What is Digg?131 Comments
- FearNLoathing, on 10/12/2007, -7/+41I think the author brings up an interesting point about supporting and retiring technologies. Because Apple controls hardware and software, there is nothing forcing them to support or keep supporting something. They can be ahead of the curve by implementing new technologies simultaneously in their OS, all of the iApps, and their hardware. Microsoft simply cannot do this.
- TheCount, on 10/12/2007, -12/+34It's funny, Sony does the same thing apple does (keeping their system closed, including making their own accessories for their own devices) and we say they are idiots. Apple does it, and they are completely reinventing the industry for the better. A double standard?
- fatlip, on 10/12/2007, -6/+27wow, this article isnt one-sided at all
- kingace, on 10/12/2007, -16/+35It's a good thing for MIcrosoft to allow 3rd parties to develop software. I'm happy with MS simply
providing Windows - as they say, do one thing, and do it well. If MS diverted focus from Windows development for something like gaming, than Windows wouldn't be nearly as popular as it is.
Plus, Apple is only ahead of the curve with their own proprietary iApps software for their own users - which there are considerable less of when compared to Windows users. Likewise, Apple only "controls hardware and software" among apple users.
Microsoft simply cannot do this, and that's a damn good thing! It's because of the massive library of terrific third-party software that Windows is so much more popular. - mrman5917, on 10/12/2007, -4/+22I think you are missing the point estvir. When he says leading it, it doesn't necessarily mean market share. Leading doesn't mean you are #1 in every instance, but changing the way things are done. Look at Windows and the innovations (yes I called them that) that Microsoft had to put in to keep up. If a company that only has 5% of the market can change the course of a company that has 90% of the market, then I would call that a leader.
Microsoft has done a lot of good, and I will be upgrading to Vista. However, don't think that they would have done it tmesleves if it weren't for that little company leading the way into a new real of media integration. - Antialias, on 10/12/2007, -9/+24Personally, I don't care if they ever get over 10% market share. There's a ton of software for the platform at their current market share, so I can't see that many advantages to growing more. Heck, I even own a ton of apple stock and I still will be perfectly happy if they don't take over the market. They are doing a great job of making the best computer experience available today, and growing to monolithic size can only slow them down.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -23/+37And how many times does this have to be said:
Until Apple has a network operating environment that can compete with Microsoft's Active Diretory and Novell's eDirectory/NDS they will only be a toy for home use.
Right now, Apple simply cannot do this. - IcanFLY, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14What we really need is for apple to stop trying to act so special and being difficult about dealing with 3rd party software and hardware. If Apple could actually increase its market share, particularly in the business world, then Microsoft might have a bit more pressure to improve. This would mean things are better for everyone if there is real competition. A great deal of revenue from windows comes from business and government.
- felchdonkey, on 10/12/2007, -6/+19I believe you mean über technically.
- mrman5917, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16The point is that you have that choice. I use both on a daily basis, and they both have their weaknesses and their strengths. You prefer XP... but what if, due to a lack of competition and changing ideas of what a computer should be, you were still using windows 3.1 derivatives? The point here, is that market shares change, we are all better for it. OS 9 on the Mac side could not compete with windows. Hell, even the first couple of releases of OS X couldn't. But they are able to now. Microsoft made Apple step up to the plate and now its Microsoft's turn.
- Momus, on 10/12/2007, -11/+23Actually, it's déjà vu.
- heavyphotons, on 10/12/2007, -5/+16@skyshock21:
If you're going to make a comment like that, would you please elaborate (because most of us are non-enterprise users) on where Open Directory is inadequate in comparison with Active Directory and eDirectory?
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/features/opendirectory.html - aroot, on 10/12/2007, -8/+19> how about one of you people who say they stole from mac, post some proof, NONE of you ever have..
I'm not a mac guy, but I'm pretty sure microsoft stole the trashcan idea. No, wait! Windows has a recycle bin, not a trash can. How silly of me! - yatin, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14i'm not a one-sided fan of microsoft of apple (both have had their good and bad innovations and technologies) but i found it ranther short-sighted to say that "cutting the cord" on old technologies is good....many large corporations depend on older technologies to function, because the cost of switiching to new technologies and learning new technologies is simply too high, so the less often they do it, the better. MS can't afford to cut the cord like Apple, because they would alienate too many people and break tons of software (the main advantage of Windows is its widespread compatibility and the software available for it)...
- hyberion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Why oh why is this the conversation we keep having.
