Microsoft Feared Mac Vs. Vista In '05

CWmike writes "Gregg Keizer sifted through many threads of e-mails released under the 'Vista Capable' lawsuit to dig up this jewel...More than a year before Windows Vista's release — and long before Apple started poking fun at the OS — Microsoft officials were already worried about comparisons between Mac OS X and Vista. An e-mail thread from October 2005 showed that an article in the Wall Street Journal by Walt Mossberg grabbed the attention of managers at Microsoft. In a column headlined What PC to Buy If You Are Planning On a Vista Upgrade, Mossberg alarmed one Windows manager who forwarded a bit from the column.... 'You won't have to worry about Vista if you buy one of Apple Computer's Macintosh computers, which don't run Windows,' Mossberg had written. 'Every mainstream consumer doing typical tasks should consider the Mac. Its operating system, called Tiger, is better and more secure than Windows XP, and already contains most of the key features promised for Vista.' Warrier added a comment of his own: 'A premium experience as defined by Walt = Apple. This is why we need to address [the column].'"

Comments

Their fears were justified.

[Anonymous Coward]

When you release an OS as fatally flawed as Vista, especially when you have proven track record of foisting poorly written junk on your customers and making them beta-test it for free, you should be afraid when a viable alternative surfaces.

Re:Their fears were justified.

[smilindog2000]

I agree, though Apple naturally dropped the opportunity to really take on Microsoft. If Apple would simply allow their OS to run on generic PCs, Microsoft would have a true competitor. As is, all Microsoft has to do is change their look every so often, and they'll maintain their monopoly. Steve Jobs is extending this stupidity to the iPhone, which I predict will lose the market-share wars to Android over the next few years. It's Mac vs Windows 3.1 all over again.

Re:What Microsoft should really have considered

[Moryath]

Pray tell, what alternate universe are you from wherein this is true?

I've done the test on brand new boxes we get in. Quad-core (not simply dual), 4GB RAM. Vista is STILL slower than XP even on these beasts.

Or are you talking Vista 64-bit Edition, aka "I'm not compatible with jack crap and not even NVidia or ATi have fully working drivers for me" edition?

Re:No, you're wrong

[V!NCENT]

Sit the fuck down and listen to the reason why the hell we, FLOSS users, hate proprietary software.

If I give you a hard copy of a document then you can read it. But what if I gave you a hard copy of a document with a flashy 3D graph that you cannot see without purchasing $300 glasses? Oh I am sorry, you must buy the $300 dollar glasses because the company patented-, and has hidden, the inner workings of it.

WTF?! We expect you to buy glasses when we can just, what? Provide an freely readable document?

Well hello and welcome to the digital fucking age. Why the hell do people give me digital documents that I can only view with Microsoft Office 200x? Oh wait, I can't...?- No. We made sure you can't possible make something else compatible with it because we lobbied for the "Digital Millennium Copyright Act".

Same goes with games. Do I have to agree to a EULA when I buy a actual Real Life board game of, let's say, chess? No ofcourse not! Ofcourse not? Well if I want a digital game of chess I do... Oh and wait, you cannot take the chess game with you when you move, because you may only take it to three houses (DRM). Oh and wait, you can't possible make you own chess game out of wood because then you are pirating the board game.

"But, but... It's for protecting the Intellectual Property!" Yeah right, so no-one may sell a set of bricks because LEGO already did it, in Real Life? Well I have to in the digital age...

Do you see and understand the fucking reason/necessity for free software now?

Proprietary software restricts our rights in the digital age. Please think of your children who grow up in it!