Slashdot Mirror
Why Microsoft Should Fear Apple
jcatcw writes "Computerworld's Scot Finnie says that Microsoft should be afraid because Apple has gotten smarter about how it competes. He says that it's the Parallels Desktop software that has been truly transformational for the Mac. Finnie did a simple three-month trial of the Mac last in the fall and realized four months later that he wasn't going back. Since then he's received hundreds of messages from readers who've also made the switch. 'In the end, this is about perception. It isn't about Apple's market share or even its quarterly sales numbers. (Apple's notebook computer sales for the fourth quarter were 4.1% of all portable computer sales, according to DisplaySearch.) What this is about is that Apple is reaching the right people with its product, winning new converts, Windows user by Windows user -- and creating buzz. How do you measure buzz? You don't. It's something that experienced people in this industry can just feel. And that's the condition Microsoft should fear. Because buzz can turn into something much harder to combat than sheer numbers.'"
People are talking about the Mac throughout the industry. Admit it: Whether you love it or hate it, you're talking about the Mac at the water cooler.
Apple certainly does have a great public image. They are in a great place right now - they get huge amounts of publicity for free. This just didn't happen by accident though, they've done a good job creating their image, and creating products that people want to get excited about. Actually, some Mac ads are so good, that I enjoy watching them. (I love those "I'm a PC" and "I'm a mac" ads!). Apple has the momentum.
I store my recipes online (the way nature intended)
How many times have we seen articles about how Apple's consumer market share is going to rise? And it never does.
Today, Apple's computer business is a distraction from its core business area of entertainment electronics.
Speaking as a certified Macintosh fanboy who bought his first Mac in February, 1984... gimme a break. If there's anything more boring than an Apple-is-doomed story, it's a Microsoft-is-doomed story.
(Yes, I know he says Microsoft is not going to die... then at the end he says "Nothing lasts forever. The bloom is coming off the rose on Microsoft. I would never put it past the software giant to come up with a way to remake itself in a better light. But the current course doesn't appear to me to lead in that direction. As much as Apple is doing things right, Microsoft is doing things wrong." How is that anything but a weasel-worded version of "Microsoft is doomed?")
Speaking as a certified Macintosh fanboy, Microsoft copies the Apple OS a lot... and, you know what? Apple has, for a long time, been returning the favor. The two companies borrow ideas from each other promiscuously, and only the blinkered view of the fans of each camp prevents them from seeing it. Of course, one idea Mac OS 9 borrowed from Windows was making windows resizable by dragging at all four edges. I just wish Mac OS X had borrow that from Mac OS 9!
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
Couldn't MS just limit their software to running on Non-Macs, just as Apple has limited their software to running on only macs. It would be a dirty trick, but If Apple can do it, why not MS. Sure MS is a monopoly, but if Apple wants to play the game of what software can run on which hardware, then I don't see why MS shouldn't have the same priviledge.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Okay! So you bought a Mac!
You bought something MacOS. Yay for you! YOU REBEL!
Now you use Parallels and buy a copy of Windows to put in there.
GAME OVER.
*MICROSOFT* doesn't care what HARDWARE you run their OS on. Running Parallels on a Mac doesn't hurt MICROSOFT in the slightest.
Both Apple AND Microsoft pull a profit off this. Microsoft even moreso, since Mac heads are likely to buy a RETAIL copy of the OS, meaning higher margins for Redmond than they'd get from a traditional OEM copy.
Who it's a mark against? The other PC vendors.
Seriously. Why does everyone turn stupid non-issues like this into a zip-gun fight between Redmond and Cupertino?
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Worse than a pro-Apple buzz, is the Anti-Microsoft Buzz. As another Switcher appears at the watercooler, smiling like Smilin' Bob, the DIS-satisfaction of Microsoft will grow. What will happen is that Windows users will become increasingly frustrated with their inabilities, the road blocks, the busted drivers, the paths out into the 'Net they now FEAR to tread. Every "Cancel or Allow" will toll in an image of the Apple commercial's sunglassed security monger. The "Sad Realization" will grow.
Like one who looked into the Palantir, the emotional illness will sink in. And they will be trapped. Every mouse click will make them sicker, sink them deeper. Their happy, released Mac User associates will shine like a white wizard among the Orcs.
