Jobs Claims Microsoft Is Shamelessly Copying 868
Nicholas Roussos writes "Steve Jobs was outspoken at a recent annual shareholder meeting. He claimed 'They are shamelessly copying us', referring to Microsoft. Of course, Microsoft has done its share of pointing fingers as well." From the article: "Most telling, Jobs said is that Tiger, the next version of Mac OS X, will go on sale later this month, while Longhorn is still more than a year away."
Who's copying whom (Score:5, Informative)
Search: Tiger will feature a built-in local search technology called "Spotlight" (technology built upon the search engines that Apple currently uses to search iTunes and e-mail). Microsoft has said it plans to offer a similar local-machine search engine for Longhorn that will be based on the company's Windows File System (WinFS) technology.
Scripting:Tiger will include a front-end scripting environment known as "Automator." Longhorn will include a new scripting shell (currently in beta test) known as "Monad." [microsoft.com]
Built-in RSS support: Tiger will embed an RSS aggregator [eweek.com] into the Safari browser. Longhorn will include an embedded RSS feature in the user interface.
Info-Display Panel: Tiger will have an information-display capability called "Dashboard." Longhorn will have an information-display panel called "Sideshow," to which users can "pin" collections of items of interest.
Integrated Instant Messaging/Video Chat: Tiger will feature a souped-up version of iChat. Microsoft will embed Windows Messenger (a sister to MSN Messenger), which also will likely feature video-chat.
64-Bit Support: Tiger will include extended 64-bit capabilities. Longhorn allegedly will be optimized for 64-bit systems. [microsoft-watch.com]
As many an Apple advocate has pointed out, Tiger is set to debut at least a year before Longhorn. That's a pretty significant head start, especially for folks who have no corporate edicts, application constraints or other limitations on which hardware/software platform they choose.
Shameless Flamebaiting Story (Score:3, Interesting)
This calls for a completely off topic but intelligent thread to be started. How about this one:
Casemodded mac mini doubles it's disk performance
This guy [amug.org] case modded his mac mini putting into an old centris pizza-box. The faster disks and CD boosted performance 20% to 70% on AV things like DVD-copy and CD-to-AIFF and file copying. Overall Xbench-disk gives the set up a 2x performance enhancement.
so the new Official discussion topic
Re:Shameless Flamebaiting Story (Score:3, Insightful)
When I saw that link, I figured he'd removed the center front panel and basically created a port replicator in the 610/660, so that one could slide an unmodified Mini into it kinda like the Duo. [everymac.com] Now *that* would be cool.
And after reading that, I couldn't help but wonder why you wouldn't just cut a single hole in the back of the Mini (yeah, blasphemer, whatever) and hang a rounded IDE cable out of
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:5, Interesting)
Everyone is copying from everyone else and it's not a bad thing. All the good ideas from old systems are implemented now with new stuff. The difference is: Apple does it better, cleaner (more intuitive) and before Microsoft.
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:5, Funny)
No, it's not. Windows Messenger is MSN Messenger's bastard, mutant son with ugly flecky skin, an abhorrant fear of the sun and a hellish need to eat raw fish.
Me: "I want to log into MSN, please"
WM: "No
Me: "Err, it's okay, I'll just run MSN messenger
WM: "Ha! The parent is well hidden, gollum! Nasssty users will never find it without getting deep into Program Files! Never!"
Me: "No, here it is
Honestly, I'm just waiting for it to creep out and bite off my finger one of these days
So they are copying Linux? (Score:3, Interesting)
Stoooooopid.
Most of these other things are built into an average Linux distro. Additionally, if you buy a Dell, many of them are just as present, as OEM addons.
Look, I'm sure Microsoft *is* copying Apple where they can. They always have, for my entire life. But the list of crap they are moa
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:3, Interesting)
At least Jobs does recognize the parts he owes to the community. Makes him slightly less evil, in my view.
