Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Zuning it again? MS defends Windows 8 Metro Start Screen amid complaints and concerns
- Thread starter *LTD*
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I remember reading some blog post about it - unfortunately I can't seem to find anything on the internet right now. Anyways, even I'm concerned about the Metro UI. F.e., I really use the jump-lists on Windows 7 a lot for application launching. Will Windows 8 have that on the "live tile", or impede me?
I expect/have heard that Win8 Live Tiles have the ability to jump you into places like Jump Lists do (Much like WP7.5 Live Tiles can jump you to parts of apps like a certain recipe). The difference is it uses another Live Tile to do so versus a list off an icon.
Uses another live tile? That's my point - my current UX with Windows 7 jump-lists is excellent. It's very subtlety there and not in my face with animations or anything. Now they're making it more difficult.
Not so much more difficult IMO, but its another tile. There's still the Windows desktop though which will have jump lists though. We'll have to wait and see how everything is set up in Beta though. I never use jump lists though so I havent looked into it much.
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/13543321/
I'm not sure what Walter Isaacson told you, but that's what happened.
It all started here:
http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/Apple_v._San_Francisco_Canyon
http://www.nytimes.com/1995/03/03/business/court-order-on-microsoft.html
http://tidbits.com/article/1625
Last edited:
It wasn't what "Walter told me", He simply wrote down what Steve Jobs told him on this part.
Then I'm sure it's occurred to you by now, especially in light of the foregoing, that some material is going to be neatly sanitized and packaged for public consumption.
MS "saved" apple not because apple had them over a barrel. To believe that idea requires such logical gymnastics that it pushes the bounds of reality.
It sucks when the media, Jobs and Gates and their little friendly play-acting had you believing a certain version of events for well over a decade, only to realize that it was never really true at all.
No conspiracy at all. It's just that a lot of the details of the settlement, especially the events leading up to it, weren't publicized. And most of the details didn't put the sort of spin on Jobs and Gates' public relationship that they would have liked. It wouldn't do to get into the dirty details when Apple and MS wanted to publicize their newfound partnership.
Apple had them so hard that Steve had to complement IE and make it the default browser on Mac OS at his own keynotes?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=PEHNrqPkefI#t=1699s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJqSaQj8iX4
Sounds like a weak man if so.
Settlement deals are often a set of compromises, acceptable, but not always comfortable.
I may love Apple Inc, but I am also a BIG Microsoft fan (IMPOSSIBLE RIGHT!? 
), and I think the whole Metro design language is BEAUTIFUL. First on Windows Phone 7, then the Zune HD, then the 360, and now Windows. It's MILES ahead in terms of design than OS X/iOS is.
Also, people are forgetting, if you want access to the Windows shell, you click/tap desktop, and TA-DA! You're on good old familiar Windows. What Microsoft should do is on the first log on (OEM or Store-bought), give the user the choice to use either the Windows 8 Start or the classic Windows Shell as their default choice, and rework the Windows Shell start menu to be more familiar.
), and I think the whole Metro design language is BEAUTIFUL. First on Windows Phone 7, then the Zune HD, then the 360, and now Windows. It's MILES ahead in terms of design than OS X/iOS is. Also, people are forgetting, if you want access to the Windows shell, you click/tap desktop, and TA-DA! You're on good old familiar Windows. What Microsoft should do is on the first log on (OEM or Store-bought), give the user the choice to use either the Windows 8 Start or the classic Windows Shell as their default choice, and rework the Windows Shell start menu to be more familiar.
To what advantage? If apple had MS over a barrel why did only get what amounted to pocket change from Microsoft? It serves no one's purpose to get such a small amount (relatively speaking) especially since apple was so close to insolvency at that point or do you believe that was a myth or a fabrication to fool its competitors?
Last edited:
And how is it that you seem to have all this information? I'm fairly certain you weren't involved in the deal, so you're idea of what happened is probably (or rather certainly) no better than anyone else's.
If you actually bother to do a little research instead of believing the official story all the time, you'll find out.
Ask anyone about MS "saving" Apple and they'll go on and on. Ask them about who San Francisco Canyon Co. is, and you'll likely get a blank stare.
I've reproduced a lot of what went on in earlier posts. Have a look for yourself.
It's true that the purchase of QDos for $50K laid the groundwork for Microsoft. But don't forget the license-agreement Microsoft got with IBM because Bill Gate's mom worked there combined with the stupidity of the IBM execs(all the money is in hardware). Of course now Apple has proved that the real money is in a superior integration of hardware & software. But Microsoft to this day continues to rake in ungodly amounts of profit for inferior software. That is Bill Gate's legacy - inflicting terrible UX on billions.
I've read your links. They don't prove what you're trying to say at all. It just confirms what Steve said in the Keynote, which went something like "We actually contacted Microsoft over some patent disputes to begin with..."
After that, instead of years of lawsuits which, on the unlikely chance Apple survived to see the end of them, I doubt Apple would get $150m; they opted for a quick settlement which suited Apple better as they badly needed investment.
Apple did not have M$ over the barrel over a bit of copied code. Apple was desperate and even agreed to cross-licence patents with Microsoft for some time in the future they were that desperate.
Then clearly you don't know how lawsuits or corporations work. Even if Apple threatened to sue, Apple was on the verge of bankruptcy at the time. Microsoft could have simply strung out the lawsuit to the point that they were forced to go bankrupt thus killing the company. Simple enough...
I'm sure there were some significant deals made before the check was cut, it would only make sense, but to think that the bailout was because Apple had them "over the barrel" is laughable.