And every trick that Microsoft will try to rejuvenate their relationship will be transparent to them. Zune the iTune killer will make them laugh sadly. Every promise of liberation and innovation will fall flat before it is delivered. Every
The numbers will lie, like the percentage of marriages that last longer than 7 years... it belies the number of dead marriages still lingering. Microsoft will retain 90%+ of the market, but those will be wretched zombies, entombed in their own fear and loathing.
Microsoft's "WOW" will become "woe", from which they are unable to escape. And like Gandalf, betrayed by a friend and mentor, they are marooned atop a tower which promised great vision, but a broad horizon of darkness, gloom and malevolence is their only vista.
I am writing this in Firefox in Vista on my MacBook Pro. One year ago (almost to this day) I made the switch because I had bought into the hype. I told myself I'd give it three months to make my decision. When the time came I was struggling to be as productive as when I was in Windows. However, I realized that I had not yet learned everything I needed in the Mac to give it a fair shake. So I extended the test. Finally after 10 months I made the Switch-back.
What about all of us that gave it a try and end up switching back? We just get modded down because of the anti-M$ sentiment. I'm no M$ lover -- I run all Linux servers and refuse to deploy Active Directory in my organization because I believe it is a gateway to "everything M$". However, many people like me may find that they are actually more productive in Windows.
Unfortunately, being a moderator doesn't reflect any degree of competence. What we see here is a moderator with an agenda, and his work has already been dealt with.
In any case, the parent indeed has a point. It would be kind of interesting to see a contender of the stature of OS X duking it out against Windows. I've met any number of "switchers" who have mentioned their relief at no longer having to be so concerned with all the issues of Windows security or the absence of it.
However, with OEMs such as Dell beginning to come on board with pre-installed Linux on some of their machines, it may not be too long before we start hearing some of the "buzz" mentioned in the submission applied to Linux. We'll have to wait and see, I guess...
My coworkers are all switching to Macs. We write various web apps, and having three operating systems right there is a lot easier than VNCing into a system and possibly having to wait for others to finish testing.
And quite a few people around the office have considered switching their personal computers to Macs because the experience is so good. And every Mac purchased by our company is money Dell isn't getting from us.
I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
I entirely agree with the article, the "buzz" or shift has begun to lean towards Apple. Don't believe me? I'm a student and over the last few years I've noticed Macs starting to pop-up more and more in class. My feeling is with all the problems people have had historically with Windows viruses and now Vista and its incompatability, people are just getting fedup with Microsoft. Eventually a person can only take so much before they think "There's got to be something better!!!" and... there is.
"Simplify, simplify, simplify!" Thoreau
Flat?.... Umm the last 5 years ;)
Apple users want to gripe all of the time about flaws in Apple hardware and software. If you read the online discussions before buying a Mac, you might get scared. But the fact is that Mac users are an elite club of really obsessive people. That's not a slight against them. They have incredibly high standards. As a Windows and Linux user, however, my experiences with the Mac were a huge breath of fresh air. It's nice to finally use a computer that's clearly been well-engineered. From simple things like how the keyboards are made to the way MacOS X manages application-related files, you can tell that Apple wants to do things well and isn't afraid to do it.
/usr, /etc) and how config file are plain-text in a way that makes it impossible to do upgrades cleanly. That's annoying as hell. Linux architects need to get their heads out of their asses, group all files for a given app into one place, and use mini XML registries for config options. This is just simply good engineering!
I recently was in need of a notebook computer, so I did some investigation as to what my options were. I put notebooks from various manufacturers side by side and compared based on processor speed, FSB speed, memory (size, speed), graphics (GPU power, shared memory, etc.), display resolution, and numerous other factors. While things appear to have changed slightly in the recent past, at the time, the MacBook Pro was less expensive than any PC notebook with comparable capabilities. How's that for risk management? I was nervous about getting a Mac... what if I didn't like it? No problem. The hardware is great, and I can install Linux or Windows on it if I feel like it. Turns out that I really like MacOS too and run Windows and Linux using Parallels.
