Windows 8 news

[*LTD*]

I applaud MS for having blogs on so many different topics. They have one for W8, WP7, Photosynth, Office for Mac and so on and on.

Looks like those blogs aren't exactly paying off.

Apple on the other hand has nothing. Nope, not even a squeak.

No need, when Apple knows exactly what they're doing.

As a MS fan, I hate the disrespect shown towards MS even when they are trying their best to be open.

Their innovation-to-R&D-ratio is pretty lousy. It's easy for folks to disrespect MS when MS does a great job of disrespecting themselves. Being "open" is pretty worthless if you're churning out a lot of crap all the time.

You are pretty much inviting a flame war here to be honest. It's hard to find people willing to talk reasonably about MS here.

Well let me start. Ballmer needs to GTFO. Three years ago.

 

[Abstract]

The Mac OS version of Office has ALWAYS had a "Ribbon", and I'm glad that the MacBU at Microsoft never changed this. The only difference is that the Mac version is oriented vertically, is made up of a bunch of collapsible panels, looks less cluttered, and feels far more organised.

The only thing I hate about the Ribbon is how much space it takes up. It's far too big. However, it could be really fantastic. You almost never need to go two menus deep to select something. Nearly everything takes one click to reach. It's the same reason I like the Mac Formatting palette ("ribbon").



Also, Windows 8 looks to be the best OS for tablets. I'm not really that excited about the regular desktop OS, but the version designed for touch users looks awesome. Google doesn't get it, and I don't think Apple gets it, either. I like Blackberry's tablet OS. The features of the PlayBook were lacking, but the actual OS, and its design, are excellent.

 

[digger1985]

Their innovation-to-R&D-ratio is pretty lousy. It's easy for folks to disrespect MS when MS does a great job of disrespecting themselves. Being "open" is pretty worthless if you're churning out a lot of crap all the time.

I think you misundertand how MS Research works. They do research for research sake. They publish a lot of papers. They are like a university. They do research for humanity's sake.

On the other hand Apple does research just to earn more money. Actually let me correct that, Apple does Design. All the R&D is done by their suppliers. CPUs? GPUs? Retina Screens? Did Apple innovate any of those? Nope.

That alone shows the difference in philosophy between the two companies. Gates is a well reknowned philanthropist. Jobs is a miserable miser.

Talking about innovation, the only innovation I see Apple doing is ripping off other OSs
Examples:
Ripping off WP7 camera behaviour: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzuZeWFSQzw
Ripping off Android notifications.
Ripping off WP7 lauching camera from lock screen.
Ripping off Windows in terms of full screen and resizing windows through all points in Lion.
Ripping off Windows when it comes to "Merge" folders behavious in Lion.

Year of the copycats anyone?

Oops, Jobs was right, but it's Apple doing all the copying.

Don't forget all the recent litigation. Remember what they say! When you can't innovate litigate.

See, I can do fanboyism just as well as you do.

 

[mkrishnan]

The Mac OS version of Office has ALWAYS had a "Ribbon", and I'm glad that the MacBU at Microsoft never changed this. The only difference is that the Mac version is oriented vertically, is made up of a bunch of collapsible panels, looks less cluttered, and feels far more organised.

When I first used Office:Mac, I immediately loved this, even though I'd been using Office on Windows for years before that (excepting that, at least in some versions, it had a belts-and-suspender feel, because there were tons of buttons at the top of the screen in addition to the toolbox). Personally, I don't mind the ribbon, although I do have to hunt for things, and I like the Mac vertical toolbox better than the ribbon. I've gotten more or less used to it.

 

[*LTD*]

I think you misundertand how MS Research works. They do research for research sake. They publish a lot of papers. They are like a university. They do research for humanity's sake.

They do research for humanity's sake.