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:4, Funny)
Woah, I'd better tell my friend to stop showing me pictures of his new baby over MSN Messenger. We didn't realise you couldn't do video chat in MSN Messenger yet.
Please tell me when Messenger gets the video chat feature, and we can start doing that again.
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:4, Interesting)
Look at some of the Apps which Apple has recently been pushing out: A web browser which saves them from reliance on IE, and two of the three programs they need to allow Mac users to abandon MS-Office for good. (They still probably need a spreadsheet program, and rumor has it that one is in development.)
This all comes down to a phone call between Jobs and Gates back when Jobs took over Apple. We are not likely to see a transcript, but a lot of folk suspect the conversation went along these lines:
"Hey Bill. It's Steve. Look, we've still got a shitload of lawsuits pending against Microsoft for all the stuff you've been brazenly stealing while I was off making digital cartoons, and now you've got the DoJ breathing down your necks and calling you a monopoly. How would you like to make both problems go away at once?"
"I'd be an idiot to say no, and I may be evil, but I'm no idiot. What are you proposing?"
"It's simple. This company has been run into the ground by morons for the past 10 years, and we need your 800-pound gorilla to prop us up for a while. We are prepared to put all these lawsuits behind us for good if you do the following:
1. Buy a bunch of non-voting stock in Apple. Say about $150 Million?
2. Make a public announcement that you intend to support the Mac with Office and Internet Exporer products for at least the next 5 years.
3. Pay us a small settlement to make our lawyers happy. Nobody has to know how much money it is.
In exchange, Apple will:
1. Not go out of business, which would have made it completely obvious that you really are a monopoly.
2. Pimp your web browser on our desktop... not that you haven't already pretty much already squished the competition.
3. Allow you to legitimately buy any of Apple's OS design ideas and technologies which you want to roll into your own (crappy) operating systems.
4. Mostly sell expensive machines to yuppie assholes, thereby not stepping on your toes in the general consumer market."
"Let's do it Steve."
"Oh one more thing... How would you like to appear as a guest on the Jumbo-tron at the next Mac trade show when I announce our deal?"
"Sound great... but... er... you're not going to make me look like that big evil face from the 1984 ad, are you?"
"Aw, come on Bill. Would I do something like that to you!?" (evil grin...)
Anyway, that's about it. The 5-year deal is over. Microsoft no longer needs to pretend they give a crap about OS X users, Apple is shipping affordable computers and developing home-grown replacement for most of the MS stuff which they customers used to use, the government heat is off Microsoft (at least in the US) and Apple is well in the black with and once again slowly growing marketshare.
It was a win for both sides to make the deal, and it's a win for both sides not to extend it. Jobs and Gates are cheerfully going right back to hating each other.
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:3, Insightful)
Nothing I've seen on this list is new. I've seen all of it in Linux, some of it before Windows/OSX, some of it after.
I think the companies ought to shut the hell up and make software (and hardware, in Apple's case -- I still believe that MS just gives out hardware designs and has a third party make it for them..)
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:5, Informative)
At least with search, I think the main point is how thoroughly it's integrated with the entire OS, and how omnipresent it is. While not revolutionary, I think it's at least a nice evolutionary step.
Info Display Panel: No idea what this is. But it sounds like a web browser to me. It could be the single thing in this list worth fighting about though.
At least for OS X, it's like a layer of windows that contain small useful utilities that are usually hidden but can be overlayed on the screen with a touch of a button. You can see a demo here [apple.com]. For OS X, this seems like a nice useability enhancement that fits well with Expose, their window management feature. Unfortunately I've never seen a demo of the similar feature in Longhorn, can anyone provide a link?