As a Free Software enthusiast, I am bothered by the fact that so much Apple software isn't Free. But I'm an activist in many ways. I'm an activist for Free Software. I'm also an activist for GOOD software. And my computer is my computer, and I'll run whatever apps make my life easiest. As such, I'm going to use commercial software when it's clearly superior in design and quality to the Free Software. (Notice how I'm implicitly dismissing Microsoft as anything worth talking about.) Then I tell people which apps are the best and why. This way, the Free Software enthusiasts can take notice and improve their designs
I think I won't be much interested in using Linux as a desktop OS until some Ubuntu comes with Beryl by default. And I'll NEVER like the fact that Linux applications have their files spread out across different sections of the file system (/bin,
One point that I find rather interesting...if you want to run Boot Camp or Parallels to run any version of Windows, you have to buy a retail copy of Windows. This means that Microsoft is then obligated to provide you with technical support. Microsoft's main business is selling OEM copies to hardware manufacturers, and under the agreements they use, the OEM is the one responsible for technical support of Windows. The retail license is also transferrable in a way that the OEM licenses are not, so this means that Microsoft might end up supporting that retail copy far longer than the OEM would be supporting the OEM copy.
I wonder how much impact it would have on Microsoft and their technical support people if ever larger numbers of Apple customers begin buying retail copies of Windows. I've bought two myself, for my new Core 2 Duo iMac and MacBook, and I know that several of my clients have done the same.
Can Microsoft deal with it?
BTW, I've also made the switch to OpenOffice with the new version. I've realized that I never really use the copies of Office v.X that I bought with my last two Macs (at a good promotional price), except for my occasional use of Excel as glorified graph paper, so there's nothing preventing me from moving to OpenOffice. Now my documents can move seamlessly among all three of my installed OS's: Fedora Core 6, Windows XP Pro, and Mac OS X.
Good points. I'll add some to this.
Many people switching to Apple are honeymooning. I happen to be a long time Apple user and MacOS (in any form) has its share of problems just like Windows, Linux, or whatever. It hangs, it crashes, some applications have awful interfaces, it's slow, etc. The problems are often different but it's really no better than any other OS. It does look slick though.
I haven't found the hardware to be better than anything else either. In fact my experience with Apple hardware has been that it breaks more often than other brands. My iBook has the only LCD display I own with dead pixels. Everyone I know with Macs has had it in the shop at one point or another (everyone in my company has a Mac, among other computers). They're like Ferrari's, nice to look at but a bitch to keep running.
On the technical side I don't like Apple either. I find it extremely hard to get anything done. I have no idea what the problem is but almost every time I try to do something with MacOS it seems I can't figure out how to. I don't understand the people that say the OS is user friendly because it seems to me it's the least friendly. I mean is there a single person on this planet that likes Finder?
I also hate developing for MacOS. Ugh, there are so many tacked on API's and just plain bizarre ways of doing things that it causes nothing but pain (and I know what I'm doing, I have worked for Apple doing software development). I'll compare the API's between Microsoft and Apple. Where Microsoft also has a lot of tacked-on API's, they tend to be extensions of existing systems or otherwise have the feel on something designed by a group of people. Buried in OS X in a ton of stuff just flying around every which direction like a whole bunch of developer's doing their own thing.
Now I'm not saying Microsoft or Linux is better or anything like that. I do happen to use Linux as my primary OS and run everything else in VMware. I'm just saying that I think many of the people switching to Apple will be looking for something else eventually.
The ratio of people to cake is too big
Maybe because they don't sell PCs? I'm not saying that it is or even should be illegal, but it's not really the same. And MS does say you can only play Xbox games on Xbox.
I purchased my first new Mac in 2002. I have been in IT for some years having first worked on IBM Mainframes so being older, my opinion will be suspect:
;)
PCs I have used since the 296 days; building them, upgrading, running various operating systems from GEMM and DOS to OS/2 and all flavors of Windows, BeOS and Linux ( Debian, RH, and Slackware so my distro experiences is somewhat limited, but RH 5.2 kernel 2 on a SCSI box was quite educational). Macs I never used, and through osmosis of my peers gained a disdain for them, a disdain born of my own ignorance and prejudice.
My Mac Experience began around 1999 when I was given a dumpster bound older 68k based Mac running OS 7.1. I thought the interface ugly, clunky and not as easy to modify as other opsys. Then I was given another, and another and another, then picked up a few more. Use increased understanding.
