Microsoft CEO sets benchmark as "Apple experience"

[Partial]

Microsoft chief executive Steve Ballmer on Wednesday issued a company-wide memo outlining his battle plan for the new fiscal year in which he singled out the Apple experience as a benchmark for future success.

"In the competition between PCs and Macs, we outsell Apple 30-to-1. But there is no doubt that Apple is thriving," Ballmer wrote in the email, a copy of which was obtained by the Wall Street Journal. "Why? Because they are good at providing an experience that is narrow but complete, while our commitment to choice often comes with some compromises to the end-to-end experience."

Going forward, Ballmer said Microsoft will be changing the way it works with hardware vendors to mimic the experience offered by the Mac maker in which there will be "absolutely no compromises." His plan calls for a similar approach in the mobile phone arena, where he hopes the company can create "great end-to-end experiences" akin to that afforded by Apple's closed ecosystem, where it maintains tight control of nearly every aspect of a product's design.

Ballmer's memo and his comments about the mobile phone industry arrive amid reports that the Redmond-based software giant this week held its first concrete meeting to begin mapping out a rival to the iPhone. A report published by jkOnTheRun suggests such a device would be based around the company's struggling Zune media player, but run a variant of Windows Mobile 7 with heavy tie-ins to Windows Live Services.

Still, Ballmer acknowledged in his memo that Windows and the public's perception of Vista remains Microsoft's No. 1 priority. He said the recent release of Windows Vista SP1 and teamwork with PC manufacturers have largely addressed the device and application compatibility issues that plagued the operating system in its early going.

"Now it’s time to tell our story," he said. "In the weeks ahead, we’ll launch a campaign to address any lingering doubts our customers may have about Windows Vista. And later this year, you’ll see a more comprehensive effort to redefine the meaning and value of Windows for our customers."











Good. Microsoft could learn many a thing from Apple.

[BallHawk]

As could Apple learn some things from Microsoft.

[SkinBasket]

I'm sure they are interested in learning how to train trendy youth into paying twice as much as they need to for any given technology.

[Partial]

As could Apple learn some things from Microsoft.

Such as???

I cannot think of one thing that Microsoft does better than Apple from a user or stock owner perspective.

[Partial]

I'm sure they are interested in learning how to train trendy youth into paying twice as much as they need to for any given technology.

tee hee. Way to comment and ignore that Microsoft has even accepted that OS X and the Apple Experience is FAR superior than anything Microsoft has put out.

[BallHawk]

As could Apple learn some things from Microsoft.

Such as???

I cannot think of one thing that Microsoft does better than Apple from a user or stock owner perspective.

How about having complete control of the market?

[Freak Out]

I'm sure they are interested in learning how to train trendy youth into paying twice as much as they need to for any given technology.

tee hee. Way to comment and ignore that Microsoft has even accepted that OS X and the Apple Experience is FAR superior than anything Microsoft has put out.

Far superior...? ha ha ha....that's just downright funny Partial. Stop being such a total fanboy and look at the reality of the situation. They both have some very good products and some not so good products. The only reason Apple is alive today is becasue of the ipod and the fact that they got smart and copied Microsquish and started supporting intel hardware. Flattery is smart business.

I remember the days when Gates and friends kept Apple afloat because he knows that competition and innovation are good for the business.

[Partial]

As could Apple learn some things from Microsoft.

Such as???

I cannot think of one thing that Microsoft does better than Apple from a user or stock owner perspective.

How about having complete control of the market?

Complete control of the market but a ton of unhappy consumers?!? No thanks..

Apple makes money hand over fist and probably is pretty close to as valuable (I have no interest in verifying this though, just a hunch, so don't bother wiki-ing it Ty).

Clearly, Microsoft is starting to see that the open system is ultimately going to lead to their demise as the user experience can never be as tight, and with the open system eventually open source will catch up with it (its pretty close already).

[Partial]

I'm sure they are interested in learning how to train trendy youth into paying twice as much as they need to for any given technology.

tee hee. Way to comment and ignore that Microsoft has even accepted that OS X and the Apple Experience is FAR superior than anything Microsoft has put out.

Far superior...? ha ha ha....that's just downright funny Partial. Stop being such a total fanboy and look at the reality of the situation. They both have some very good products and some not so good products. The only reason Apple is alive today is becasue of the ipod and the fact that they got smart and copied Microsquish and started supporting intel hardware. Flattery is smart business.