LOL

Yep. Humanitarian research hasn't put a viable smartphone platform in anyone's pocket never mind a tablet. MS fans need to wait. For years. Humanitarian research has resulted in more back-asswards OS X-inspired versions of Windows (now with 2 UIs!) and more Office retreads. Zunes. Kins. Phantom Courier videos that amount to nothing. Embarrassing HP Slates. And of course, the perpetual mission to shoehorn a full OS onto a tablet. At least you can play games on an Xbox.

Humanitarian research has resulted in MS becoming a second-rate tech company in the consumer sphere that is so unprepared for current market realities that they're pinning their hopes on a has-been mobile phone maker to help sell a mobile OS hat no one really wants, which was released about three years too late.

On the other hand Apple does research just to earn more money. Actually let me correct that, Apple does Design. All the R&D is done by their suppliers. CPUs? GPUs? Retina Screens? Did Apple innovate any of those? Nope.

That alone shows the difference in philosophy between the two companies. Gates is a well reknowned philanthropist. Jobs is a miserable miser.

Whatever Apple does or is doing, the result is clear: more great products that consumers can get and use TODAY - not three years after the fact, and which set the standard TODAY - not introduce things that the competition has already chewed up and spat out years ago. The iPad, iPhone, the very face of mobile tech - and probably the mobile device you're using now - is all thanks to Apple. Thanks to Apple in 2007 and thanks to Apple in 2010.

Whatever Apple is doing - innovation or copying, call it whatever you like, they're doing everything that matters to consumers. Apple guides the industry. Apple actually does things with their patents and research, and consumers get a steady stream of great products, often well before anyone else thinks of releasing such products. And they're mostly done right on Apple's first try.

All we hear about is MS' research - all that research. Where's the beef? Where are all the ground-breaking, revolutionary products? All it's been for the last decade are more versions of Windows to run on the same old PeeCees, Office retreads, failure in mobile, flatlined stock, false starts, late starts, and (a bright spot), the Xbox.

Maybe they should just stick to research and leave the consumer products sphere to those who are dynamic and actually bother to take risks. Or let folks install office on their Xboxes. LOL

Consumers don't give a damn about who's the better philanthropist. Philanthropy doesn't give us hot mobile devices and a rock-solid mobile ecosystem. Philanthropy doesn't push tech forward. Philanthropy doesn't give us a retina-display iPad. Philanthropy doesn't give us that new 13-inch MBA. Philanthropy doesn't give us a comprehensive cloud-computing platform that is designed to work seamlessly with Apple gear. Philanthropy doesn't create new markets and redefine old ones (sometimes rather unexpectedly.)

Do you think when we line up for our iPads, when we're waiting for upgraded MBPs, when we're planning out our next iPhone (iPhone 5) purchase that philanthropy crosses our minds?? It doesn't even register. Nor does it need to. Because it has nothing to do with whatsoever with the product. It has nothing to do whatsoever with profitability. It has nothing to do whatsoever with the very things that drive the industry today.

Philanthropy is nice. It's certainly beneficial. But it's not required. And it doesn't do anything to service consumers in the market.

I bet when you realized that, for example, the Courier was just a pipe dream, that MS fumbled the ball yet again, that you'd have to wait God knows how long for a viable mobile device from MS (so you can stop using Apple or Android gear, or horrid WinMo or antiquated, no-app Blackberries) . . . I bet you thought "hey, that's ok, MS is very generous with their money. They're so upstanding. Bill Gates is a great guy."

Right. Get real.

 

[twitt3r]

Oh god Microsoft what are you doing?! The ribbon layout is the worst thing about office, it takes 10 minutes to find anything you need. I really hope there's a way to get back to the Win7 explorer look. I use keyboard shortcuts almost exclusively, I have no need for the ribbon handicap.

So continue to use your shortcuts and stop moaning about something you do not use or care for.

 

[MonkeySee....]

I think you misundertand how MS Research works. They do research for research sake. They publish a lot of papers. They are like a university. They do research for humanity's sake.

