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.'"
Flattery and Imitation (Score:5, Insightful)
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.'"
Re:Flattery and Imitation (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 ;-)
Re:Flattery and Imitation (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Flattery and Imitation (Score:5, Interesting)
what are you talking about? (Score:5, Informative)
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 [osdata.com], check out this 1993 screen shot [w3.org] of the first web browser. [w3.org] 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 [osdata.com] 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 [min.net]. Windoze XP (screen shot to compare [microsoft.com]), is more of the same [min.net] 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.
Re:what are you talking about? (Score:4, Informative)
...and...
Please don't compare reasonable software, such as
link [molgen.mpg.de]
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.
Re:Flattery and Imitation (Score:5, Insightful)
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
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?
Re:Flattery and Imitation (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Flattery and Imitation (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Flattery and Imitation (Score:5, Informative)
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 $150 million in non-voting Apple preferred stock. This wasn't anywhere close to 25%. Note that it was NON-VOTING stock - so essentially it was just a goodwill investment in Apple. Microsoft was required to hold the stock for at least 3 years before selling. Another clause of this investment was that Microsoft was to continue to produce Macintosh products, including all new versions of the Microsoft Office product.
Microsoft has since sold all of this stock - at a nice profit, I might add. Additionally, the agreement that required Microsoft to continue to develop Macintosh products has since expired as well.
I could have just modded this down - but I thought that attempting to correct this ridiculous interpretation of events would be more beneficial.
Re:Flattery and Imitation (Score:4, Interesting)
Jobs opted for some cash and public Microsoft backing (Office for the MacOS) to make the MacOS look viable for the near future, and Microsoft was given a way out of a lawsuit by Apple for the ripped off code. Apple needed Microsoft a bit more than vice versa, but M$ 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..
Re:5 huh? (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re:Flattery and Imitation (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re:Flattery and Imitation (Score:3, Informative)
No. At one time they owned 5% or so of non-voting stock, but they sold it years ago.
I think the jist of the article was that MSFT pulled Apple out of a financial pinch or something.
That was the 1997 deal between Apple and Microsoft, where MS agreed to purchase Apple stock and continue producing Office for 5 years (note that this is now expired, and MS occasionally makes noise about discontinuing Mac Office). Rumor has it that this was the pu
Re:Flattery and Imitation (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Flattery and Imitation (Score:5, Insightful)
Hired. As in "Apple hired Jef Raskin and Bruce Horn over from Xerox."
Stole. As in "Microsoft stole big chinks of Apple's codebase and methods."
Re:Flattery and Imitation (Score:4, Informative)
Jef Raskin never worked for Xerox. Horn I don't know about.
Apple never copied Xerox' work. Raskin started the Macintosh project at Apple drawing on years of experience with user interface design. when Raskin had some of Apple's staff visit Xerox too see how they were doing, the Macintosh project was already well on its way. The original Mac had ideas licensed from Xerox, but it was by no means built on Xerox' ideas alone
Microsoft never stole anything from Apple. Apple licenced its technology to Microsoft, but through a glitch in the contract, Microsoft was allowed to do much more than Apple in fact intended
See Jef Raskins website [sourceforge.net] and Jim Carlton's book [barnesandnoble.com] (be warned that Jim Carlton's book totally misrepresents the Xerox episode, which is why it's useful to read what Raskin has to say) for more.
google loves you (Score:5, Informative)
Wish i was an editor
Re:google loves you (Score:5, Funny)
Well, your grasp of capitalization is loose, puntuation is nonexistant and your grammar is subpar. You meet the minimum requirements for Slashdot editorship. The problem is, you were able to locate the free article, read it and subsequently create a functional link to it using HTML tags. This disqualifies you from consideration for the job.
The both copy each other... (Score:5, Insightful)
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...
Re:The both copy each other... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:The both copy each other... (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
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.
Re:The both copy each other... (Score:3, Informative)
THAT's the different between Apple DRM and MS DRM.
Actually Microsoft's DRM does allow you to burn to CD. Or transfer to portable players. The difference is Microsoft provides content owners with the ability to toggle these features. Don't blame Microsoft if record labels won't turn the flag on. EMI's new service, for example, is supposed to allow CD burning.
Re:The both copy each other... (Score:5, Insightful)
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...
Re:The both copy each other... (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:The both copy each other... (Score:3, Funny)
Correction: Slashdot would be tearing them apart.
Re:The both copy each other... (Score:5, Insightful)
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?
Re:The both copy each other... (Score:4, Insightful)
Forgot about that feature where you can share music with up to 3 friends (provided they also have iTunes), didn't you?
No -- are you always this pleasant when someone disagrees with you? You can't share your iTunes Store music with your friends unless you're willing to give them your Apple ID password -- something that most people probably wouldn't be too kosher with doing, especially since if you ever wanted to authorize another person, you'd have to deauthorize someone else. It's a real headache.
And if my dog eats my CD, Tower Records or Sam Goody won't replace it for me for free.
Again with this snarky attitude. My point is that a music download is NOT a CD. If I buy a piece of downloaded software, most places will let you re-download it as long as you have your login. It's one of the nice things about paying for something that doesn't have a physical medium attached to it. Why is the iTunes Music Store so different?