"Mac is better than windows"
"Windows is better than Mac"
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
As I sit here I have a windows machine on my left, a mac on my right, and a Linux box at my feet. . .each to their own function and each to their strength.
I am so tired of fan boys from both sides spewing their dogma out and calling it knowledge. "Windows!" "Mac" "Bill!" "Steve!"
They are just computers. They are not religions. You don't see anybody talking about how much market share Frigidaire has over (insert generic fridge maker here). Or how much better toaster a is over toaster b. . .
It's insane and it's stupid and its this circular discussion that prevents anybody from doing anything to advance us beyond the crumbs and bones we get from both sides.
It's the same stupid discussion everybody has about iPods. Don't like them. . don't' use them. . .love them. . use them. But SHUT UP about it. I don't care if you don't like them because they're from apple, just the same that I don't care if you think your iPod is the greatest thing since the antibiotic and light bulbs. Its a device. Use it. Don't. It doesn't matter. None of this matters. Nobody discusses the value of Windows 3.1 VS OS 8 anymore. . .and in ten years it won't matter about these things either.
In the end, it's what you like, and what you use. And that's it. You like windows. Use it. But don't' tell me I'm wrong or I'm a fan boy because I use something else. And quit acting smug because you use product b and that somehow makes you fell more "enlightened" than the plebes that are using product b.
It's you, and your talent, and your ability, not the tool you use that determines the worth of the final product. A great novel can be written with a quill. . .a crap novel can be written with Word on an expensive PC.
It's a tool for crying out loud. Can we all just move on to something else now? - mrman5917, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Since Apple has had such a small and devoted market share, they have been able to do it. When they make a change, it sucks, but the whole system benefits from it. If Microsoft only had a 5% marketshare, you better bet that they would have cut a lot of the old technologies that were weighing them down.
- superal1394, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14@TheCount
The difference between Sony and Apple is when Sony does it, its draconian and nothing works right, when Apple does it, its elegant, rather open, and works like it is supposed to. For example, the iPod is the simplest MP3 player to purchase, get music for and put music on it, and protect. Sonys MP3 players insist on using their unbelievably complex programs, or Windows Media Player, both of which cannot compare to iTunes. - gavroche, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12Thats mostly due to iTune music store and iPods, not computers
- irbdavid, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12If Apple's market share in the PC world rises above even 20-30% they'll no longer be fun. Half the reason to get a mac is for that self-satisfied, elitist feeling! Hopefully the appeal that a dirt-cheap beige box has to joe-user will remain and they'll continue to 'vote with their wallet' against Apple and keep Dell/MS with the majority market share.
- replica, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7What halo effect? They were at 2% Market share before the ipod and they are still at 2%. They have not gained any market share.
The 5% is US market share. The 2% is world wide.
http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2006/April/os.php - tobsterius, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Jobs is aware of the mistakes that Apple made when they were the market leader in the 80's. Given the fact that Jobs is a more mature and seasoned business man, he won't allow Apple to make these mistakes again. Granted, that doesn't mean Apple won't make an entirely different set of mistakes but I think Apple will make the right moves this time around.
- axemachine, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11You got them where it hurts. No wonder the curse and hate.
- hardran3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Do you realize democracy has nothing to do with this ?
If Popular = Best, Then reality TV is the best TV ever, Ashlee Simpson is the best singer, and windows is the best OS. Popular != Best. Popular means it appeals to the lowest common denominator. I use a Mac at Home and a mix of XP/2000 at work. I use windows when I have to, but prefer OS X for personal computing.
I think the funniest thing about these flame wars is that with 2% market share, most of the Windows Fans have never even been in the same room as a Mac, let alone used one. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8@heavyphotons
Open Directory basically only allows you to authenticate to a windows domain controller for the purpose of mapping a network drive, or possibly to use an Exchange account. This is hardly comperable to Active Directory or eDirectory where such an architecture grants you the ability to enforce group policies, push out software packages, authenticate against either ISA server or BorderManager... NOT TO MENTION: Almost all corporate software which allows you to set group policy restrictions local to that software package does so by authenticating to Active Directory and some packages also offer Novell integration.
I would like to see one (just ONE!) ERP pacakge that takes advantage of Open Directory. It's my feeling that Apple basically took Open LDAP and converted it for their platform just to say "Yeah, we do directory services too!" when really when you compare it to the robust AD or NDS, it's absolutely laughable at best. Apple still has a LONG way to go before they can say they're enterprise ready with OSX. - JohnnySoftware, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Is this page from some alternate dimension???