On the other hand Apple does research just to earn more money. Actually let me correct that, Apple does Design. All the R&D is done by their suppliers. CPUs? GPUs? Retina Screens? Did Apple innovate any of those? Nope.

That alone shows the difference in philosophy between the two companies. Gates is a well reknowned philanthropist. Jobs is a miserable miser.

Talking about innovation, the only innovation I see Apple doing is ripping off other OSs
Examples:
Ripping off WP7 camera behaviour: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzuZeWFSQzw
Ripping off Android notifications.
Ripping off WP7 lauching camera from lock screen.
Ripping off Windows in terms of full screen and resizing windows through all points in Lion.
Ripping off Windows when it comes to "Merge" folders behavious in Lion.

Year of the copycats anyone?
Image

Oops, Jobs was right, but it's Apple doing all the copying.

Don't forget all the recent litigation. Remember what they say! When you can't innovate litigate.

See, I can do fanboyism just as well as you do.

The bit in bold was great.

I'm quite suprised the amount of people on this forum just outright dislike Apple.

Its quite bizarre.

 

[digger1985]

The bit in bold was great.

I'm quite suprised the amount of people on this forum just outright dislike Apple.

Its quite bizarre.

Well when you have people like LTD, it's not really surprising.

----------

They do research for humanity's sake. Philanthropy doesn't create new markets and redefine old ones (sometimes rather unexpectedly.

When exactly has Apple created a new market? They join existing markets. Mp3 players, Phones, Tablets etc. I am not denying they make great products, but all this talk of innovation and creating new markets is hyperbole.

You talk about MS churning out the same old stuff? What about apple? iPod version 5? iPhone version 5? iPad version 3? Apple TV version 2? iMac version god knows. Macbook version what.

The way I see it, Apple is just like MS is churning out the same old iOS based devices, and many times ripping other OSs like Android or WP7.

 

[tkermit]

Well when you have people like LTD, it's not really surprising.

At least there are a lot of other people on here that provide a 'fair & balanced' "counterweight".

 

[digger1985]

Do you think when we line up for our iPads, when we're waiting for upgraded MBPs, when we're planning out our next iPhone (iPhone 5) purchase that philanthropy crosses our minds?? It doesn't even register. Nor does it need to. Because it has nothing to do with whatsoever with the product. It has nothing to do whatsoever with profitability. It has nothing to do whatsoever with the very things that drive the industry today.

So you'd still buy these products if they were manufactuered in Africa using slave labor, because all of these things don't matter as long as the product is good.

LTD also needs to learn more about Research
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research

It's called MS Research and not MS R&D for a reason.

BTW I bet a lot of iPhone users have Photosynth app installed. And guess where that came from

 

[roadbloc]

So you'd still buy these products if they were manufactuered in Africa using slave labor, because all of these things don't matter as long as the product is good.

The sad thing is, most people would. We're in a world where people don't think where their products come from. This however, has nothing to do with Windows 8.

 

[digger1985]

The sad thing is, most people would. We're in a world where people don't think where their products come from. This however, has nothing to do with Windows 8.

Sorry about the OT, just trying to pointing out that people have different views on morality and ethics and just because LTD doesn't care about MS or Apple's philosophies doesn't mean the rest of the world doesn't.

Anyway I am looking forward to W8. I have been itching to either get an iPad or a Android tablet (samsung) but now I will just get the first W8 tab that comes out.

 

[thejadedmonkey]

The bit in bold was great.

I'm quite suprised the amount of people on this forum just outright dislike Apple.

Its quite bizarre.

It's because there's so many people who hate anything that isn't Apple and love everything that is Apple - no matter how bad it is. the iSheep, as I will affectionately call them, have a mantra much like Mr. Bush's, where if you're not with them, you're against them. I'm not an iSheep, I don't think a polished turd with an Apple logo on it is worth hundreds of dollars. So I'm against them. And that makes me a Windows lover. Once someone's pigenholed into a "box", whether it be "smart", "dumb", or even "windows lover", those boxes are hard to break out of.

