Opinion: Apple -- Here to Stay

MacCentral ^ | March 08, 2005 | Don Tennant

[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.

[FastCoyote]

[It isn't far away now.]

"Okay, I'll bite. What year will that occur in?"

Market share? Could be ten years, could be twenty years.

But the point is, for usability, we're only a couple years away. For IT people like you or me, Linux is already fine for a lot of uses, like mysql, apache. My java IDEs need some more work. But KDE is coming along quite well, like I said, it is about Win98 level.

Linux doesn't have to beat windows to be a success. But given that we are getting progressively less marginal usefullness out of our apps, the idea that Linux won't converge on Windows and beat it in some areas is absurd.

[Swordmaker]

Mac's memory management was a joke and Mac's did not do multitasking until the late 1990's - that is why the Mac has never been considered a business machine. Mac lost because they had an inferior product. Spin all you want, the computer industry does not buy the MacMythology. Numbers talk and BS walks.

Who told you that piece of misinformation? I did one hell of a lot of multitasking on Macintoshes WAY before that... running Pagemaker, Photoshop, WordPerfect, Filemaker and several utilities all at the same time. And that was in the late 1980s.

Multifinder - The multitasking version of Finder for Apple Macintosh computers. This is the part of the operating system responsible for managing the desktop -- locating documents and folders and handling the Clipboard and Scrapbook. For System 6, and earlier versions of the Mac OS, MultiFinder was optional. Since System 7, MultiFinder has replaced the older Finder.

See... more ignorance. Let's just see when Multifinder became the default operating system for Macintosh when System 7 was released:

The official release date for System 7.0 was April 1991

Hmmmmm.... nope, April, 1991, does not equate to the late 1990s.

How about when Apple released Multifinder itself??? Note the date in the following article:

Author: from AppleLink
Date: September , 1987
Keywords: multifinder release tips hints announce announcement
Text:
You can boost the productivity, speed, and ease-of-use of your Macintosh systems with MultiFinder--the first generation multitasking operating system for the Macintosh. With MultiFinder, you can:
-- Use multiple applications at the same time
-- Switch between them at the touch of a button
-- Print documents while working on other applications

And new applications will allow you to do things like background telecom-munications or file processing so you can do one thing, while the computer does another. It's like having multiple computers at your fingertips.

MultiFinder saves time normally spent switching between applications by allowing more than one application to be open at once. There's no need to close and re-launch programs when switching between applications. With MultiFinder, cutting and pasting from one application to another is fast and easy, since both can be open at once.

Hmmmm... September, 1987... nope, that doesn't equal late 1990s either.

Now I will admit that Apple did not have true "pre-emptive multitasking" until the late 1990s... Both Apple and Windows really used "cooperative multitasking", depending on the application to nicely release its hold on system resources. Windows 95 supported pre-emptive multitasking but still required applications to be written to take advantage of it... if even one did not, the "blue screen of death" could visit the user because of one misbehaving application. With the release of OSX and Windows XP, pre-emptive multitasking is finally mature on those platforms. The Amiga computer had pre-emptive multitasking from day one in 1985 ... but even it had occasionaly "guru meditations" that were the Amiga equivalent of the Windows BSOD and Apple's Bomb.

Also, I will admit that the old Apple way of assigning memory to applications was kludgy... but it worked.

[rightgrafix]

I personally use a Mac. but I feel this great controversy over which computer is better, is a waste of time. Both Mac and PC computer's have system and hardware problems(and probably always will). So buy whatever you want and use it, because in general both computer's do the same thing.

[Swordmaker]

Go for it. You people bore me. It would be a relief to do something else for awhile.

Then why do you associate with us? If we bore you, go somewhere and meet some people who don't bore you. Or are you a masochist? Do you enjoy being bored?

[Clemenza]

Apple: While most of us consider it a TOY, Californicators think of it as a serious product.

[Fabozz]

"Apple, a much smaller company than Microsoft, had earnings about 1/4 of those of its larger rival."

You are not using the word "earnings" correctly. Apple's revenue may be a quarter of Microsoft's. Its earnings, however, are about one twentieth of Microsoft's, because as a hardware manufacturer Apple has tremendous expenses that Microsoft simply doesn't.

For this quarter, analysts project Apple to make $174 million in profit, Microsoft $3.47 billion, making Microsoft's earnings one full order of magnitude greater than Apple's. This is admittedly not "several," but it's still quite significant.

[Swordmaker]

You are not using the word "earnings" correctly.

Thanks... you are correct. I was sloppy in my posting. I did intend it to mean revenue as that was what was being discussed.

[Petronski]

I know this will come as a shock but ... we are conversing. Right now. The horror...

Since you've started off acting like an impudent ass, what makes you think we're going to converse about anything else, except your impudent, asinine behavior?