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:3, Informative)
Download the MSN Toolbar Suite Beta [msn.com] to try it
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:3, Interesting)
Who says scaling is a requirement? It's a classic case where there are logical bounds - the screen size. Why would mixing interactive and non-interactive widgets be a problem? Web-browsers also do both. You don't clutter your desktop with ANY shit, that's the point. As soon as you are done with them, you dismiss them with the same key you brought them up with. Your method for running a calculator reqires seven keypresses rather than one. It also fails if any on
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, you're missing some things.
re: Search --> We're not talking about searching for file names with some matching string, or partially matching string. This is metadata search, AND filename search. I'm probably missing something here, but there's a particular /. user [slashdot.org] getting a lot of press lately whose comments you might want to read.
re: Scripting --> It's not that the OS will have scripting, it's that there'll be a user interface to make it easy for the masses.
Some of the things you do have a point about, but you need to consider that a lot of these features are being touted as they're either just being brought to the masses, or being brought in an easier to use way.
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:5, Informative)
yes, like most other people, you are missing something.
this is built into pretty much everything. for example if you open the system preferences and want to know where a setting is you type it into the search bar and it will highlight where it is no matter how deep linked. this will happen in real-time as you type and will be instant. I have never seen anything like this on Mac, Windows or linux before. usually you have to open a separate help application/window and do a long search on contents or select something from an index.
have you used iTunes? compare its live-updating search with the Windows/linux type-then-press-enter-then-wait-a-bit. it's not just evolutionary, its like the difference between going through various Yahoo portal screens or just Googling something. searching will always just be a variation on a theme, it's the *user interface* to the search that makes the difference between awkward and genius.
also, the results of *anything* are included in this instant, live-updating search. I love the prospect of having loads of PDFs of scientific papers and not needing any order to the filenames or directories because I can search for the relevant content and it will be much easier to adapt my filter as I go because I'll see how many results are being returned.
just imagine not just the invention of Google, but a Google that would change its results in real-time and which would do web page, image, PDF search etc. all at the same time. everyone accepts Google has changed the web but is so blind to how Spotlight changes the desktop even more.
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:3, Insightful)
And you can't see any difference between them? Sit down at a UNIX/Linux box and use 'find' to find all files that have a name that ends in ".jpg". How long does it take? Try it in MacOS from the GUI. Try it in Windows from the GUI.
This is as simple a search as it gets since all OS's already have filename "metadata". And it's SLOW. With Spotlight, you see results as quickly as you can type the letters.
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:3, Informative)
There is a pervasive language of scripting (called oddly enough AppleScript) that can launch applications, as well as control their actions. Sure I can launch sylpheed with a shell script, but I can't make it do anything past that. Ditto for every other Linux app (okay, I'll get flamed for that bit...).
I can call shell scripts from AppleScript, and vice-a-versy. It's a lot more extensive (and restrictive, figure that oxymoron out by
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:3, Insightful)
The word I should have used is "pervasive". It's a common syntax across the system and applications.
I admire the Open Source movement, but a holistic design is not something that can be accomplished by 1000's of separate hackers (heck, look at the *wide* acceptance of LSB). You kinda cheated and used KDE apps, commandline, and OpenOffice as exeamples; which require 4 different scripting languages. Apple has the money and the drive to make the scripting language
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:5, Informative)
It looks like HyperCard [wikipedia.org] was the first scripting language, if that is defined as a programming language designed in such a way that "mere mortals" could use it for serious work.
Then AppleScript [wikipedia.org] was developed as the first system-wide scripting language. It was developed in 1994. Windows Scripting Host was developed and shipped as part of Windows 98.
So it looks like in this direction, Apple was a genuine pioneer and deserves the respect that flows therefrom.
D
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:5, Informative)
You also have AREXX on the Amiga (1985), RiscOS on the Archimedes was also fully scripted (1987), and you could argue that the MS-DOS command shell (1979) and batch filing methods are akin to an OS-wide scripting language, particularly as a major goal of AppleScript was to make up for the Mac's lack of a CLI. Interesting to note that the opposite happened for NT 3.51 - the MS-DOS shell was slated for removal, but left in to fulfil the role of system scripting.