I remember the days when Gates and friends kept Apple afloat because he knows that competition and innovation are good for the business.

Copied microsoft?!?

PowerPC chips were superior chips when IBM was putting money into them.

Then, the video game market exploded and IBM stopped trying to get a G5 into a laptop. Apple switched to Intel at this point and for that reason alone.

Apple had some rough years, no doubt, but since Steve came back they have grown at a rapid rate while pumping out really high quality products.

See the post on the closed system. Microsoft is going to be competing with open source where as Apple is not. Cost trimming and linux improvement will someday lead to linux workstations for your average office worker.

[BallHawk]

You can't argue that Apple is superior to Microsoft. The statistics just don't work.

You can say "I believe X Product is greater than Microsoft's Y Product. But as a whole, Microsoft is superior. In users, revenue, popularity, etc.

As Freak Out said, Apple was saved by the iPod. If it wasn't for that they'd be crippled, if not already defunct.

[Partial]

You can't argue that Apple is superior to Microsoft. The statistics just don't work.

You can say "I believe X Product is greater than Microsoft's Y Product. But as a whole, Microsoft is superior. In users, revenue, popularity, etc.

As Freak Out said, Apple was saved by the iPod. If it wasn't for that they'd be crippled, if not already defunct.

No one said they were except Steve Ballmer saying they need to move towards an Apple like experience.

Apple was saved by Steve Jobs. Furthermore, why does that matter? It's an excellent example of quality product from a booming company. They are growing extremely fast.

[Freak Out]

I'm sure they are interested in learning how to train trendy youth into paying twice as much as they need to for any given technology.

tee hee. Way to comment and ignore that Microsoft has even accepted that OS X and the Apple Experience is FAR superior than anything Microsoft has put out.

Far superior...? ha ha ha....that's just downright funny Partial. Stop being such a total fanboy and look at the reality of the situation. They both have some very good products and some not so good products. The only reason Apple is alive today is becasue of the ipod and the fact that they got smart and copied Microsquish and started supporting intel hardware. Flattery is smart business.

I remember the days when Gates and friends kept Apple afloat because he knows that competition and innovation are good for the business.

Copied microsoft?!?

PowerPC chips were superior chips when IBM was putting money into them.

Then, the video game market exploded and IBM stopped trying to get a G5 into a laptop. Apple switched to Intel at this point and for that reason alone.

Apple had some rough years, no doubt, but since Steve came back they have grown at a rapid rate while pumping out really high quality products.

See the post on the closed system. Microsoft is going to be competing with open source where as Apple is not. Cost trimming and linux improvement will someday lead to linux workstations for your average office worker.

Apple is not going to be competing with open source? How so?

[BallHawk]

They are growing extremely fast.

In the business world? No. They still can't manage a 10% market share.

In the bedrooms of spoiled teenagers across the US? Yes. Apple has managed to make Macs hip, trendy, and cool. But they aren't going to win the battle against Microsoft in the bedrooms of teenagers.

[3irty1]

Microsoft needs to start competing with Windows XP not with Apple in the OS market. Stop trying to turn Windows into a toy and release something that gives existing Windows users a reason to upgrade.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

As could Apple learn some things from Microsoft.

Such as???

I cannot think of one thing that Microsoft does better than Apple from a user or stock owner perspective.

How about outselling MS 30 to 1? Might be a nice change.

Or not being narrow and complete..ie, niche.

[Partial]

I'm sure they are interested in learning how to train trendy youth into paying twice as much as they need to for any given technology.

tee hee. Way to comment and ignore that Microsoft has even accepted that OS X and the Apple Experience is FAR superior than anything Microsoft has put out.

Far superior...? ha ha ha....that's just downright funny Partial. Stop being such a total fanboy and look at the reality of the situation. They both have some very good products and some not so good products. The only reason Apple is alive today is becasue of the ipod and the fact that they got smart and copied Microsquish and started supporting intel hardware. Flattery is smart business.

I remember the days when Gates and friends kept Apple afloat because he knows that competition and innovation are good for the business.

Copied microsoft?!?

PowerPC chips were superior chips when IBM was putting money into them.

Then, the video game market exploded and IBM stopped trying to get a G5 into a laptop. Apple switched to Intel at this point and for that reason alone.

