cross license.