Microsoft Bites Apple, Apple Bites Back 1024
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.'"
News? (Score:4, Interesting)
Microsoft Employee: Look, Apple just added X feature to OS X!
Bill Gates: Well rats. Since they beat us to the punch, we should just voluntarially not add the feature for the next five to ten years as if they had a patent on it or something.
Microsoft Employee: Good idea sir!
No way - as soon as one company adds some service or markets an idea, other companies can start using it as well. Apple's and Linux's big problem isn't microsoft stealing little features and design attributes, it's that people don't realize that both are very stable and allow you to do almost the exact same thing as a PC running windows. If that myth ever goes away, then there's a legitimate chance that users will start to move over at a noticeable rate to alternative platforms for the desktop.
Matt Fahrenbacher
Re:Apple leadership? (Score:4, Interesting)
But when they did offer such an OS, they did it right.
Athens? Yuck! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Flattery and Imitation (Score:5, Interesting)
MS Inspiration (Score:2, Interesting)
Seriously, they should just port all their stuff to linux and built a Windows GUI to replace X (I have nothing against X, that would just be a good strategy for M$. Or, they can keep making all the friggin money they are making now).
MS did this with Apple before (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.
BSD (Score:1, Interesting)
Seems like an Ugly and impractible design. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Apple leadership? (Score:5, Interesting)
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 $3K in 1984. The Mac won in the marketplace over the Lisa, therefore it can be argued that co-operative multi-tasking and a simple memory model are better.
After all, if pre-emptive multi-tasking and protected memory are so important, everyone would have used OS/2 instead of Windows 3.1.
dork.
Re:The both copy each other... (Score:5, Interesting)
You conveniently left out the most important part:
You can freely burn the songs onto a standard CD and then listen to them anywhere and in any manner you choose.
THAT's the different between Apple DRM and MS DRM. Apple did what they had to in order to make the deal with the record companies: put some barriers in the way of egregious out-and-out mass piracy. Microsoft, on the other hand, is going above and beyond the call of duty: They're workng overtime with hardware vendors to ensure that in the future nobody, including independent content creators themselves, will be able to generate, distribute, or play any media without express permission from the distribution cartels.
That Won't Stop Microsoft from Winning (Score:5, Interesting)
While OSX does enjoy several advantages over OS/2, I am not convinced that it's going to be enough to buy Apple any long-term gain. I suspect that any move Microsoft makes against the Open Source community will also be very dangerous to Apple. At the very least, Apple is going to have to remain vigilant if they are to avoid any potential dirty tricks.
Re:Flattery and Imitation (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Flattery and Imitation (Score:4, Interesting)
Jobs opted for some cash and public Microsoft backing (Office for the MacOS) to make the MacOS look viable for the near future, and Microsoft was given a way out of a lawsuit by Apple for the ripped off code. Apple needed Microsoft a bit more than vice versa, but M$ 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..
Oh, wow (Score:4, Interesting)
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.
Macintosh OS = Windows 95 (Score:4, Interesting)
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
Re:Microsoft is speeding up... (Score:3, Interesting)
This is a myth. There were things in Win95 that had long been in in the Mac. But Microsoft didn't copy the Mac. They copied OS/2 Warp.
The reason this myth got started is because most tech reporters at the time (as now) only use Windows. They had to compare this new look to something in their experience, but they didn't have any experience outside of Windows. But they did notice that some people in the publication's art department were using that Mac. So they compared it to that. Most likely they had never even heard of OS/2. And if they did, certainly they never used it.
Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? (Score:5, Interesting)
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
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.
Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? (Score:4, Interesting)
There is innovation in open source, but funding and leadership are issues with innovative open source projects.
I've been seeing more and more researchers working with commercial products/platforms due to funding issues, at least at the university that I'm at. Here alone microsoft provides millions to fund research.
It's not about profit really, but about survival. If you're a research professor and you're not bringing in funding, you get fired, or at least put to use by teaching those annoying freshman courses that no one else want's to teach.
The open source projects that I've seen have mostly been funded by the government. NSF grants, etc. But those are usually smaller and heavilly contested.
It's my opinion that Open source innovators have a huge funding problem.
Leadership also plays a factor. Innovative ideas often come with huge risks. A design built by democratic consensus will assume the risk of its most risk adverse members. The conservatives slow down the pace of innovation, but also stabilize the project.