Apple had some rough years, no doubt, but since Steve came back they have grown at a rapid rate while pumping out really high quality products.

See the post on the closed system. Microsoft is going to be competing with open source where as Apple is not. Cost trimming and linux improvement will someday lead to linux workstations for your average office worker.

Apple is not going to be competing with open source? How so?

Closed system. If you want Apple hardware or software legally and don't want to jump through hoops, you're buying a 25% profit machine from Apple.

[Partial]

They are growing extremely fast.

In the business world? No. They still can't manage a 10% market share.

In the bedrooms of spoiled teenagers across the US? Yes. Apple has managed to make Macs hip, trendy, and cool. But they aren't going to win the battle against Microsoft in the bedrooms of teenagers.

They are going EXTREMELY fast. What crack are you smoking? They're the fastest growing pc manufacturer and they are now #3. Apple has over 20 billion dollars cash on hand. How many other companies can claim that? It's just the beginning for Apple, too.

They're not interested in that battle. You people just don't get it. If they were interested in selling a billion systems like Microsoft and having to support a million different configurations, they'd sell the OS stand alone at a significantly decreased markup.

Apple is intersted in selling machines at a steady growth rate at 25% profit instead of being like dell and having a 1-2% profit.

[Partial]

As could Apple learn some things from Microsoft.

Such as???

I cannot think of one thing that Microsoft does better than Apple from a user or stock owner perspective.

How about outselling MS 30 to 1? Might be a nice change.

Or not being narrow and complete..ie, niche.

See above. Apple could sell the OS stand alone or license it to Dell and others and they'd catch up with Microsoft in a matter of years. They're not interested in doing that, though.

Here's a good article for little dog BH.

In the past year, Apple stock has been +115%, vs Microsoft +7%. Over the last five years, Apple stock has been +2270%, vs Microsoft +21%. And in the last ten years, Apple stock has been +4314%, vs Microsoft +89%. Those extraordinary statistics emerged during the week as the blogger community discussed the relative merits of money invested in Apple versus the same amount invested in Microsoft.

Microsoft has 80,000 employees, +95% market share, and competes in businesses outside of Apple, which only has 18,000 employees and ~3% worldwide market share.

However, Apple is bringing in more than a third of Microsoft's revenues and making more than a quarter of Microsoft's profits, and is selling new Macs - which eat up direct sales of Windows PCs - four times faster than the industry.

All in all things are looking good for Steve Jobs.

It's from Time. Oct. 29, 2007 05:00 AM

[BallHawk]

If Apple isn't intersted in the battle they will never win the battle. And if they never win the battle they'll never be the power that Microsoft is, or even close to it.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Microsoft has been stealing good ideas from Apple since the dawn of the PC. Snore.

[3irty1]

See the post on the closed system. Microsoft is going to be competing with open source where as Apple is not. Cost trimming and linux improvement will someday lead to linux workstations for your average office worker.

This I don't buy. Linux workstations would be cheap, secure, and make a ton of sense for businesses that have enough IT to do self support on free software but It's a long shot that many corporations could make a huge shift like this. Not enough critical commercial software is cross platform. Even in the cases where all productivity software is usable under linux, most corporations are dependent on Outlook for much more than email. Linux is likely to always be more trouble than its worth. American business still runs quarter to quarter.

[SkinBasket]

Cost trimming and linux improvement will someday lead to linux workstations for your average office worker.

That's one of the dumbest thoughts you've had in some time. Not in theory, but in practicality. But really dumb regardless.

[Partial]

See the post on the closed system. Microsoft is going to be competing with open source where as Apple is not. Cost trimming and linux improvement will someday lead to linux workstations for your average office worker.

This I don't buy. Linux workstations would be cheap, secure, and make a ton of sense for businesses that have enough IT to do self support on free software but It's a long shot that many corporations could make a huge shift like this. Not enough critical commercial software is cross platform. Even in the cases where all productivity software is usable under linux, most corporations are dependent on Outlook for much more than email. Linux is likely to always be more trouble than its worth. American business still runs quarter to quarter.

In the future it will be. OO is pretty much completely compatible with Microsoft Office. Eclipse is linux native. There are plenty of email clients that do the same things as Outlook or Lotus. Give it about 10 years.

[Partial]

Cost trimming and linux improvement will someday lead to linux workstations for your average office worker.