I'm a Windows lover because iSheep made it that way. But I'm proud of it. And I love the direction Windows is headed in, even more than OS X these past few years.

 

[MonkeySee....]

It's because there's so many people who hate anything that isn't Apple and love everything that is Apple - no matter how bad it is. the iSheep, as I will affectionately call them, have a mantra much like Mr. Bush's, where if you're not with them, you're against them. I'm not an iSheep, I don't think a polished turd with an Apple logo on it is worth hundreds of dollars. So I'm against them. And that makes me a Windows lover. Once someone's pigenholed into a "box", whether it be "smart", "dumb", or even "windows lover", those boxes are hard to break out of.

I'm a Windows lover because iSheep made it that way. But I'm proud of it. And I love the direction Windows is headed in, even more than OS X these past few years.

Negative nelly.

 

[TheSideshow]

It's because there's so many people who hate anything that isn't Apple and love everything that is Apple - no matter how bad it is. the iSheep, as I will affectionately call them, have a mantra much like Mr. Bush's, where if you're not with them, you're against them. I'm not an iSheep, I don't think a polished turd with an Apple logo on it is worth hundreds of dollars. So I'm against them. And that makes me a Windows lover. Once someone's pigenholed into a "box", whether it be "smart", "dumb", or even "windows lover", those boxes are hard to break out of.

I'm a Windows lover because iSheep made it that way. But I'm proud of it. And I love the direction Windows is headed in, even more than OS X these past few years.

Agreed. Whenever you post something pro-Microsoft, you're an Apple hater. I guess it can go both ways though with many people.

Point is, I have seen one post that could be negative to Apple and he admitted it was a trolling post when he made it. But then this thread gets labeled as having a bunch of Apple haters.

 

[sigamy]

Forget the Ribbon vs. no ribbon and other UI-centric debates. For me, Microsoft is missing the whole point when they say that Windows Explorer is probably the most used application on Windows.

Why, after almost 30 years of GUI-based computers do end users still have to deal with a file system?

I am in full support of the iOS and hopefully future Mac OS view that applications--not users--should manage their data.

I've had this debate many times with Windows users that have switched to the Mac and their use of iPhoto. I've posted about this here before. Basically, I've found that Windows users initially hate iPhoto and it's automatic and "hidden" storage of photos. They are so used to manually creating huge nested hierarchies of folders to store their photos. Typically, they would have photos stored all over their system.

It was hard for these folks to drop the old habits and trust the computer and the app (iPhoto) to manage the data for them. Let iPhoto be *the Finder* for photos. There are very few reasons to need to go to the file system to do something with a photo on a Mac (upload to non-supported site like Craigslist or ebay).

The point is...end users should not need to muck around with the files on their system. This stuff is data. It should be presented to users in the context that it is used, which is 99% of the time, within an App.

Microsoft also states their goal with Win 8 is to reimagine Windows. Again, they are missing the whole point. The goal should be to reimagine computing and productivity and getting stuff done.

 

[TheSideshow]

Forget the Ribbon vs. no ribbon and other UI-centric debates. For me, Microsoft is missing the whole point when they say that Windows Explorer is probably the most used application on Windows.

Why, after almost 30 years of GUI-based computers do end users still have to deal with a file system?

I am in full support of the iOS and hopefully future Mac OS view that applications--not users--should manage their data.

I've had this debate many times with Windows users that have switched to the Mac and their use of iPhoto. I've posted about this here before. Basically, I've found that Windows users initially hate iPhoto and it's automatic and "hidden" storage of photos. They are so used to manually creating huge nested hierarchies of folders to store their photos. Typically, they would have photos stored all over their system.

It was hard for these folks to drop the old habits and trust the computer and the app (iPhoto) to manage the data for them. Let iPhoto be *the Finder* for photos. There are very few reasons to need to go to the file system to do something with a photo on a Mac (upload to non-supported site like Craigslist or ebay).