Really, dude, it's possible to have a civil conversation about this.
Re:The both copy each other... (Score:4, Funny)
If you mean that, like, in the way of a bad acid trip, then I guess you're right.
Have you seen Longhorn?
Re:The both copy each other... (Score:4, Insightful)
(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.
C:\Documents and Settings\Dave>su
'su' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file.
C:\Documents and Settings\Dave>
Re:The both copy each other... (Score:5, Funny)
Apple leadership? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Apple leadership? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Apple leadership? (Score:4, Interesting)
But when they did offer such an OS, they did it right.
Re:Apple leadership? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Apple leadership? (Score:5, 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
But let's not forget how when Word97 came out the
We may be facing this with the next "XML document format" MS Word on the way...
Re:Apple leadership? (Score:4, Insightful)
However, you are right in criticizing the lack of protected memory - a source of great irritation and many unnecessary crashes and reboots. The market demanded it, and Apple provided. Where is the criticism here?
ps: I still use Linux, even on my Macs, but I believe in fair criticism.
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.
Yes, Leadship (Score:5, Insightful)
This is a meaningless comparision. How many copies of NT 3.5.1 were sold to retail customers?
Apple was selling a "preemptive, protected multitasking OS" (OS X Server) several years before OS X was released the masses. Likewise, Microsoft did NOT deliver a "preemptive, protected multitasking" appropriate for unsupported users until Windows XP. (Win2K was aimed at business users who had IT support).
Moving deeper, Apple has never been a leader in OSes -- OS X came straight out of the UNIX world. Even the Apple ][ borrowed heavily from others, including HP.
Apple's ongoing genius is User Experience, like the fabuously-well integrated iTunes music store. And here, Microsoft is, has always been, and remains a laggard and a copycat.
Apples' ongoing genius is (Score:5, Insightful)
Wanna know why?
It's because they give a rip about their users.
Thats why they lead and Microsoft doesn't.
Re:Apple leadership? (Score:5, Informative)
Agreed. But CEO's sometime make up a large part of a company's image and culture. Steve Jobs is no exception. He did just that. He changed Apple from the inside out. They are not the same company they were in 96.
I think Steve Jobs is a brilliant marketer and innovator. Something Apple was desperate for when he took over.
He really did save Apple. Apple became stagnat for years and the lack of a good OS was one of them. It was Steve who got the nextstepOS ported, created the imac, drafted a new modern UI(aqua), integrated bluetooth on all macs, came up with the itunes music store, etc.
During the early and mid 80's the macs were years ahead of the pc's. Built in sound, ethernet, a modern gui, and color layouts created the huge cult mac following. They were close to 10 years ahead of Windows based pc's. Again I believe this was part of Steve Jobs vision. Apple became stagnent after they fired him quite quickly.
The only thing Apple is behind on is hardware which oddly was its strenght when he wasn't the CEO. This is mostly Motorolla's fault but it has hurt them quite hard.
Apple had no leadership and horrendous marketing in the mid 90's. But today its the opposite.
Who else would pay premium prices for
What a change a good CEO can do. Apple went through 4 CEO's when they originally canned him.
Fact or Fiction (Score:5, Funny)
I hear they're creeping towards the top of their own Fiction Best Sellers list these days.
Microsoft "talks" to Apple (Score:5, Informative)
The good news is that Apple is not going for it.
this is what free market is about (Score:4, Insightful)
Feed on each other to make a stronger whole
Sign Needed: (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously, this 'article' is the journalistic equivalent of the Sci-Fi channel bumpers [slashdot.org] and the only reason I can see for Slashdot to post it is to start another anti-MS feeding frenzy.
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.
Re:Sign Needed: (Score:5, Insightful)
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"
Who's the bad guy today? (Score:4, Funny)
Help, I'm conflicted.
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
Athens? Yuck! (Score:3, Interesting)
Where's the beef (Score:5, Informative)
Ugly (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Its in keeping with Windows XP and the rest of M$ (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Ugly (Score:3, Interesting)
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
one of the features they haven't told us about yet (Score:5, Funny)
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..."
Here's a summary... (Score:4, Funny)
More to come.........uhhhhhh...yeah (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, after they check out Apple's latest OSX version "Panther" [apple.com] in July :)
They only need a few months to emulate what they see there, right?!
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.
Did anybody notice the photo (of the MS/HP Athens) (Score:5, Funny)
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!"
What's so funny? (Score:3, Funny)
Still, XP does boot and shut down fast. That's something worth paying for and I wish Apple would follow.
Re:What's so funny? (Score:5, Funny)
"Time for Tubby Bye-bye"!
"That's mine, you can't have it" (Score:3, Insightful)
What, do you think iTunes is visionary? How about the idea of a 'digital media hub'? These are ancient news in the computing world and the fact that one company got to market a year before the other says more about scheduling than it does about innovation.
The absolute worst is people who think Microsoft making their UI more 'soft' was a direct response to OS X. These UI changes don't get dreamed up at the last minute -- they're part of an evolution that takes years.