Re:Who's copying whom (Score:3, Informative)
Just to paraphrase... (Score:3, Insightful)
Dear computer industry. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Dear computer industry. (Score:4, Funny)
Maybe by the time I buy it, the instructions will ask me to drop it from 3 inches [wikipedia.org] in the air.
Oh, and does this mean Apple will have to fire Jobs again? Bummer.
Imitation (Score:4, Insightful)
Even with the amount of development power available to Microsoft, they have never been able to catch up to Apple, the industry leader. This is not to say that Microsoft is somehow bound by their develpment skill, but rather their creativity.
Apple, in contrast to Microsoft, has taken the bold step of basing their operating system on Unix, which allows them to tap into the vast stores of development resources latent in the IBM/Solaris camps. Microsoft, unyielding, relies on their own developers who are slowly (but rapidly gaining speed) migrating to the more stable Unix-based systems.
I love Steve Jobs, but I think he's a little paranoid here. Losers always copy the winners. It'd be better to take comfort in the comfortable lead that Apple's got, rather than complain about parrots.
I believe it was Voltaire who said that imitation was the sincerest form of flattery.
Re:Imitation (Score:3, Informative)
Actually, Microsoft's current systems are more a kluge of the Windows API onto VMS. NT has a great many VMS-isms, in part because one of the lead developers of VMS was hired by Microsoft to spearhead their more enterprise operating system. Microsoft had since licenced VMS technologies to put into NT 5 (2000, and 5.1, XP) and into NT6 (I guess Longhorn). Whether
Re:Imitation (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Imitation (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Imitation (Score:5, Informative)
Simple, it's not stagnant.
Forbes Magazine: The conversion rate of iPod customer base to the Macintosh platform from PC "implies two points of global PC market share gain for Apple in 2005," to 5% from 3%, said Morgan Stanley, adding that the conversion rate for iPod owners could track closer to the 25% range going forward from 19%.
http://www.forbes.com/markets/2005/03/18/0318auto
This has popped up before (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:This has popped up before (Score:5, Informative)
Nope, analogy still works. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Nope, analogy still works. (Score:5, Informative)
The truth of the matter is Xerox invented the wheel and Apple went and invented the Maserati.
Re:Nope, analogy still works. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:This has popped up before (Score:5, Informative)
Basically, Xerox had point and click for selecting text, there no 'click on a file to open it' or any other GUI features in the OS, just in one word processor. Read the article, it is a great read.
It really is too bad that there are so many M$ fanboys out there who need to believe that Apple isn't the big inovator of the OS world.
OSX - Windows - Linux (Score:4, Insightful)
Linux and most OSS software is not exactly an innovator in any sense, it's mostly just a reimplementation of proprietary software already in existence.
But anyways, isn't all progress built on the success of others? Why should we deride Microsoft for implementing things that are good?
Re:OSX - Windows - Linux (Score:3, Informative)
Do you mean like how Apple came out with Safari and everybody copied it?
Not everything starts with Apple. It's a give-and-take from all parties (as you've somewhat alluded later on).
Re:OSX - Windows - Linux (Score:3, Informative)
Also most of the things apple claimed MS copied has existed in Linux for a long time, especially 64-bits (my god how can he say something that stupid?)
Re:OSX - Windows - Linux (Score:5, Insightful)
Since the heart of OSX is BSD, they don't have to keep ripping their system apart to search for major security issues because it's probably been done many times previously by others. And KDE is catching up to windows with respect to "plug it in and it works" with kioslaves. When I plugged in a firewire drive and saw the little icon on my desktop, my reaction was "finally!"