This gives open source the stability and reliability it is well known for, but holds back innovation.
This is nothing new... (Score:2, Interesting)
"Windows 98 = Macintosh '89"
Yeah, MS does put some neat and genuinely innovative stuff into their OS's, but that's just "some." They have all this money, yet nary an interface design department that I can tell of.
Re:Ugly (Score:3, Interesting)
Apple and Oranges (Score:1, Interesting)
Say a VCR manufacture steals an idea from a refrigerator manufacture. Does that make the VCR a better refrigerator? NO.
If Microsoft steals an idea from Apple it's not going to make Windows a better Mac. All it does is makes Windows better.
Same from the Apple perspective. "It's not a PC, it's a Macintosh." as the old adage goes. Which means you wouldn't use a Mac for 'personal computing'.
Take a look at any Fortune 500 company (except Apple) and you'll see that Windows (ie. PCs) is used by 'Knowledge Workers'. Macs are used by people who can't tell the difference between a VCR and a refrigerator.
Re:Yes, Leadship (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't know about later versions, but the initial release of OS X Server hardly qualified as an operating system at all.
I used to run a small network for a student newspaper, and we made the mistake of buying it on the day it came out. It was missing half the advertised features, it wouldn't recognize the Adaptec UW SCSI card in the machine, and ithe Finder was buggy.
Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? (Score:4, Interesting)
The problem is that the Linux community is populated partly by ex-Unix guys who are quite capable of installing their own window managers and getting by without pointy-clicky desktop environments. But it's also partly populated by ex-Windows guys who feel more at ease with a desktop full of icons and something resembling a "start" menu where their "applications" live. This generates a fair amount of tension within the community itself.
For example, take a typical X11 flamewar. The old-school Unix guys have spent a lot of time configuring their system for productivity and certainly don't want X11's benefits to be thrown out. But, the Windows folks want to eliminate any hindrances that prevent their latest OS from looking and feeling more like what they were used to.
Bringing things back on topic, there's little reason Linux folks and X11 users can't pick-and-choose whatever improvements they want to add (antialiased fonts being the latest example). But without a centralized force in charge of UI development, improvements are ultimately decided by program authors themselves. The result is a more conservative development path overall, but that's not necessarily such a bad thing.
Re:Flattery and Imitation (Score:2, Interesting)
Unless Safari can imitate IE in name and functionality. It's too bad that Web programmers will write code that only works on IE. (I understand why they do). I think most of these are dedicated Intranet type websites, but I've been to several companies where Netscape or Opera just will not work.
Loose lips sink ships! (Score:2, Interesting)
We can be sure Apple is hard at work on something exciting for 2005. They just won't tell us about it two years in advance.
Re:Apple leadership? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Arrogance is Dangerous (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, Apple is quite happy with that.
I'm quite happy with them.
All around, we are quite happy.
5 huh? (Score:2, Interesting)
Show some real evidence, please.
Re:Apple leadership? (Score:3, Interesting)
That's entirely a personal perspective.
My mother is still using the same system she bought in 1998. I suspect she'll continue using it until it dies. I know people using 386's as firewalls/routers, mail servers, file servers, etc. Heck, I used a PC as a gaming platform for 2.5 years without doing anything more than upgrading the memory - I finally replaced it last November.
There are people at my company using computers that are at least 4 years old, if not older. And are likely to continue using them since there's no reason to upgrade them.
You do not get twice the lifespan out of your hardware - thinking that is bullshit. If you don't upgrade your software than - surprise - your hardware needs are unlikely to increase and you can keep using it.
Should I even mention how quickly PC hardware decreases in price relative to Apple hardware? A mere three months can result in half the price for the same system. That certainly can't be said for Apple hardware, and it's not a matter of it holding its value better - it's called artificial price inflation.
Re:Ugly (Score:5, Interesting)
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
Re:Flattery and Imitation (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Flattery and Imitation (Score:2, Interesting)
Amiga Re:So What else is new? (Score:2, Interesting)
And terrible marketing.
It is true that marketing and market savvy are king. Otherwise Microsoft would be in the dust bin of history and it would be Amiga and Mac that were vying for market share.
Re:what are you talking about? (Score:5, 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.