The point is...end users should not need to muck around with the files on their system. This stuff is data. It should be presented to users in the context that it is used, which is 99% of the time, within an App.

Microsoft also states their goal with Win 8 is to reimagine Windows. Again, they are missing the whole point. The goal should be to reimagine computing and productivity and getting stuff done.

Hold on. You are missing all of W8.

Windows 8 (so far from what s revealed) shows that they DONT have to deal with a filesystem, but they CAN. Apps deal with the photos directly just like you want.

The Metro side does not use the file system. I suggest you look at this video (Check starting at 3:15)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p92QfWOw88I

You will see how there is a file system, but people dont deal with it if they dont want.
Things are subject to change, but going off what has been shown off thus far, this seems to be the case.

 

[*LTD*]

Microsoft also states their goal with Win 8 is to reimagine Windows. Again, they are missing the whole point. The goal should be to reimagine computing and productivity and getting stuff done.

No. Stuff like that isn't for MS. Far too much risk. Just rehash and repackage the same thing and attempt to convince users that the same old PC paradigm is as healthy as ever.

http://www.appleinsider.com/article...at_street_but_windows_revenue_declines_2.html

Which might not be so easy to do.

MS has spent the better part of the last 5-7 years *reacting* to Apple and other rivals. There is no proactivity and initiative at MS. At least no appreciable level of it. Look at what's come out of MS over the last 5-7 years. Then compare to what Apple has done. It's like night and day.

But MS' real competition is Google. And Google has already shown that although they might be rather sneaky, they are also incredibly disruptive, and certainly not afraid to take risks and take them early enough to make a real impact on the market.

 

[digger1985]

Forget the Ribbon vs. no ribbon and other UI-centric debates. For me, Microsoft is missing the whole point when they say that Windows Explorer is probably the most used application on Windows.

Why, after almost 30 years of GUI-based computers do end users still have to deal with a file system?

I am in full support of the iOS and hopefully future Mac OS view that applications--not users--should manage their data.

I've had this debate many times with Windows users that have switched to the Mac and their use of iPhoto. I've posted about this here before. Basically, I've found that Windows users initially hate iPhoto and it's automatic and "hidden" storage of photos. They are so used to manually creating huge nested hierarchies of folders to store their photos. Typically, they would have photos stored all over their system.

It was hard for these folks to drop the old habits and trust the computer and the app (iPhoto) to manage the data for them. Let iPhoto be *the Finder* for photos. There are very few reasons to need to go to the file system to do something with a photo on a Mac (upload to non-supported site like Craigslist or ebay).

The point is...end users should not need to muck around with the files on their system. This stuff is data. It should be presented to users in the context that it is used, which is 99% of the time, within an App.

Microsoft also states their goal with Win 8 is to reimagine Windows. Again, they are missing the whole point. The goal should be to reimagine computing and productivity and getting stuff done.

REmove the filesysystem from OSX and I guarantee that 95% will instantly switch to windows. Even Apple has been forced to add a sort of file system to iOS when they added folders so that users could group their apps.

 

[ravenvii]

REmove the filesysystem from OSX and I guarantee that 95% will instantly switch to windows. Even Apple has been forced to add a sort of file system to iOS when they added folders so that users could group their apps.

That's not a filesystem. You two are talking about different things.

Application organization is not a "filesystem", even though you *can* organize applications inside a filesystem.

 

[yg17]

REmove the filesysystem from OSX and I guarantee that 95% will instantly switch to windows. Even Apple has been forced to add a sort of file system to iOS when they added folders so that users could group their apps.

Yeah, I want no part of an OS that doesn't have a user manageable file system. The thought of hiding that from the user is a joke in my opinion. My files, I want to manage them.

If you make it idiot proof by hiding the file system, they'll just build a better idiot.

