Additionally, they benefit ENORMOUSLY from the open hardware world that Microsoft supports. The advances and huge cost savings in modern hardware are a direct result of Microsoft providing a common platform for that hardware to support.
Think of the closed systems that no longer exist because they simply could not keep up with the pace of innovation in the open-standards hardware world... A standard platform has allowed the hardware to develop and explode. It was the PC platform that caused the revolution of the 80s, and that was because IBM was not able to lock it down as a closed system (thanks, Compaq!).
Apple now benefits from that - standard PC hardware, developed because Microsoft provided the OS and support platform (the open driver model) to spur that innovation. All the Mac hardware is from the PC world, and it's why you can run a PC-based Linux directly on Macs. They are now in the world of the PC, in terms of hardware.
Closed systems can yield amazing elegant and solid systems, but ultimately do not provide the open and stable platform for broad market innovation and advancement. Market growth requires a mix of both; close the system too much and you get zero growth. Keep it too chaotic (no stable API or driver model, for example) and nothing can stabilize for development.
Well, hell froze over. You posted something sane to me and I agree with it.
The open standards of the Intel chips have been exceptional for all concerned. The fact that all 3 major OS’s now use the same general architecture lowers costs, increases competition and creates much greater economies of scale. All good things.
My only point is, the subject of this thread. Microsoft trying to out Apple, Apple. And giving the reasons why I think that is a fools errand, and they should just do what they do already well, better and get over it before they NEW COKE themselves.
I use that analogy because it fits PERFECTLY.
COKE had 85% market share and now has 45%. Pepsi had 5% and now has 45%.
Because COKE freaked out when Pepsi went from 5% to 15% and BLEW IT trying to be something they were not ever going to be and did not need to be.
Microsoft MAY loose another 15% to Mac. Whooopie. Better 15% than 30% yes? Cede the ground that you cannot hold and hold the ground you can.
Don’t NEW COKE it Microsoft.
Well, yes, but I would argue that there were very good business reasons for Apple switching to PC hardware that had nothing to do with any inherent goodness of the PC platform design:
The PC platform design is no more than a well-polished turd, but that didn't matter to Apple, because it was the way to leverage virtualization, and for years some of the best platforms for running Windows have been Macs.
BTW, I concur with your comments about open hardware -- I generally prefer open standards to proprietary designs despite the anarchy they sometimes generate.
With that I must say goodnight, but I'll look for more comments tomorrow. Cheers!