Re:OSX - Windows - Linux (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:OSX - Windows - Linux (Score:5, Funny)
IIS -> apache, ftpd
COMMAND.COM -> Unix shell
Exchange -> sendmail
poorly-implemented third-party "virtual desktops" -> multiple X11 desktops
Visual SourceSafe -> rcs, CVS, now subversion
Internet Explorer -> Mosiac and Netscape
Remote Desktop -> X11
Expect to see more shameless copying in the future:
I could go on, but I think Microsoft's role as an innovator is quite well-established.
Excuses (Score:4, Insightful)
And killing you in the market. Still. More focus on winning on less on being beaten please.
Funny, truth hurts don't it? (Score:5, Insightful)
is anyone truly copying? (Score:5, Insightful)
Pointing fingers and complaining about who's copying who is not only non-productive but it is the same mindset which leads to all this IP mess that we're currently in.
So to you Mr.Jobs, get off your high horse. They didn't copy the wheel just because your latest car has one. It took that wheel to get you there, do not disrespect that wheel.
I'm not trying to defend microsoft or apple. I hate everything equally.
Re:is anyone truly copying? (Score:3, Interesting)
But Jobs' perspective is biased. I can think of a desktop search engine that's out now - Google Desktop Search.
If anything, I'd say MS is copying/trying to catch up to Google.
The only solution (Score:5, Funny)
Oh, I almost forgot to close my
oops (Score:5, Funny)
That would suck. Then the whole rest of this page would be sarcastic too
Yeah, close call.
Re:The only solution (Score:3, Funny)
Oh! A sarcasm tag! That's really useful.
But of course. (Score:5, Funny)
Thoughts? (Score:5, Interesting)
While I understand Jobs' compliants and squabbling he has to keep on pushing. What he has been able to accomplish with Apple is remarkable. Steve Jobs has the foresight to move ahead and come out with new innovative products. In just about every market you're going to have somebody nipping at your heals to try to beat you to the punch. It just so happens the market leader is stealing from the secondary leader this time.
Microsoft has their own set of problems to worry about and I think both operating systems have their own segments in the world today. Really though as of lately I think a lot of people are switching to a Mac. [slashdot.org] I have friends who have been Windows fans who are fed up with the licensing, security etc etc and have decided to move to the MacOS.
Moreover, I see the problem being were each OS fits into the world. The MacOS always seems to stay with the education systems, graphic arts people, designers, editing and hardcore Mac addicts; while Windows hits up everybody else.
Apple needs to rev up it's marketing and start hitting other users. Eg. Corporate users
Windows took 9 years to copy Mac OS (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Windows took 9 years to copy Mac OS (Score:4, Interesting)
Windows was announced in 1983, the Mac came out in 1984. How did that happen? Easy... Microsoft was already developing software for the Mac before it was released, and Bill knew Microsoft had to do at least as well if they were going to stay in business.
different markets (Score:3, Insightful)
Which is why the apple market has very little to do with the Windows market. You can't run Windows on the apple hardware (in general) and you can't run OSX on generic PC hardware. So the operating systems have eerilly similar features. Microsoft isn't threatening Apple's marketshare. If you've got apple, you know if you like it, and chances are slim you'll switch back based soley on the reason Microsoft comes out with new features. And vice vera. I know I won't switch to Apple just because their instant messanging software is new and improved. Completely different markets. Its almost the difference between Nissan the Carmaker [nissanmotors.com] and Nissan.com [nissan.com]
Time Machine (Score:3, Interesting)
10 years later: "Those bastards! They copied/snarfed/stole the UNIX security model!"
This is probably what will happen too. People will scream for something to be added to/changed in windows, and then Microsoft will get bad mouthed for implementing it.
I have no sympathy for Steve Jobs, or people who agree with his baseless argument. Lest we forget, the *base* of the *entire* OS X operating system is a BSD core, something Apple didn't invent or innovate in to existance.
Re:Time Machine (Score:3, Interesting)
You forgot 10 years ago: "Why has Microsoft never used the security features built into the WinNT Kernel by the DEC people?"