 

[digger1985]

Forget the Ribbon vs. no ribbon and other UI-centric debates. For me, Microsoft is missing the whole point when they say that Windows Explorer is probably the most used application on Windows.

Why, after almost 30 years of GUI-based computers do end users still have to deal with a file system?

I am in full support of the iOS and hopefully future Mac OS view that applications--not users--should manage their data.

I've had this debate many times with Windows users that have switched to the Mac and their use of iPhoto. I've posted about this here before. Basically, I've found that Windows users initially hate iPhoto and it's automatic and "hidden" storage of photos. They are so used to manually creating huge nested hierarchies of folders to store their photos. Typically, they would have photos stored all over their system.

It was hard for these folks to drop the old habits and trust the computer and the app (iPhoto) to manage the data for them. Let iPhoto be *the Finder* for photos. There are very few reasons to need to go to the file system to do something with a photo on a Mac (upload to non-supported site like Craigslist or ebay).

The point is...end users should not need to muck around with the files on their system. This stuff is data. It should be presented to users in the context that it is used, which is 99% of the time, within an App.

Microsoft also states their goal with Win 8 is to reimagine Windows. Again, they are missing the whole point. The goal should be to reimagine computing and productivity and getting stuff done.

Forget MS, the question you should be asking is WHY hasn't APPLE done this yet? At least with MS you have an excuse cos they don't "innovate", but what's stopping Apple?

Why does OS X STILL have a filesystem? Apple was meant to be the innovator, thinking differently, the revolutionist so what are they still doing with that god aweful filesystem that even MS is still using.

 

[AppleScruff1]

No. Stuff like that isn't for MS. Far too much risk. Just rehash and repackage the same thing and attempt to convince users that the same old PC paradigm is as healthy as ever.

http://www.appleinsider.com/article...at_street_but_windows_revenue_declines_2.html

Which might not be so easy to do.

MS has spent the better part of the last 5-7 years *reacting* to Apple and other rivals. There is no proactivity and initiative at MS. At least no appreciable level of it. Look at what's come out of MS over the last 5-7 years. Then compare to what Apple has done. It's like night and day.

But MS' real competition is Google. And Google has already shown that although they might be rather sneaky, they are also incredibly disruptive, and certainly not afraid to take risks and take them early enough to make a real impact on the market.

MS owns the business world and that's not going to change in the next several years. MS also owns the consumer market for pcs. Apple currently owns the mobile market. Your talk is rather foolish considering the numbers of users involved. But we all know numbers are irrelevant to you, unless of course it is pro Apple.

 

[*LTD*]

MS owns the business world

So what? It doesn't put great gear in your pocket. It doesn't create lineups for blocks. It doesn't revitalize consumer tech markets.

I don't see MS exchange or MS Windows server or the MS tools the average IT department uses do anything at all for MS' performance in the *real* brand-building, progressive area of tech: the consumer sphere.

In fact, it has done nothing but cloud and confuse MS' performance in other areas. No focus.

and that's not going to change in the next several years.

Of course it won't. Has it ever? That's why MS is where they are now in the consumer sector: dazed and confused. Which is perfectly fine if you're a big fan of servers and corporate networking. Forgive me if that doesn't exactly get my blood churning. LOL

MS also owns the consumer market for pcs.

We all know why and how that happened. Universally licensed OS. Dells, Acers, and of course, HP. Lots of junk. No control over the OS. how is this impressive? it isn't. Flooding the market with an OS that any box-maker can install. Horizontal business models aren't impressive. They're just easy.

And Macs remain the gold standard of the computing industry. Entry fee is $1000. Bargain-bin vs. Premium user experience and design.

Apple currently owns the mobile market.

With a closed, unlicensed OS. A walled garden. There are no easy sales. It's all demand-driven. THAT is the key here. With a paltry 2 smartphones, Apple owns nearly 30% of the smartphone market. It takes an ocean of phones at all price points for the competition to even compete in share, and of course, they are nowhere in the profit department in comparison to Apple.