That's one of the dumbest thoughts you've had in some time. Not in theory, but in practicality. But really dumb regardless.

Why? Care to actually include some input on why its dumb?!? Have you actually used a recent linux distro? Ubuntu is far superior to Windows currently in security, ease of use, ease of installation, and ease of set-up for drivers, software, etc.

[Partial]

If Apple isn't intersted in the battle they will never win the battle. And if they never win the battle they'll never be the power that Microsoft is, or even close to it.

THEY DON'T WANT TO BE. YOU CANNOT BE THAT BIG AND HAVE GOOD QUALITY. THAT IS THE POINT. THEY MAKE OODLES AND OODLES OF CASH.

[Zool]

Good thing you're not a fanboy.

[3irty1]

See the post on the closed system. Microsoft is going to be competing with open source where as Apple is not. Cost trimming and linux improvement will someday lead to linux workstations for your average office worker.

This I don't buy. Linux workstations would be cheap, secure, and make a ton of sense for businesses that have enough IT to do self support on free software but It's a long shot that many corporations could make a huge shift like this. Not enough critical commercial software is cross platform. Even in the cases where all productivity software is usable under linux, most corporations are dependent on Outlook for much more than email. Linux is likely to always be more trouble than its worth. American business still runs quarter to quarter.

In the future it will be. OO is pretty much completely compatible with Microsoft Office. Eclipse is linux native. There are plenty of email clients that do the same things as Outlook or Lotus. Give it about 10 years.

Well anything can happen in 10 years. I think the strongest chance of this coming true is in cross platform software not linux programs to replace other programs. A company that already chooses to use software like eclipse, pro/e, Eagle, etc on Windows will be the ones that can potentially switch. Lotus notes is already cross platform too. Lotus notes is also a complete piece of shit. We use it at work and as much as we'd love to switch to Outlook we just can't because of all the collaborative software and custom shit that's been developed over the years. Its way more than an email client. To my knowledge there is nothing that can do what Outlook can do as well as Outlook can do it.

[BallHawk]

If Apple isn't intersted in the battle they will never win the battle. And if they never win the battle they'll never be the power that Microsoft is, or even close to it.

THEY DON'T WANT TO BE. YOU CANNOT BE THAT BIG AND HAVE GOOD QUALITY. THAT IS THE POINT. THEY MAKE OODLES AND OODLES OF CASH.

So Apple cares more about making good products than making more money?

Yeah. Sure.

[bobblehead]

You guys crack me up. They are different companies with different mission statements. They aren't really competing. I like what apple is doing. They have a vision of the future and are working towards it....mainstream. Microsoft simply defines the present and dominates it. Nothing wrong with either model.

[3irty1]

You guys crack me up. They are different companies with different mission statements. They aren't really competing. I like what apple is doing. They have a vision of the future and are working towards it....mainstream. Microsoft simply defines the present and dominates it. Nothing wrong with either model.

Have you not seen the anti Windows "I'm a Mac. I'm a PC." commercials? Pretty sure Apple is doing their best to compete with Microsoft.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

They are growing extremely fast.

In the business world? No. They still can't manage a 10% market share.

In the bedrooms of spoiled teenagers across the US? Yes. Apple has managed to make Macs hip, trendy, and cool. But they aren't going to win the battle against Microsoft in the bedrooms of teenagers.

They are going EXTREMELY fast. What crack are you smoking? They're the fastest growing pc manufacturer and they are now #3. Apple has over 20 billion dollars cash on hand. How many other companies can claim that? It's just the beginning for Apple, too.

They're not interested in that battle. You people just don't get it. If they were interested in selling a billion systems like Microsoft and having to support a million different configurations, they'd sell the OS stand alone at a significantly decreased markup.

Apple is intersted in selling machines at a steady growth rate at 25% profit instead of being like dell and having a 1-2% profit.

Of course they are the fastest growing..that is much easier to do when you are at the bottom.

Cash Reserves: I don't know, but MS has it and a year ago they had 40 billion. MS makes around 17 billion in profit every year. MS had 60 billion in the late 90s, moron...and it was UNWIELDY (you are either too stupid or uninformed to remember that the SEC was after them for hoarding their money)..they gave one time dividend payout of $32 Billion to its shareholders. LOL

And, you fucking dope..cash reserves arent' necessarily a good thing.