In the end I played with, modified, tinkered with, and eventually sent to dumpster heaven, almost every model of Mac there was up to around PPC 604 based machines.. My interest was as a hobby since I still work in IT on PC based systems. Learning this way; on discarded junk machines on obsolete operating systems, as versus on "working" machines doing real work, is a good way to do it; you are not constrained and can try things that might let the magic smoke out of things
Anyway, I jumped from 604 to G4 buy actually buying a new Mac in 2002. By then I was hooked. The OS X interface worked, the addition of terminal allowed me to command line when needed, and the apps did everything I could do on the PC side with few constraints...and less issues.
I now use a Mac as my primary (but hardly only) home box. Oh and that 2002 purchase is STILL up though now relegated to use as a media server for home entertainment.
Speaking as a PC user who tried a Mac, worked with it, and grew to prefer it.
Macs may not be for everyone; but I contend they are still the best machine for Joe User at home. Also, the more Joe Users there are with Macs, the less zombies there are out there attacking my net.
- Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
Parallels has allowed our company to begin the migration away from Windows by providing support for specific, required applications on the platform of choice:
- Business users receive Macs, and use Parallels (and sometimes Boot Camp) for specific applications.
- Engineers have the choice between either Mac OS X or Ubuntu. They can also run Parallels or VMware for Windows applications, though they rarely do so.
- Artists run Windows, since their singular, primary application is 3d Studio Max -- Windows only 3d software.
Parallels has allowed us to make a long-term platform decision (Mac OS X and Linux) while continuing to support the short-term software requirements (Running Windows software). As more cross-platform software is made available, we will migrate away from the Windows-only solutions.
http://plausible.coop
The answer is parallels for Linux...
Yeah, yeah, I know. There already are virtual machine products available for linux, however the average shmoe does not know that. Who is going to spend the marketing dollars necessary to educate potential average joe linux converts about that possibility? And no, Wine and its commercial derivatives is a crutch, not a good substitute for products that run natively on linux.
I believe distros have gotten better about making it easier to install dual boot, but that is so inconvenient.
I actually use Mac, Windows, Linux, VMware, Crossover for Linux, Parallels, etc personally and in my work environment. The virtual machine type programs are far and away the best option to working in an environment that uses multiple platforms.
Mac Pro's are also rediculously overpriced.
When Frys is running a good sale, I can get the expandability equivalent of a
Mac Pro with a normal PC for $200. Under normal circumstances, that figure is
~ $400. At that price, I can still get a relatively low profile system too.
What the flying fuck? Have you even seen a Mac Pro in person? You're basically arguing that a Ferrari isn't any nicer than a Geo Metro because they both seat four people and have steering wheels. Go price out an equivalent system at a major PC manufacturer like Dell, and tell me how close you can get for $200 or even $400. Or perhaps you weren't aware that the Mac Pro was actually far cheaper than equivalent Dell systems upon its release?
The Mac Pro is a dual processor, dual core system with workstation class hardware and top of the line specs, not some shitty stamped sheetmetal no-name Taiwanese knockoff piece of crap. And considering what you get software and hardware wise, it's actually quite cheap.
ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
I still own 5 computers used for my consulting business, but I now just use a MacBook with Parallels + Windows + Linux -- works for me for about 95% of my work. I don't even bother (usually) using my Mac as an X Window client for Linux: now, I just run Linux under Parallels, as needed. Same for Windows.
One thing: Microsoft still makes money from this arrangement (the Windows license fee) so it is not like this is a totally bad situation for them.
Being able to copy and paste between Windows and Mac applications is useful, as is an optional shared file system.
For software developers not focussed on the Windows market, this is a great setup. I use Common Lisp, Ruby, and Java - all portable to many OS platforms, so I usually work on OS X.
It's not that... I'm talking about the experience of coding on the system. Haven't you ever spent days working on a MS machine and then moved over to Linux (or vice versa)? By the tenth time I've accidentally typed "ls" instead of "dir" or wondered why "cd /" didn't work the way I expected, or whatever I find myself swearing at Bill and all the demonspawn in Redmond! It's not their fault, of course. My muscle memory just takes a while to reset. With a Mac, however my fingers don't need to relearn the command line. Everything works the way I expect it.
Waltz, nymph, for quick jigs vex Bud.