"Because Apple controls hardware and software, there is nothing forcing them to support or keep supporting something."
Apple goes out of its way to support as much 3rd party hardware as possible. They support a ton of printers because they are using the gimp-print software (gimp-print.sourceforge.net) and CUPS - not to mention the ones they or hardware makers have written.
I have the Mac software developer kit and it comes with all the tools, documentation, and libraries/headers I need to write device drivers for my own devices, if I had any and I felt like it.
Apple does not get in the way of software developers.
For instance, Apple does not rigidly "control hardware and software". Apple controls "_system_ hardware and _part_ of the operating system" - that would be a somewhat true statement.
There are too many apps for the Mac to count that come from third parties. You can easily count the apps that are on sale from Apple.
Apple does not tightly control the operating system at all. The Darwin layer of Mac OS X is FreeBSD from BSD (obviously), which Apple does not own. The kernel of the Mac OS X is MACH 3.0 from CMU.
Once the computer is turned on and the first user is registered, the user controls the software more than Apple controls the software.
Apple has a public website you can sign a SCSL and download Darwin from, then compile it on your Mac or Intel PC. And you can actually run it. It is an OS, it runs commands. It is like Linux, sort of - that is pretty open. You can read the source code for Darwin - or FreeBSD - all you want. I own two textbooks on FreeBSD myself. They are not by Apple.
Apple thoroughly documents their operating system, uses open sources tools for compiling things (GCC 4 compiles C, C , Objective-C, etc.), shells, scripting (Python, Perl, PHP, Ruby, etc.), and they give away a free install disc with newest version of their COMPLETE development tools including fancy Xcode IDE free with each Mac sold, even the little $599 one!
They also include Java on the Mac, which they have been doing since Mac OS X came out. They take pains to adapt each version to the Mac, and in fact most of the changes between Sun's JDK 1.4.1 and 1.4.2 came from fixes Apple's engineers made AND CONTRIBUTED BACK to Sun to put in the mainstream builds. Those fixes were then in JREs run by users/develope on not just the Mac but the Windows, Linux, and Unix platforms as well.
Apple knows how to share and play fair.
The only proprietary language that they wrote for the Mac that I can think of is AppleScript. You by no means have to use it. Even their scripting infrastructure is Open (that's what OSA stands for) so you can write your own scripting language, and snap it in and use it. For a while, Dave Winer, the guy who seems to be the inventor of RSS did exactly that. Why do you think his website is called Scripting.com? (his language was called Frontier and it was a Mac scripting language that worked with OSA)
Anyone seen the new graphics animations that are appearing on web pages, that run really fast and don't slow down the whole computer like some plugins do? Well, that is done with a neat element the WHAT team invented, and Apple implemented on Safari 2 and shared with Mozilla which included it in Firefox 1.5. It is called the Canvas element. Know where else you have seen it? Dashboard. All the graphics done in Dashboard applications are done using that Canvas element. That's what they gave to the web community; that is the kind of power they share with developers.
If you BELIEVE what you SAID and that Apple is interfering with developers in any way, I suggest you get your browser over to this page and take a look around:
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/
This is just a tiny sampling of the software available on the Mac which third party developers sell outright, sell as shareware, or give away as freeware and/or open source.
As for hardware, Apple defines, makes, and sells the system hardware. You can buy practically any USB mouse, USB keyboard, etc. That is why they adopted USB and dropped their old proprietary ADB (which arguably is what "inspired" USB given their similarities). Apple has worked with 3rd party hard drives, first SCSCI and now USB and IEEE.1394/Firewire, for two decades. Again, Apple is open.
"Sony does the same thing apple does (keeping their system closed, including making their own accessories for their own devices) ..."
Sony invented Memory Stick(tm) for Sony devices. Apple does not make any proprietary storage devices that are not interoperable with other devices. Instead, they plug gin in through standard interfaces.
Name one proprietary port on a Mac. IEEE.1394/Firewire? USB? MODEM? Bluetooth? 802.11g? No way, they are all wide open official de jure industry standards.
"It's a good thing for Microsoft to allow 3rd parties to develop software."
Well, last time I checked, they charged a heck of a lot of money to "allow" commercial software developers to buy their IDE (Visual Studio) whereas Apple gives away theirs, Xcode for free. Apple's free tool includes automatic class diagram generating, editing the business object schema using diagrams as well, and graphically selecting the searching/filtering criteria for object searches. And then you can interpose that stuff directly between the application object model - and the GUI. It is called CoreData and it virtually eliminates a lot of the drudgery of application programming developers have to go through on other platforms.