I'm sure as hell not going to discuss the iPod with you, any more than I would attempt such a discussion with a Microsoft TV commercial or marketing brochure.

The horror...

Exactly!

[N3WBI3]

Hes not going to want to see any point but the Linux sux point. I remember him swearing up and down awhile back he would not let Linux in his environment but now aparently hes a Linux admin.

Being an Integrator and a certified engineer for both 2k3Ad and RHEL3. I can tell you that the difficulty in administering depends on several factors.

1) System Knowledge, every system has its gotcha's. If you know them a set up system will not be buggy

2) System Purpose, for the most part youre desktop and desktop infrastructure is much better off on 2k desktops and 2k3 AD. But a weblogic / websphere, database, Mailserver, ... Many of these are much easier to admin, and are more stable and scalable under *NIX.

3) Pre implimnetation Planning..

[antiRepublicrat]

Apple has picked up desktop users from iPod sales -- is not supportable by objective fact.

Hmmm, an analyst survey that found some switching and others planning to switch. That's good enough for me.

[antiRepublicrat]

The operative word being "loads". As in piles.

I know, all that crappy software like Office, the Adobe and Macromedia suites, and excellent products such as Xcode (development), Xgrid (cluster computing), Xsan (file storage) and Final Cut Pro HD (video editing) -- all not available for the PC. And don't forget all the high-end scientific UNIX apps available for OS X, and not Windows.

We're talking about broadly used desktop apps, not that load of specialized crap.

Exactly. To a retail chain in a consumer PC world, Mac software, and even Mac versions of PC software, is not "broadly used," just like Maya and SPSS. Therefore, they're not carried.

[antiRepublicrat]

Fine. Whatever. Live in your little dream world.

Only if you learn how to properly admin a Linux box.

[antiRepublicrat]

It isn't far away now.

It still is, until Linux gets its drivers in order. I know its mainly the fault of the device manufacturers, but it's still a fact no matter what the reason is.

[LexBaird]

Because I don't want to be a member of the Glee Club, packer.

I suggest you read the posting guidelines for this forum. Then, go ply your trade as MicroSoft shill at some other forum who will put up with your randomly fired obscenity, such as DU.

[LexBaird]

Apple: While most of us consider it a TOY,

This is ironically amusing, considering how many people I've heard (including on this thread) say they only keep using windows because they want to play games.

[HAL9000]

The court disagreed and dismissed Apple's suit. End of story.

No, the end of the story was that Apple and Microsoft cross-licensed their patent portfolios, thus giving Microsoft the legal right to try to copy Apple technologies into Windows.

[antiRepublicrat]

No, the end of the story was that Apple and Microsoft cross-licensed their patent portfolios, thus giving Microsoft the legal right to try to copy Apple technologies into Windows.

Apparently they're still doing it even though the deal's run out. Have you seen the list of Longhorn features that look curiously like current and soon-to-come OS X features?

But the freakiest feature I can't wait to see MS try to copy is Core Image. This is the one that will offload the number crunching of various filters to the graphics card. I'd love to see the image and video benchmarks when you add a 6800 Ultra with 16 pixel pipelines and 35 GB/sec memory bandwidth to the equation.

[Last Visible Dog]

Microsoft, Apple and Xerox - David K. Every

Nice try.

David K. Every is a self-appointed reporter and MacPropagandist (or should that be Ipropagandist). This propaganda piece has very little to do with reality - the guy is a Mac evangelist. Funny, this MacMythology piece fails to mention Xerox sued Apple over the stealing of their GUI. The only place you can find this MacPropaganda piece is on this guys personal MacPropaganda website.

[Last Visible Dog]

Xerox sued Apple - Whow... whoop-de-doo. So they did... and lost.

Just as Apple lost when they tried to sue Microsoft. This just proves your MacPropaganda piece is - say it with me - MacPropaganda and has little connection with reality. Xerox was pissed at Apple and Apple did not license the GUI.

[Last Visible Dog]

And exactly WHERE did that BIOS reside? On a PROM (Programmable Read Only Memory) chip on the mother board.

Like I said - you don't have to be a computer illiterate to use a Mac, but it helps. What resides in a PROM - say it with me - SOFTWARE! Compaq did not reverse engineer the PROM, they reverse engineered the BIOS which is software and not hardware as you claimed.

That PROM chip was, TA DA... hardware.

Just as a hard disk is hardware and software resides on the hardware so I guess you consider Photoshop to be hardware since it reside on - as you said: TA DA...hardware.

Like I said: you don't have to be a computer illiterate to use a Mac, but it helps.

HINT: a bios is software just as Photoshop is software. All software resided on some form of hardware (hard disk, PROM, system memory) but software never magically becomes hardware as you claim.