I have used both MAC OSX and Windows XP/Vista quite a bit both in labs and personally. The only thing I see as an advantage for MACs is that it is different and has great marketing. The software that comes with it is in my opinion lacking in several areas. Sure the software that works on both is even, but other than that it is no better. Windows has more issues pop up because it has a far larger user base and much larger suite of applications that some are poorly written. Security wise, I am sorry to say MACs are no more secure. Hacking a MAC is easier overall than Windows, trust me I do a lot of penetration testing. Again as far as attempts Windows gets hit more because of sheer size. MACs are prettier and that is about it, but then again so is Vista and you see how "great" that is. To me Vista may be Microsofts biggest enemy. Personally Linux is better than both in security, performance, etc. Just not great for gaming. I am a power user so I expect more out of systems than every day people. I think MACs are great machines. I also think that Windows blows them away in the business sector and in high end home users (gamers mainly). MACs are great in Creative circles and basic home users who want a trendy machine. To each their own, everyone needs to go with what they are comfortable.
How so? Most people buy their Windows PCs as an "all-in-one package" that includes an LCD screen. They don't buy componenets separately. The iMac gives them basically the same thing, but saves a heap of desk space, and doesn't have a tangle of cables running everywhere. Advantage: iMac.
This "all-in-one" market you speak of seems to be a fiction. People say "I want a new computer that works well" - not "I want an all-in-one" computer or "I want a computer with a separate monitor." People who segment the market in that way might be deluding themselves. I'm not sure where this crazy-ass categorization of the market comes from. It doesn't reflect reality, rather it seems to be a fabrication dreamed up by corporate executives, who are quite used to being divorced from the reality of the market, even though they think they know how to define it.
It's a good sign that someone lacks credibility when they start speaking of markets in these terms.
... and then they built the supercollider.
Now to Visual Studio. If there ever were a bigger POS out there, I don't know what it is. Notepad, maybe? It's the most rudimentary of IDEs in existence, falls woefully short of real productivity enhancing features, and most horridly produces lots of useless boilerplate code that you wind up having to rewrite anyways. The GUI portion works, but that's about it. Since I don't write thick client, that aspect is useless to me. And god help you if you need to do heavy refactoring of code with VS. (BTW, I own 2 copies of VS, although not the latest. A friend I trust owns that one and stated its usability had not improved). Maybe should invest in a laptop that isn't a piece of crap. This argument has been outdated since Win2000 came out; I thought you guys had finally given up trying to get people to keep believing it. Is around a $5K top end laptop with Windows XP Pro good enough for you? I'll get the exact model from another friend of mine who's about to buy a MBP. Another draw is multi-media editing software. The software on OSX just works better and easier than anything I've seen on an MS system.
And another argument from 1998. You really need to pull your head out. Even software like Photoshop just plain works better on a Mac.
(Especially now that CS3 is out) You should also look at the other packages available. Heck, the out of the box Mac comes with better multimedia editing software than most people buy for their PCs. I'm not even sure how expensive I'd have to go to match a PC package with the Mac packages I've got. I know the $100+ packages won't do. I love how Apple fanboys always seem to cover up that Apple participates in more vendor lock-in that Microsoft, and instead explain that you can just "hack it". Oh, and breaking the licensing agreement and giving Apple the option of revoking your software license is always a great idea too. Do check Vista's licensing agreement and get back to me on that. Especially the OEM ones. Let's see, Intel processor, Intel chipset... Probably about the same as a 16 or 32 core PC! I think you missed the sly aside there. I was indirectly referencing AMD. But that's no surprise. You appear to be living in a constant state of self-righteous denial, so don't let me disuade you from joining your PAL Ballme on stage.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
There is a lot more to the CAD world than just being able to draw lines. Arcitosh is nowhere close to the big picture that is required. Drawings move between different companies with the expectation of compatibility. We use AutoCAD 2007 but most of our customers use 2004-- this alone is a challenge. The biggest hope is when a viable competitor can come out with a solid professional level CAD package with automation support for less than $800. At that price point, there is hope.
I hoped Omni Graffe would work for me... it did many things better than Visio... but smart blocks from Visio weren't compatible in it. Other programs I have tried like Excel substitutes (Mariner Calc was one) couldn't even handle merged cells in a spreadsheet.
Primavera has hope, but the big picture still has a lot of major holes.
Again, for myself, I can work around limitations... but many of my co-workers can't. I hope things get better over the next year.