I will admit there are some times when it's pretty blatant that a company's idea is stolen.
Computer manufacturers noticed apple's sales take off when they went for a more stylish look. Yes, they're copying. It's called capitalism and it's what raises the bar for everyone. What, do you think apple came up the idea of making something they're selling look good?
It's no different from JC Penny selling some fashion that the GAP came up with. Thanks for the idea, say hello to the free market. We as consumers win, the innovator gets first-to-market advantage. But that's ALL they get.
Seems like an Ugly and impractible design. (Score:4, Interesting)
Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? (Score:5, Insightful)
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?
Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? (Score:4, Informative)
I think you'll find there's a lot of big ideas coming through, both in the back- and front-ends of GUI design.
Take KDE, for example, and its KIOSlave system, which is slowly moving KDE from being a collection of applications to a collection of pluggable components, with things like Konqueror becoming complicated wrappers for these components. The whole desktop is totally integrated - that's big, isn't it?
Or Enlightenment, whish is going even further to do away with the whole application concept altogether, or so I've heard (I don't use it).
And even little projects are doing interesting things, like Slicker, experimenting with how we manage our desktop space.
All these calls are ill-founded, and probaly stem from the fact that it is easy to keep up to date on Microsoft's and Apple's big moves, since you only get the occasional big article, whilst developments in the Free Software world come thick and fast.
Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? (Score:3, Insightful)
There's nothing to stop someone from inventing FancyUI with all sorts of bells and whistles and installing it in place of X11, but who would use it? All of my cur
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)
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:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
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.
it ain't X (Score:4, Insightful)
No, it's not X. I've done some HCI work, including some very early contributions to Gnome. It is almost never the technology that slows you down in this area, it's almost always people's mindset.
One thing that's been really damaging Linux in this regard is the load of people who believe that Linux absolutely has to copy windows. Very obviously, innovation and copycat behaviour don't work well together.
osx (Score:5, Insightful)
I can compile GNU fileutils
Apple has done in a few years what many in the Linux community have been trying to do for ages
Don't Laugh (Score:5, Insightful)
I sincerely hope that Apple Execs aren't 'laughing' at msft longhorn, for having features in '05 that they've had since '01. If I recall, they did the same thing regarding Win95, and look at the resulting market share for Apple when that came out.
Unfortunately, in the consumer space, technical merrit isn't everything.
Microsoft is speeding up... (Score:5, Funny)
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.
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
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.
Arrogance is Dangerous (Score:5, Insightful)
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
Re:Arrogance is Dangerous (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple has a new marketing and advertising team.
The Imac is a perfect example. Joe six pack sees the cool imac vs an ugly biege pc, he is going to pick the imac.
MS use to have great marketing. However Jobs has fired and replaced the whole team when he took over. Its quite good but consumers like gui's.
If its as good as macosx it will hurt apple. If its ugly like XP it might benefit them. I do not know of anyone who likes XP. However longhorn supports brilliant colors in high end m
Re:Arrogance is Dangerous (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Arrogance is Dangerous (Score:5, Funny)
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.
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.
hmmm (Score:4, Insightful)
And this is the *best* thing MS can copy? Whatever happened to increasing security? Opening standards? Interoperability? Customer support? Fixing bugs?
Nope...gotta get them colours right...
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.
Re:Oh, wow (Score:4, Informative)
You should get out more.
Here's [sitepoint.com] one of several short summaries available on the web covering the development and history of the GUI.
News from WinHEC... (Score:4, Funny)
Microsoft now announces:
The arrival of the nExT generation desktop! This desktop will include all-new technology, such as scalable icons and a specialized bar at the bottom that we like to call "the port." You can now land programs in the port, and ship programs from the port.
At the windows developers meeting, we will be unvailing the UCAPI, or universal component API. This API will be a C++/C# centric API, where MS nExT developers can place descendant classes of current coponents in a directory, and they will be automatically "turned on" for use in all programs that used the original component! Imagine the possibilities, such as a multi-threaded spell-checking text box!
We at MS are very excited to be the frontrunners in this brand-new nExT-generation technology!
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
I'm amused that (Score:5, Insightful)
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...
Senseless debate . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
And to misquote (Score:5, Funny)
Longhorn, huh? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:And... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Has either company (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re:Yawn (Score:5, Funny)
Uuummm.... fear of microphones?
Fear of germs?
Fear of tiny gay men?
Re:BSD (Score:5, Funny)
Stealing from a dead man is called scavenging.
Re:Correct me if I'm wrong but, (Score:3, Funny)
Wow, that _would_ have been impressive!
Re:Hey...Microsoft is catching up (Score:3, Informative)
Re:keep laughing apple (Score:4, Insightful)
Besides, why do people seem to be eager for Apple's death, like it would somehow transform the computing world into a utopia? I don't think that most Mac users are about to switch to Linux! We need at least one alternative with an easy GUI around in order to prevent an absolute dependency on Microsoft in the general market.
Re:Loose lips sink ships! (Score:4, Insightful)
In 2 years time I can't even think what unix desktops will have archieved...