So maybe it's 10 years later: "Those bastards! They finally copied/snarfed/stole the UNIX security model! And they got it screwed up again!"
So Microsoft Windows has a builtin security model, wh
Re:Time Machine (Score:5, Insightful)
The main problem with NT's security is not the model itself, it's the various ways how it gets circumvented to either have some nifty feature which looks nice at a demonstration without a real use (ActiveX) or because the ways how NT is used by application designers and users is contradictionary to the model. Applications that need administrator priviledges to run are inherently flawed. They are applications, something that is applied on top of the inner workings and shouldn't know about any priviledges necessary for system administration.
NT is a good example how OS design itself doesn't create computer security. It is the way how an OS is used, procedures, usage patterns, deployment, applications, which create an environment for computers which is more or less secure. OS security is a single aspect of overall computer security.
Your first example is not really a Linux/Unix vulnerability (in fact the vulnerability is the same on WinNT), it is an application vulnerability. If it propagates through to the operating system (as it does if the user has far reaching OS priviledges), then it may point out an OS problem. Under Unix/Linux it should normally not affect OS integrity.
The second is indeed an OS problem, because it is a driver problem, and most drivers need OS priviledges to run. It would be possible to have drivers run in a sandbox like environment with a protection layer against the kernel and other drivers which helps to keep driver vulnerabilities local to the driver and the hardware the driver is operating. Sadly neither the Linux kernel nor the WinNT kernel are well prepared for such security layers. There are experiments with minimalistic kernels (microkernels) which provide such layering, but they didn't have much impact into mainstream computing yet. You might be interested in the L3/L4 series [tu-dresden.de] which allow userland drivers.
Re:Time Machine (Score:3, Interesting)
The base of the *entire* operating system? Are you trying to say Cocoa, Carbon, Core*, Aqua, etc, are based on BSD? Funny, I've been running OpenBSD for years, and still can't find the Dock...
Apple innovated and implemented a lot of technology on top of that BSD core. Saying otherwise would be like saying there's no change between Windows 98 and DOS. The only differ
Re:Time Machine (Score:5, Informative)
Interface builder? Yup, Interface objects stored in .nibs? Yup. Has a dock? Yup. Has a Shelf? Yup. Implements the Open Step API? Yup (Cocoa). Uses Objective C? Yup. System objects start with NS? Yes sir.
Re:Time Machine (Score:3, Informative)
No, the problem is hordes of incompetent/lazy/ignorant software developers who can't grasp the concept of a multiuser OS.
Wrath of Linux Users (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wrath of Linux Users (Score:3, Insightful)
True, I am one of those people.
Why not use MacOS X and be able to run mainstream apps and have a unix core without dual booting?
Because I like using software that's already mine, and always will be. Sure, I could run open source software on OS X, but the vast majority of it still requires X11 for it to work, and as a consequence there is absolutely no integration, and it looks like ass.
Why not run Ye
Deja vu... (Score:3, Interesting)
And didn't they establish then, that the whole damn lot of them "stole" the idea from Xerox.
The Apple GUI was derived from Xerox's original idea and by some of the Xerox team who defected. Meanwhile, we got GSX/GEM when yet another team member broke away from Xerox, and if memory serves Apple did battle with Gem over IP issues.
It could be argued (I stand to be corrected), that Windows was the only GUI not led by, or written by someone from Xerox...
Incidentally, Jobs started his "IT" career selling Wozniak's blue boxes designed to allow free lobg distance phone calls...
Here endeth the history lesson...
Re:Deja vu... (Score:4, Informative)
soo...
how is that stealing?
Taken out of context (Score:4, Interesting)
Apple innovates. Microsoft is mediocre. (Score:5, Insightful)
I was recently helping a friend of mine shop for a new system. He had been using PCs with Windows for the longest time, and I never heard the end of the complaints about how Windows screwed this up and how Windows screwed that up. So finally, after trying to convince him for years, I helped him buy a new Mac. He had some money to spend (he's rollin' in dough) so he bought a Mac Mini with the faster processor and all the options, and got the wireless Apple keyboard. He already had a really nice Samsung display and a Logitech wireless trackball, along with a Firewire/USB hub with plenty of ports.