Yep, i bet you would rather have your 20 billion in a passbook savings account rather than acquiring new companies or investing it. :oops:

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Microsoft has been stealing good ideas from Apple since the dawn of the PC. Snore.

Um, Apple and MS stole from Xerox Parc.

[Charles Woodson]

If Apple isn't intersted in the battle they will never win the battle. And if they never win the battle they'll never be the power that Microsoft is, or even close to it.

THEY DON'T WANT TO BE. YOU CANNOT BE THAT BIG AND HAVE GOOD QUALITY. THAT IS THE POINT. THEY MAKE OODLES AND OODLES OF CASH.

Release Steve Jobs, cock from your mouth and take a deep breath before you post here again.

This oodles and oodles of cash doesnt really matter if A. you cant do much with it. or B because it only had one third of what microsoft earned

[Partial]

See the post on the closed system. Microsoft is going to be competing with open source where as Apple is not. Cost trimming and linux improvement will someday lead to linux workstations for your average office worker.

This I don't buy. Linux workstations would be cheap, secure, and make a ton of sense for businesses that have enough IT to do self support on free software but It's a long shot that many corporations could make a huge shift like this. Not enough critical commercial software is cross platform. Even in the cases where all productivity software is usable under linux, most corporations are dependent on Outlook for much more than email. Linux is likely to always be more trouble than its worth. American business still runs quarter to quarter.

In the future it will be. OO is pretty much completely compatible with Microsoft Office. Eclipse is linux native. There are plenty of email clients that do the same things as Outlook or Lotus. Give it about 10 years.

Well anything can happen in 10 years. I think the strongest chance of this coming true is in cross platform software not linux programs to replace other programs. A company that already chooses to use software like eclipse, pro/e, Eagle, etc on Windows will be the ones that can potentially switch. Lotus notes is already cross platform too. Lotus notes is also a complete piece of shit. We use it at work and as much as we'd love to switch to Outlook we just can't because of all the collaborative software and custom shit that's been developed over the years. Its way more than an email client. To my knowledge there is nothing that can do what Outlook can do as well as Outlook can do it.

Oh believe me I know my company is hooked on Lotus as well. It sucks balls because I had to make an HTML email for our project that the CEO wants to work in Notes and it is impossible to make anything not look like ass.

We're switching September 1st to Outlook 2007, which is retarded because it has worse HTML support than Outlook 2004. Dumb dumb dumb.

Dude, Outlook is a piece of shit too. I wish more companies would use Google's Corporate suite, as it'd be cheaper than Outlook, and has much better calendars, mailing, document management, etc.

But, imo Thunderbird out "Outlooks" Outlook 2007 by a significant margin.

The big linux apps are cross platform.

[Partial]

If Apple isn't intersted in the battle they will never win the battle. And if they never win the battle they'll never be the power that Microsoft is, or even close to it.

THEY DON'T WANT TO BE. YOU CANNOT BE THAT BIG AND HAVE GOOD QUALITY. THAT IS THE POINT. THEY MAKE OODLES AND OODLES OF CASH.

So Apple cares more about making good products than making more money?

Yeah. Sure.

For having 3% market share yet making 25% of the profit of MS, that is pretty damn good. For one, growing too fast can be detrimental to business, profits, quality control, etc. Secondly, if they wanted to be the leader they'd sell their stuff cheaper. From Steve's mouth they are a hardware company first, and a software provider second. That fact alone shows that they're not in competition with Microsoft at all.

Based on stock growth and cash on hand, Apple has virtually nothing to worry about anytime soon. They're doing just fine and growing quite rapidly.

Do you think BWM or Maserati are competing with GM?!?!?

[Partial]

They are growing extremely fast.

In the business world? No. They still can't manage a 10% market share.

In the bedrooms of spoiled teenagers across the US? Yes. Apple has managed to make Macs hip, trendy, and cool. But they aren't going to win the battle against Microsoft in the bedrooms of teenagers.

They are going EXTREMELY fast. What crack are you smoking? They're the fastest growing pc manufacturer and they are now #3. Apple has over 20 billion dollars cash on hand. How many other companies can claim that? It's just the beginning for Apple, too.

They're not interested in that battle. You people just don't get it. If they were interested in selling a billion systems like Microsoft and having to support a million different configurations, they'd sell the OS stand alone at a significantly decreased markup.