Hello? What computer do you think the first web browser for HTML (the main document type of The Web) was written/run on? It was a NeXT system - and the Cocoa Framework of Mac OS X *is* the NeXT Step framework. It's the application programming framework The Web was invented on. The programmer who did that work, over at CERN, is now a Knight of the British Empire.
Microsoft charges quite a lot of money for its development tools. They lashed out at open source tools that are staples in the open source community to Congress. They have called the software two or three generations of programmers have labored on both "cancer" and "communism". Meanwhile, those tools - are curing cancer, monitoring world economies, managing finance, displaying HTML web pages, and recording your TV programs on your TiVo for you.
1. The core of Apple's operating system (the Unix layer and the Kernel layer) were written by teams of Computer Scientists working at two of the United States leading universities for Computer Science.
2. Apple gives their development tools away and has been doing so since Mac OS X 10.0 was originally released in 2001.
3. Apple gives their development documentation away, just like their programming tools.
Mac developers not only are "allowed" to program, they are given for free everything they need to write:
1. device drivers
2. Cocoa or Carbon applications (Aqua GUI) - in C/C or Objective-C
3. command line (shell) commands (no GUI, text UI or no UI)
4. X Windows applications
5. kernel extensions
6. Dashboard widgets
7. Applescripts
8. scripts in any standard/open-source shell language or scripting language
9. Java applications
http://developer.apple.com/
Apple's OS, down at the Darwin layer, uses the same commands and the same APIs that Linux and Unix use. They have the same sorts of data structures, the same calls, the same stuff.
Windows, by contrast, is a very very different bird than Linux, Unix, or Mac OS X. It is not just its own animal, it is its own species. It has been around a lot shorter time than Unix/Linux/OSX, which traces its roots back to the 1970s.
Seriously, the history of personal computers is really well known and publicly documented. Some of these statements posted here are so off base, I would be more than a little embarrassed if I had made them.
Personally I have used both Mac OS X and MS-Windows since about a year of when they both came out, and I have been programming both off and on from the late 1980s or early 1990s. I have bought countless tools from Microsoft and Apple, and got the free ones that Apple gives away now. I just do not know where people get these statements about how each company treats its developers.
Apple cuts developers way more breaks than Microsoft.
Has anyone complaining about the Mac ever written one Mac OS X program in their life? - gaius_baltar, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Yay for eliminating dumbass legacy ports! I often wonder why brand new Lenovo IBM Thinkpads have stupid purple parallel ports on the back. No one uses that. Get rid of it!
- ChuckTaylor, on 10/12/2007, -15/+19lol. people kill me sometimes.
5% of the market, yet this is the beginning of the post-pc era huh?
you really need to step out of your fanboy costume and look at how integrated microsoft is into peoples homes, and most importantly, their jobs. Its practically woven into the fiber of society in one form or another.
Apples integration pretty much begins and ends with an ipod at this point. - tharealmegaman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5So an accurate article gets posted yesterday about how Linux performs better than OSX and gets buried while a sensationally titled article like this gets this many diggs? Does anyone else need further proof of the power that Apple fanboys hold on digg?
- d4rkn1ght, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Shrimpdesign wrote:
“It seems you don't know your history. Xeorox PARC recieved a millions dollars worth of Apple stock for letting them tour and use ideas from the PARC research facilities. Then Microsoft stole those ideas from Apple without the exchange of money.
Maybe you should think before asumming that "that none of you know" about the history of the personal computer's GUI.”
Not to mention that some of those Xerox engineers became Apple engineers after they saw what they could do with Apple.
The main people at Xerox didn’t take the GUI seriously.
In those days the GUI interface was something of a joke to all the other companies. Until Apple showed what they could do with it, and then companies like Microsoft bought into it. - rebrad, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Apple has become the iPod company. iPod is their money maker and their computers and OS now a distant third to iTunes.
The reason Apple abandon their old proprietary architecture to a industry standard is that the stockholders got tired of throwing good money after bad. Now Apple only controls their hardware to the extent that they can pick and choose what options Intel offers them and Intel doesn't give you any options that they don't offer others.
It wouldn't surprise me if Apple abandons OSX in a couple years when there is no money in supporting the antiquated PowerPC architecture. After all, why continue to throw money at an OS when the return on an OS can't compete with Apple's primary business, the iPod and iTunes.