When he realized that he could plug in his digital camera and his digital video camera, the hard disk almost instantly filled up with stuff. So the next day, we went back to the store and picked up a Maxtor Firewire hard drive with a 250 gig capacity. He copied tons of digital photos and videos from his other computers. I introduced him to iTunes, so he just had to import all of his MP3s from two PCs, which were bursting at the seams with MP3s. The 250 gig drive filled up quite fast, so the day after that, he bought a second one; luckily there is an "available" firewire port on the Maxtor drive, so you can "daisy chain" them.
But that's not all! With the Mac Mini, the two external drives, the USB/Firewire hub, the display, keyboard, and mouse, his desk actually looked quite clean. (He's good at organizing cables.) It's amazing how much stuff fits into small boxes nowadays. So he had to go "shopping"... Picked up a new iPod, Final Cut Studio or whatever it's called, and Adobe Creative Suite for the Mac... I swear he dropped almost four grand on stuff for this Mac in a few days. This from a guy who thought Macs suck.
He was quite amazed when he found out that Final Cut is made by Apple. He knew it was a serious program, but he never thought about who made it. When I explained that Apple makes the computers, the operating system, and software that does just about every function you can dream of, he was amazed that one company can do all of these things, and do each one of them much better than any other company out there. Specifically, he was shocked and amazed that Microsoft, with thousands of times the resources that Apple has, can't even get their operating system working properly.
We came to the conclusion that the problem facing Microsoft and many other companies is simply that Microsoft is mediocre. It's an easy problem to fall into. Microsoft is simply mediocre because the quality of their work is not important to them. They are simply greedy for money. Now they'll tell you that they care, and they're working to fix the security flaws, etc., but only because they realized that those security flaws are impacting their bottom line. As long as those flaws did not affect Microsoft in any significant way, they would have continued to ignore them.
Personally, I believe that if security flaws did not impact the sales of Microsoft software at all, Microsoft would simply ignore them and not care that your data, your identity, your finances, etc., are at risk. Because they're mediocre.
Apple, on the other hand, is a first-class company. Say what you will about their stuff being more expensive, but believe me, you get what you pay for. Someone has to get paid for making true innovations. Even though some things in their OS existed in other OSes before them (Spotlight - Query in BeOS). I think they're constantly improving.
Here's the read point (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:More customers (Score:4, Informative)
Apple's putting out new major versions about every 18 months these days.
Re:More customers (Score:4, Insightful)
Political parties do the same thing.
Re:More customers (Score:3, Insightful)
I wouldn't say that was the real problem. Microsoft's real problem is that they are making a major architectural change to the OS in the midst of changing requirements. Since Longhorn was first started, MS has had to revise it significantly to be more secure as spyware and viruses have become huge problems for
Re:didn't apple steal... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:didn't apple steal... (Score:4, Informative)
"In the suit, filed last Thursday, Xerox accused Apple of unlawfully using, in two of its computers, copyrighted Xerox software that controls desktop computers. Xerox also argues that Apple has undermined Xerox's ability to license its own software widely by suing two other companies marketing similar software."
The suit was eventually thrown out and perhaps Apple bought a license later, but it's clear that Xerox believed their interface had been stolen.
By the way, in those days it was often assumed that copyright covered not only source code, but "look and feel" as well.
Re:didn't apple steal... (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh wait. It isn't? It's not? Well then I guess it's not hypocritical.
Re:didn't apple steal... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's spelled "licensed"... (Score:3, Informative)
No, Apple licensed it from Xerox. So did Microsoft, for that matter.