And we're seeing just how good iOS is. Why hasn't Google been able to translate their majority share in the smartphone market over to tablets? We're seeing the limits and folly of the horizontal model. It requires speed and the broadest licensing possible. THAT'S ALL. Meanwhile there are no contracts in the tablet space. The real measure of worth and success lies in the tablet space. Apple owns the mobile space not because they whore out their OS to everyone, but because it is driven by Apple quality - Apple's attention to detail, and the strength of the mobile ecosystem they built.

You can command majority share because you license out your OS to everyone and their dog, anyone who can slam together a box and to hell with the user experience, OR . . . you can give a damn about your product, have enough respect for it to maintain a closed licensing model, perfect the basics, pay attention to details, and all on your own create the standard by which all others a compared. You can just flood the market with a lot of junk, or you can actually hit all the measurements that actually matter.

Your talk is rather foolish considering the numbers of users involved. But we all know numbers are irrelevant to you, unless of course it is pro Apple.

Nunmbers are all irrelevant. All of them. Until we understand what exactly is behind them. Why they are what they are. Then they have meaning. They have context. They find their place in reality.

Sales figures - the rhyme and reason for them, are an entirely different beast when it comes to MS, and likewise, an entirely different beast when it comes to Apple. They aren't the same company, nor are their strategies the same.

To examine sales figures divorced from their strategic and market context is a waste of time and *will* lead you to false conclusions.

Apple gear sells for one set of reasons. MS for another.

Not all sales figures are created equal. Understand what's behind them.

 

[AppleScruff1]

So what? It doesn't put great gear in your pocket. It doesn't create lineups for blocks. It doesn't revitalize consumer tech markets.

I don't see MS exchange or MS Windows server or the MS tools the average IT department uses do anything at all for MS' performance in the *real* brand-building, progressive area of tech: the consumer sphere.

In fact, it has done nothing but cloud and confuse MS' performance in other areas. No focus.


Of course it won't. Has it ever? That's why MS is where they are now in the consumer sector: dazed and confused. Which is perfectly fine if you're a big fan of servers and corporate networking. Forgive me if that doesn't exactly get my blood churning. LOL


We all know why and how that happened. Universally licensed OS. Dells, Acers, and of course, HP. Lots of junk. No control over the OS. how is this impressive? it isn't. Flooding the market with an OS that any box-maker can install. Horizontal business models aren't impressive. They're just easy.

And Macs remain the gold standard of the computing industry. Entry fee is $1000. Bargain-bin vs. Premium user experience and design.


With a closed, unlicensed OS. A walled garden. There are no easy sales. It's all demand-driven. THAT is the key here. With a paltry 2 smartphones, Apple owns nearly 30% of the smartphone market. It takes an ocean of phones at all price points for the competition to even compete in share, and of course, they are nowhere in the profit department in comparison to Apple.

You can command majority share because you license out your OS to everyone and their dog, anyone who can slam together a box and to hell with the user experience, OR . . . you can give a damn about your product, have enough respect for it to maintain a closed licensing model, perfect the basics, pay attention to details, and all on your own create the standard by which all others a compared. You can just flood the market with a lot of junk, or you can actually hit all the measurements that actually matter.


Nunmbers are all irrelevant. All of them. Until we understand what exactly is behind them. Why they are what they are. Then they have meaning. They have context. They find their place in reality.

Sales figures - the rhyme and reason for them, are an entirely different beast when it comes to MS, and likewise, an entirely different beast when it comes to Apple. They aren't the same company, nor are their strategies the same.

To examine sales figures divorced from their strategic and market context is a waste of time and *will* lead you to false conclusions.

Apple gear sells for one set of reasons. MS for another.

Not all sales figures are created equal. Understand what's behind them.

ROFLMAO!! I thought perhaps you were capable of a reasonable discussion.