It also wouldn't surprise me if Apple sold the brand name, Mac to the Chinese, Indians or whomever pays the highest price. It worked for IBM and it would work for Apple. IBM was then free to pursue their core business and in Apples case they could pursue the path they have chosen as an entertainment industry. - richardiscool, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4We are at war with Oceania, and Apple has the largest market share.
- user98887, on 10/12/2007, -10/+13Yet another dull inaccurate apple story by some macophile.
You might notice apple's leading the market in downloading music, not computers. - fatlip, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4also, as pointed out in the article.. apple is hardware AND software.. microsoft is just software.. now in order to accurately compare.. you're going to have to group microsoft with all the hardware manufacturers who make products that microsoft sofware comes on, and then see the differences.
- gr00vy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3First the comment about Microsoft clinging to the PC model, especially when compared to Apple, is the most incorrect statement I have read here in a long time. Microsoft is in more devices, from webTV, PocketPC, Tablet PC, UltimateTV, Xbox, Cell Phones, MP3 Players, etc, etc... Than Apple. There is simply no comparison.
But Apple lucked out by defining the MP3 player market and introducing lock-in. About as lucky as MS with OS's. And they play as hard as Microsoft did by all reports, and someday may very well have thier commupance. (though they benefit in that they are playing with other monopolists, and while everyone hates the game, they all love the monopoly).
But, I will agree the Mac is about to see significant marketshare increase. But NOT market defining share. BMW carry's a lot of prestige, but nearly no marketshare. That is owned by the Toyota Camry. Mac has a big advantage that Dell doesn't have. There is no per computer charge to the OS manufacturer. They do have a big disadvantage compared to Dell, they have to pay thier own R&D.
Apple is benefiting from the inexolerable deprecation of the "bus", and the fact that computers (with the exception of gaming), are largely fast enough. And in time, even Apple Computers will come with fast enough motherboard based graphics, and the ability to run games natively through boot camp (and gamers have shown that they are not as price sensitive, or tech scared to make games run) that for the home user it will come down to the BMW/Honda decision. And most people will buy Hondas, and most people will want BMW's.
They will continue to own the creeative professional space. They are going to see a dramatic increase in people that buy thier own machine. But the marketplace worldwide will continue to owned by Microsoft and PC vendors. But Apple will be bigger and more profitable. More people will own Apple products, but quite simply, they are never going to be more than a Niche Player. - sapo916, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I dont like Apple nor Microsoft. Im screwed in Life.
- denisflorent, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3No, seriously, 22 years after... some people are still writing pseudo-articles just to say "Apple is better than Microsoft" ? Oh my God !!! Don't they have anything better to do in life ? 30 minutes wasted to write that pseudo-article !
- salmonmoose, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Parallel ports are also a very simple method to interface with other proprietary hardware, it's much easier to build the electronics to work with one than say a USB port; Many industrial equipment relies on that port to interface with computers, and laptops are the obvious choice.
- FireStrife, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2What was mostly said is true. The world is run mostly on Microsoft OS, and the fact that WinXP gains its support from many companies and does have a lead in the market for its versatility to be used with many different types of hardware make it fairly popular. Macs I will say are nice and sometimes more stable than that of Windows however he who wins the market has to win the favor of other companies who will provide for. Windows being able to run on many hardware configurations and brands has been the winner with this strategy. The way mac works however it would need to be allowed to function under more than just its own brand.
If Apple really wants to beat MS it would have to do it with WinXP functionabilty and diversity not under high priced self hardware. - foolfromhell, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Will they pull it off? and Become market leaders?
My wallet says no... - UserAgent, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2At least parts of OS X are open source or implement open software. OS X isn't any more "proprietary" than Windows is... and of course Microsoft never tries to imelement DRM in any of its products... It's the recording industry thats behind the DRM, not Apple. Record companies would never have agreed to distribute their songs on the iTMS if there weren't some copy restriction measures in place.
- astraycat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Closed platform has its advantages, and its why Apple's software works more reliably. They don't have to support third party hardware, they don't have much in the way of third party software.
Microsoft's problems mostly stem from third party software and hardware. It's been a long time since XP itself crashed and BSOD'd on me, but applications crash left and right. Are these applications by Microsoft? Hardly, they're from software companies that for the most part I haven't heard of.
The same goes for hardware. Microsoft doesn't write the hardware drivers. This leads to more crashing. They couldn't possibly write the drivers for every piece of hardware that's out there, they'd never get anything done.
This is why Windows Vista is having trouble. Most of the people who are reporting trouble are reporting it with their laptops and their built in WiFi adapters. Sorry, but that kind of hardware just wasn't what they foresaw their testers using. Hardware manufacturers don't have Vista drivers yet, these people complaining that their hardware wasn't supported really have to remember that the people programming Vista are human, and aren't able to support all hardware in a beta release.
