Comments on: Apple shows us how to compete with Microsoft
The Mac maker has never pulled any punches in competing against Microsoft, even when it was dependent on the Windows giant.
Most Popular
15 sites that went kaput in 2009
Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.
Top 10 news stories of the decade
Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.
About The Open Road
Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to the Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is general manager of the Americas division and vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.
Add this feed to your online news reader
The Open Road topics
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q1.07/592FE887-5CA1-4F30-BD62-407362B533B9.html
As you can see. Microsoft was not being a benefactor at all!
MS did it for their own reasons, all of which made commercial sense.
apple did not need the $150M from msft: it had already contained the operating loses & also had nearly $2B in the bank.
in reality the investment by msft was part of a larger deal in which msft was settling a violation of intellectual property lawsuit with apple - in fact, if you look at the financial statements for that period, it appears that msft was quietly paying about $1B++ to apple in unpublicized fees.
msft settled the lawsuit privately with apple on the eve of macworld because it was poised to lose MANY billions of dollars in a court judgement - and with the DOJ anti-trust case moving forward, making a token investment in apple was good PR for msft because it made a virtue out of a necessity.
ps: the lawsuit in question was not the famous 'look & feel' case (which was actually just a simple licensing issue - apple didnt explicitly restrict msft using its GUI conventions after window 1.0); rather, this case was the clearcut infringement by msft of apple's quicktime-for-windows technology (by way of an thieving subcontractor that was deliberately being laundered through Intel).
If that is viewed as "defying" Microsoft, then it has more to do with trying to remove mediocrity from their company DNA and not settling for the status quo.
The better thing to do, as Dell is doing, is to provide Linux as an alternative to Windows on many levels.
Make it easier for Linux users to access compatible hardware from Dell so even if it is a smaller market compared to Windows machines it's tapping into a market that may otherwise go elsewhere (since Linux can be installed on anything from super-computers to watches).
Then as Linux grows, so does Dell but not at the expense of it's Windows buyers.
As for Windows 7, most accounts I have read say that it is really not much more than a refined version of Vista. If that is true people will once again be disappointed.
But don't worry, we're not paying you to spread truth. You have done the bidding of your masters well, spreading their lies with conviction. Make sure your master sees this so they can "pay" you for your loyalty.
Are you also aware that Microsoft's revenue has been declining the last two quarters and Microsoft has already stated this quarter's revenue will also be down?
And you say Mac is on its way down?!
Everyone is entitle to his own opinion; no one is entitle to his own facts.
Next time you feel the urge to post something, please ask mommy and daddy to relax parental controls.
This is one of the reasons Microsoft got into trouble with the government(s)... Their exclusivity contracts that forced PC manufacturers to only offer Windows, effectively killing off all other OS vendors, except those that made their own hardware, like Apple. However, they also tried to push out other OS based hardware from corporations, by forcing corporations to pay Windows and Office licensing fees for every available seat, whether that seat ran Windows or not.
"...had to humbly accept a $150 million investment..."
They didn't have to accept this investment. This was just a facade to show that Apple was still alive and well and had the support of the largest software developer in the world. I believe at the time Apple had over a billion in the bank, they didn't need Microsoft's "investment".
"... irked Microsoft, like the Safari browser in 2003..."
Why would that "irk" Microsoft? They had previously declared they would no longer continue development of IE for Mac. So Apple stepped in with Safari, which as you know uses open source WebKit, Apple's branch of the KHTML project.
"For those who insist that Dell and others set themselves up with an umbilical existence to Microsoft's whims, I suggest that you take a close look at Apple. "
As usual, I think that people miss the point. Apple has quality and innovation on its DNA, Dell has cheap prices!
Apple could turn on a success in the second-coming of Jobs, because Jobs "co-founded it" and soda-marketing guys destroy it.
But Dell? OK, it's the second-coming of Michel but there is no innovation inside, neither hard+soft integrity.
To buy RH and mix with Dell hardware could be "good business," but never a "like Apple's success"!
Is a 30% annual growth rate, $25 billion in the bank and Apple pushing its market share on the web, from 4% two years ago to just under 10% now, evidence that Apple is going down the tubes? Is Microsoft dropping below 89% market share a sign of robust health? If it is, then let us have more of that.
Who cares if Steve jobs is a control freak if he delivers to consumers the products and services that they want and are willing to pay extra for?
Windows 7 will speak for itself whenever it shows up. We have to deal with today, not some vaporware in the future. Microsoft has a habit of promising much and delivering very little. Windows Vista was a huge embarrassment; Windows 7 must be very good just to make up for Vista, let alone catch up to Mac OSX 10.6 Snow Leopard.
Besides, if Windows 7 is that good, the best place to run it is on a Mac, not a Dell. The build quality of Apple's Macintosh equipment is better and the Macs are real cute. They don't cost any more than for comparable Dell PC.
If you want to buy a junky PC, or one out of a White Box, rather than a computer which will last for four or more years, then you can pay less. But, you get what you pay for. And being able to avoid Windows XP and Vista is worth $300, any day.
Dells suck,Macs suck,get it?
Who the hell honestly buys a prebuilt tower(especially dell) on this site and doesn't feel guilty of being scammed?
That's, of course, presuming they would benefit from acquiring a Linux distro in the first place. They seem to be nicely hedging their bets right now by offering both (and primarily Windows).
Yeah, the fact that OSX is a superior OS has nothing to do with it,
We should be thankful for the what MS brought to the table 10+ years ago - but they have long since rested on those laurels while Apple and Linux have fought tooth and nail for each percentage point. You might not like everything about Apple, but it innovates, attracts customers and in turn spurs competitors to follow.
But don't worry, we're not paying you to spread truth. You have done the bidding of your masters well, spreading their lies with conviction. Make sure your master sees this so they can "pay" you for your loyalty."
Windows 7 < apple fanboy's "productivity",including writing.
Truth? Spoken like a true gullible POS.Go back to 5th grade,you don't deserve to be on a tech site.
1) Actually, MS Office was first written for Apple OS. It was eventually ported to Windows (and not the other way 'round, as you assert).
2) the $150m and a promise to continue Mac Office development was what MSFT was grudgingly forced to pay in order to avoid being eviscerated by lawsuit damages that they would have owed Apple over copyright and/or patent theft.
This pretty much changes the premise of your whole article in many ways...
Meanwhile, it's fun to watch. Maybe MSFT will realize their losses before its too late, maybe they won't. Either way, at least the result will mean a more open environment for us all, methinks.
Apple has adopted Microsoft software for its hardware, and Microsoft's processor platform . Apple's hardware once unique now concurrently runs windows. Apple as a computer company has not evolved buy has slowly morphed into a WINTEL with some bells and whistles, thus Mac is as recently called a PC with a tax.
Apple is now a highly successful innovation company with the Ipod, Iphone and Itunes center stage, the computer business is sentimental favorite and a company icon, but unless you did not get the memo it is no longer Apple Computer company.
I suspect if Microsoft decided to no longer support Office on a Mac that sales would slow to a trickle, certainly for Universities and many businesses.
Apple showing how to compete, I think not. Apple has shown what it takes to survive
- by solitare_pax February 6, 2009 5:22 PM PST
- Back on topic - if Dell could produce an OS that was as rock-solid as Mac OS 10.5, and provide all the programs a business needs, they would do quite well - if they could get the IT guys who are still in love with Windows 95 out of the trees and teach them how to walk upright.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(36 Comments)