Posted on 03/08/2005 12:06:04 PM PST by r5boston
Nearly a decade ago, just a few months after Microsoft shipped Windows 95, I asked Bill Gates if it was a conscious decision in the development of that product to give Windows more of a Mac look and feel. Of course I knew he'd say it wasn't, but I couldn't resist asking. "There was no goal even to compete with Macintosh," Gates proclaimed. "We don't even think of Macintosh as a competitor."
That was a crock, so I pressed the issue a little. I asked him how he accounted for the widespread perception that Windows 95 looked a lot like Mac 88, and whether the similarity was just a coincidence. I didn't expect a sobbing confession of mimicry, but I thought it would be cool to see how he'd respond. Surprisingly enough, Gates shifted gears and became more forthcoming.
(Excerpt) Read more at macworld.com ...
I looked at MAS 200, and find it interesting that they tout platform flexibility -- if you're on Windows. But off the top of my head I know MYOB and Quickbooks for OS X, and OSAS is available for pretty much all Windows and *NIX platforms (including OS X).
Who poured the vinegar into your breakfast cereal?
Still the Windows shill.
Pure, unadulterated Texas Catsh*t.
You look up and down this thread and the only people throwing rocks at other computers and their users are you and Bush2000. Typical PC users with serious envy issues.
You might want to check the mote in thine own eye.
Yet qualified Linux admins don't seem to know it. I mean, how can Largo service 400 machines and 800 accounts with an admittedly underworked staff of 6 (including the IT director)? The only thing that really takes their time is the few Windows machines still there.
That's a huge issue for most people.
But lack of software functionality isn't a TCO issue. You can't even compare TCO if one can't do the job specified.
Certainly not on desktops. Servers are a completely different market -- which we weren't even discussing.
You're there as soon as you start talking about administration, since if you're in a business, you'll have a server, and you'll have to buy the seat licenses for it. Windows is $3000+ for 25 seats, while OS X is unlimited at $1,000 (cheaper if you get it with the hardware). But if you want to go there, managing a Mac network of clients is also brain-dead easy.
and the issue of legacy apps is a non-issue
Tell that to someone with a large ASP web site or a MS SQL Server farm.
I still don't like the taskbar much, and Apple copying it (although vastly improving it) for OS X as the Dock is one of the major usability problems with OS X. It may be pretty, but usability experts suggest ditching it for something more functional.
The Windows UI blows it on a much more fundamental level, with things such as the menu bar locations changing between apps, it not being in an optimal place to click, bad guidelines for dialog boxes, etc., and the ultra-rediculous "Why to I click Start to shut down?"
Apple did a better job tying the interface to the OS than Microsoft did (which really didn't happen until 95)
You just stated it: Windows 95 = Mac 88.
There's an old addage:
Mac is for work.
Linux is for networking.
Windows is for Solitaire
But now that Mac is UNIX you can probably give it the networking job too.
Actually, IBM tried that, but Compaq reverse-engineered it.
He's right. None of them have as good an interface as the iPod, you can't select your songs or playlists as quickly, and none have such ergonomic controls. Others may beat the iPod on price, capacity, or the addition of a radio or such, but none are as high quality and easy to use.
Mainly because they go with what they know, or what their friends know. Apparently a significant percentage of PC-owning iPod buyers are showing interest in the Mac since being introduced to the Apple brand. Unfortunately, Mac prices were too high for a casual switch -- thus the Mac mini is born.
Which part is false? That apple sells a pc for $499 or that they are selling well?
Again hyperbole... you don't know what "orders of magnitude" means. In actual fact, technically, the earnings of both companies are in the SAME order of magnitude: 109 dollars.
Microsoft Corp. today announced revenue of $9.19 billion for the quarter ended September 30, 2004.Apple® today announced financial results for its fiscal 2004 fourth quarter ended September 25, 2004. . . . Revenue for the quarter was $2.35 billion.
Apple, a much smaller company than Microsoft, had earnings about 1/4 of those of its larger rival.
Wow back from a ban and picking fights already..
I have to disagree with your history report. Apple eventually lost that suit because of a technically ignorant judge. The Microsoft investment in Apple was at the time a little over 4% of the value of the outstanding Apple stock. The stock purchased was non-voting. At no time did Microsoft own "20%" of Apple.
Oh, Xerox licensed its GUI ideas to Apple. Some still think they were "stolen."
What did the task bar do that wasn't already done on the Apple Mac menu bar? Show running apps? Covered. Advise you of modem connection status? covered? Provide quick links to specific programs? covered. Provide a clock and calendar? yup, covered.
You like the task bar approach... others perfer the menu bar. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.
you have to understand he just got back from a ban, he loves to stir up crap on these tech threads by using the language you saw..
Bush2000 is WRONG AGAIN!
Apple iMac Bondi Blue - Introduction Date: May 6, 1998
The iMac was criticized by industry pundits because it dropped SCSI, Apple Desk Top Bus (ADB) and the standard Apple Serial ports in favor of universal USB. The only other access ports were Audio, Ethernet and Modem.
When my wife (then friend) got an ipod in late 2002 we were amazed that it pluged right into my mothers computer with no problems.
Oh, in addition, while Windows did offer limited USB support in the last two upgrades of Windows95, they admitted that USB was severely limited and prone to problems. According to Microsoft, USB support was only fully implemented in Windows 98... Released on June 25, 1998... but that it still had problems cooperating with other ports. USB was finally "completely" implemented only in Windows 98 SE released sometime after April of 1999.
Contrast this with a fully functional USB implementation in all new Macs as of May 6, 1998.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.