Re:didn't apple steal... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Copy... (Score:5, Informative)
(You cannot even post without being anonymous, shows you stand by your comment) . Why is this falsehood still presented as fact? Apple licensed the GUI from Xerox but MS copied their desktop metaphor from Apple. How many times does it need repeating until the trolls and the uninformed shut the fuck up and bring different points to the table?
Re:Copy... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Konfabulator (Score:3, Informative)
Finally, one of the biggest disadvantages for would-b
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:More copied features (Score:5, Interesting)
Okay, how about these? eMate (1997) [everymac.com], MacTV (1993) [lowendmac.com], Newton (1993) [wikipedia.org], Pippin (1995) [wikipedia.org]
Re:More copied features (Score:4, Informative)
Yeah, they're called Mac TV [lowendmac.com], Newton [msu.edu], and Pippin [morochove.com].
Re:More copied features (Score:5, Informative)
TabletPC
Newton ...
Media Center PC
Except for TV, any Mac with iLife ... and there was an Mac with a TV tuner built in ...
Pocket PC
Newton again ...
XBox
Pippin ...
To mention nothing of Palm, ReplayTV/Tivo, Nintendo, and so on. Not one of these "innovations" from MS is truly innovative. Perhaps the only innovative item above is the Newton, and Alan Kay had the idea with his Dynabook first.
Copying is usually how progress happens. Even the most innovative product is build upon prior ideas.
SteveM
Spotlight & Automator (Score:3, Informative)
Regarding scripting, Automator is a GUI front end to AppleScript that allows one to represent a script as a number of steps intead of actually writing the script.
The others you mentioned are pretty much right, though.
Re:Free software anyone? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not an Mac owner, but Tiger's search doesn't sound anything like locate. Locate has no knowledge of file type, file contents or metadata. It couldn't show you "all Openoffice files written by John Smith last tuesday", for example. It wouldn't index you emails etc.
It also requires a complete database scan to update AFAIK, whereas spotlight updates its database in the background as it is integrated into the OS, so Spotlight will generally be up to date.
Free software that will be quite similar to Spotlight is Beagle [gnome.org], which looks pretty impressive.
Re:From the article... (Score:5, Insightful)
Using your reasoning, BMW hasn't "won" (ever!) either. They're quite happy to let others sell cheap, commodity cars.
Apple doesn't have to dominate the desktop market. Aside from the fact that they've been going out of business for 30 years, they're doing very well financially lately. (Oh, if I only bought Apple stock 5 years ago.)
Re:But its OK for open source to copy everything. (Score:3, Insightful)
It's like saying it is okay to cheat as long as you also share your answers with everyone else.
No, I think a better analogy would be that it's okay to cheat as long as the test isn't for credit. In this case "credit" would represent "money."
Re:Even MORE telling (Score:3, Informative)
Re:My favorite OSX to Windows feature... (Score:5, Informative)
You make me laugh, really hard, too. This is Slashdot, you know, you shouldn't say such assinine things like the Dock comes from the taskbar. Let's see a raise of hands for everyone who knows where the Dock comes from. [anart.no]
Re:My favorite OSX to Windows feature... (Score:5, Informative)
In fact, much of Mac OS X's interface is strikingly similar to that of NeXT, as is evident from those videos [openstep.se] that were posted to
Here's how it works: (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple develops, then announces.
Just because Microsoft issues a press release or throws a press conference and says that the next version of Windows is going to have [feature], that doesn't mean that Apple hasn't already had [feature] under development/running in a lab somewhere for a year.
For example, the search capability in Tiger known as "Spotlight." Apple applied for a patent on the technology behind Spotlight [uspto.gov] (a patent that was granted in January of this year, BTW) when OS X 10.0* was still a year and two months away from public release. Which means they started working on it in 1999 if not sooner. Years before the name "Longhorn" was ever uttered by anyone at Microsoft.
~Philly
*OS X 10.0 release date: 3/24/2001