Apple, of course, can. Because their pool for hardware is very small. They control all of it. Apple users expect this. PC users should not. Those that do have either forgotten who writes the drivers for their hardware, or come from the Apple camp.
In the end, Microsoft will retain most of its market share for the sheer fact that people like to shop around. They like to see that this PC, while the same as another PC, is cheaper. Thus, they feel like they're getting more for their money and feel happier when they buy the damn thing. The only thing that I'd buy from Apple is a laptop, because I really like to pick out which motherboard, which memory, which sound card, blah blah goes into my PC. I love the Mac OS, really, but I'm not willing to give up being able to control what my PC is made out of.
That said, I'm not touching Vista until I know that all the drivers I need have gone through a couple of revisions for Vista.
Apple has also said they don't want to be another OS vendor. Allowing their OS to be used on platforms other than their own opens them up to Microsoft's problems with third party companies. They don't want that. Apple users don't want that. - bitcloud, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Reads like marketing propaganda.
Anything that computes is a computer. The only difference between appliances that companies like apple make, and appliances that are "clinging to the PC model even for the living room" are that the former are closed computers and the latter are open systems. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
It *is* possible to make closed systems that can be opened. (think beginner, advanced, expert).
Thats the model to use. - bb4u, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The article mentions Apple dropping old technologies including Firewire. Huh? There is still a Firewire port on the new Intel based Macs. It doesn't seem like they are dropping it in the near future. I believe that other vendors besides Apples have been hesitant to use it because it involves a license fee to Apple which makes it costlier than USB 2.0.
- vinny, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3You can use the same keyboard on both systems, so I don't get your point. There is a wide range of prices for almost any product you can buy. I certainly don't make my choice based only on price, I'd bet you don't either.
- generic109, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4PC keyboard = Apple keyboard (control panels in OSX to change the function keys)
every usb pc keyboard works with my mac. idiot. - jrbrewin, on 10/12/2007, -7/+9the whole argument is ipod centric. From the appliant-ising of a media device, comparing it to a phone, and then applying it to a pc isn't quite right, at least for a large proportion of people. It would be fine, if lets say, i only wanted to use the bog standard apps on a pc, like i can only do with my ipod, and phone. It would be fine, if lets say, i wanted to monopolise a market and stay away from open, free, and customisable PCs, like i have with my ipod. Alas, a pc isn't an ipod, which is why we have ipods, and PCs. The luggage that microsoft supports is exactly the same luggage that the core buyers of windows operating systems want; hardware legacy support, application support dating back over a decade; it's there for those that want it, and you know what, it's not that which is making any of the microsoft operating systems unstable - microsoft had that stuff licked in NT4. For the most part the things that break the microsoft operating system are
a) massively open hardware support WITH badly written buggy drivers
b) bad user security model
c) OS services being ebedded in the kernal
b and c are supposedly being fixed in vista - although we should wait until after the beta to see how well b works out - some people still have their doubts. point a was attempted to be fixed in windows 2000, but for those people that buy their PCs from the Dells, HPs, or PCWorlds (or whatever the equivelant is in the states) they get as much of a closed hardware build as you're going to get - all the hardware will come with WHQL certified drivers, and most of the kit is to a reasoble standard.
Yes, ultimately, the apple hardware market saturation figure may go up some, but when each mac is able to run windows through boot camp, and people actually get to see and use a mac you will see a nice split down the middle between
- i've tried osx and it's nice, i'll continue to use mac os
- i've tried osx and i don't like it, i'll continue to use windows
when shall we see the day when steve turns off support for boot camp, disables it on all those macs that auto update, and piss off a ***** load of people... :-)) - bb4u, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I don't think the iPod/iTunes is as easily defended as the Macs so it would be a mistake for Apple to sell off the Mac brand or stop developing OS X. Mac users have stuck with Apple before the iPod came out and have helped keep the company afloat. Who knows how long Apple will continue to dominate with iPod/iTunes?
- superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Your link shows Countershare, not Marketshare - the results are dependant on the kinds of things people are using the counters for.
- noahhoward, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4It's kind of meant to be one sided... it's a look at Apple... not the computer industry as a whole.
- PathDaemon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Actually, that's how Macs work. Beginners use iLife and the other basic parts of the Mac OS, advanced users crack open the UNIX core and do whatever they want.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 129 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is