Microsoft Kills Off Mac IE, Blames Safari

aliebrah writes "CNet reports that Microsoft will not release any more major upgrades for Internet Explorer on MacOS. They cite competition from Safari as the reason for this decision, and say that Safari is a better browser for Macintosh systems. Ironically, they also say that they can't compete with Apple, because Apple has better access to the underlying operating system." Yeah, that must be rough. Today's SlashDotFunQuiz is to predict the order in which, impact when, and years until these other Mac products get the axe: Media Player, MSN Messenger, Office, Outlook, and Virtual PC.

Comments

Re:Completion?

[Tekka]

No I would say they are just sticking the finger up at Apple, its rather funny if you think about it.

Re:Huh? BULL -LONE -EE

[alienw]

Having the Darwin core open-sourced does NOT give, say, Linux or Microsoft any competitive advantage. However, open-sourcing, say, Quartz would actually be useful for many other projects, which is why Apple doesn't do it. That was pretty much my point.

Unfortunately, Apple's platform is extremely difficult to develop for if you are a PC guy. You need to not only have an expensive Mac box, but also learn Mac-specific stuff like Objective C in addition to the APIs. If you want to sell your program, you will have to use Macs for a year or two until you start to wrap your brain around how users expect the system to work. Sure, you might capture a segment of the market if you have a really good program, but the costs of development are unlikely to get recovered. Besides, the Mac software market is already pretty crowded, and there are too many heavyweights like Apple themselves.

Re:Huh? BULL -LONE -EE

[anthony_dipierro]

Market share or not, Apple people BUY software!

Good point. Apple people are willing to pay more for a less useful product. They should start an advertising campaign around that.

Re:Huh? BULL -LONE -EE

[anthony_dipierro]

Define "less useful".

Having fewer uses. For instance, having much less software available for it. Having much less hardware available for it.

Re:The great irony ...

[brett720]

Talk about some horrible comparisons! Following your logic, you would make it sound like Microsoft is killing IE and somehow moving Safari to the PC platform! Totally rediculous statements.

As far as IE 5.2 ported to OS X, I can't comment on that, as I dont see a reason nowdays to use a Mac over PC anymore..Mac is almost a dead bird.

If you want to talk about video formats...There are other players/formats like DivX blows away Quicktime hands down, so thats a moot point and has nothing to do with MS not developing on a closed platform that makes little business sense.

How can IE be eclipsed by Mozilla and Safari when IE has like 95% share..Mozilla is like 3% and all the others combined like Safari are less than 1%. That is the funniest part of the whole message...and 100% without fact or basis.

I dont blame Microsoft one bit for the decision not to develop a browser for the company that has traditionally released the least amount of info about thier OS/ROMS/etc. I dont see any business sense any more because Mac is becoming such a small niche of the computer world.

I imagine I will get modded down by one of the Mac moderators because they think its opinion flame-bait rather than justified facts(which it is)..but just needed to clear up the silliness that was going on in that earlier post.

WOW zealots are blind

[Java Geeeek]

They sue every company that makes a PC the same color or size as a Mac Uh, it's called "trade dress," and they were certainly right to do it for some of those blatant iMac ripoffs. Same with the Aqua skins for Windows-- because there are plenty of people in this country who'd be dumb enough to think that a Windows machine with that skin was actually running OS X, and would develop a negative opinion of OS X as a result. If you don't think people in this country are sufficiently dumb for that to happen, I've got two words for you: WWE. NASCAR.

Apple.com is where I would look for the dumbest people. Letâ(TM)s pay twice as much for weaker hardware just because the icon moves when you mouse over it. Thatâ(TM)s all they offer. Granted their interface looks great, but too bad there isnâ(TM)t any software to run on it.

And most atrocious is their taking of open source software in the form of using Darwin for the under lying Mac OS along with other system tools and don't give back to the open source community by releasing the Aqua interface to the open source world. Seems like if you're going to take, you should also give back. Uh, Aqua is one of the major things that makes a Mac a Mac. Apple was in a five year long lawsuit over the look and feel of their OS, and now you think they're just gonna give it to the Linux herd? Puhleeze! Furthermore, if you want examples of Apple "giving back," look at Safari.

Kind of makes my point. They had no problem taking all the system functionality from the open source world, all they things they would have to spend big piles of money on developing if it werenâ(TM)t for open source so in return they retain control of the only object of value they own. Where is the X86 version of Safari?

just imagine what they could do if they released Mac OS to the x86 world? Uh, they'd go out of business in about six months to a year, because you cheap fucks wouldn't buy Apple hardware if you could avoid it. Get this fact through your thick fucking skull, moron: Apple is a HARDWARE company. Their software is what sells their hardware. Their hardware sales are what fund their software R&D. You remove half of that equation and Apple ceases to exist.

The Aqua interface makes a Mac a Mac according to you, yet they are a hardware company? Wouldnâ(TM)t great hardware make a Mac a Mac if it were a hardware company? They do have cool looking cases to pull more form over function types into their fold, but if you consider cases hardware, then youâ(TM)re an ido er, um typical Mac user. They use Aqua to force people to buy their overly expensive hardware because they donâ(TM)t other businesses competing with them. Sounds like another big company based in Redmond.

BTW, please tell us if you think Apple hardware is still crap after June 23, when they release the 970-based machines.

Next to the 64 bit x86 machines it will be. I guess that great hardware is why so much of the desktop publishing industry in moving to the PC platform.

Re:Apple has better access to the underlying OS?

[brett720]

I thought Safari was open source. Am I mistaken?

Just because a piece of software is supposedly "open source", does not mean that the OS it was built upon is open. Your logic would point to Apple OS X being open source.....So yes, you are mistaken.