Apple is intersted in selling machines at a steady growth rate at 25% profit instead of being like dell and having a 1-2% profit.

Of course they are the fastest growing..that is much easier to do when you are at the bottom.

Cash Reserves: I don't know, but MS has it and a year ago they had 40 billion. MS makes around 17 billion in profit every year. MS had 60 billion in the late 90s, moron...and it was UNWIELDY (you are either too stupid or uninformed to remember that the SEC was after them for hoarding their money)..they gave one time dividend payout of $32 Billion to its shareholders. LOL

And, you fucking dope..cash reserves arent' necessarily a good thing.

Yep, i bet you would rather have your 20 billion in a passbook savings account rather than acquiring new companies or investing it. :oops:

Naturally TY comes in and doesn't contribute anything to the debate.

They are stocking up cash for something. Who knows what? I sure don't. But, I am quite glad that they can afford to have 20 bil stashed under Steve's bed :D

At the bottom? Aren't they number 3 now?!? Considering they make 25-30% profit on every machine they sell that is pretty damn good... They're worth more than Dell and I believe HP as well, though I don't know that for sure.

[Partial]

If Apple isn't intersted in the battle they will never win the battle. And if they never win the battle they'll never be the power that Microsoft is, or even close to it.

THEY DON'T WANT TO BE. YOU CANNOT BE THAT BIG AND HAVE GOOD QUALITY. THAT IS THE POINT. THEY MAKE OODLES AND OODLES OF CASH.

Release Steve Jobs, cock from your mouth and take a deep breath before you post here again.

This oodles and oodles of cash doesnt really matter if A. you cant do much with it. or B because it only had one third of what microsoft earned

Microsoft has about 40 bil on hand. Apple has probably 25 by now. That's quite a bit more than a third.

What is this contributing?!? Why bother? Read the thread. Apple isn't interested in competing with Microsoft.

[Charles Woodson]

If Apple isn't intersted in the battle they will never win the battle. And if they never win the battle they'll never be the power that Microsoft is, or even close to it.

THEY DON'T WANT TO BE. YOU CANNOT BE THAT BIG AND HAVE GOOD QUALITY. THAT IS THE POINT. THEY MAKE OODLES AND OODLES OF CASH.

Release Steve Jobs, cock from your mouth and take a deep breath before you post here again.

This oodles and oodles of cash doesnt really matter if A. you cant do much with it. or B because it only had one third of what microsoft earned

Microsoft has about 40 bil on hand. Apple has probably 25 by now. That's quite a bit more than a third.

What is this contributing?!? Why bother? Read the thread. Apple isn't interested in competing with Microsoft.

lol
apples revenue is 24 billion,
Microsoft's rev is 70 billion

[Partial]

If Apple isn't intersted in the battle they will never win the battle. And if they never win the battle they'll never be the power that Microsoft is, or even close to it.

THEY DON'T WANT TO BE. YOU CANNOT BE THAT BIG AND HAVE GOOD QUALITY. THAT IS THE POINT. THEY MAKE OODLES AND OODLES OF CASH.

Release Steve Jobs, cock from your mouth and take a deep breath before you post here again.

This oodles and oodles of cash doesnt really matter if A. you cant do much with it. or B because it only had one third of what microsoft earned

Microsoft has about 40 bil on hand. Apple has probably 25 by now. That's quite a bit more than a third.

What is this contributing?!? Why bother? Read the thread. Apple isn't interested in competing with Microsoft.

lol
apples revenue is 24 billion,
Microsoft's rev is 70 billion

Revenue != profit or value little dog. Again, what is the point of the comment? Who cares? Apple is a HARDWARE company. Microsoft is a SOFTWARE company. When as Microsoft ever sold a laptop or a desktop?!? Never.

In any case, the point is they want to close up their system so they have less support. That could potentially piss off a lot of manufacturers and gamers.

[Zool]

Apple is a HARDWARE company. Microsoft is a SOFTWARE company. When as Microsoft ever sold a laptop or a desktop?!? Never.

Yet its always Apple zealots that feel the need to start comparing the 2 companies. You pretty much stole this quote from me in one of our previous discussions.

[Partial]

Apple is a HARDWARE company. Microsoft is a SOFTWARE company. When as Microsoft ever sold a laptop or a desktop?!? Never.

Yet its always Apple zealots that feel the need to start comparing the 2 companies. You pretty much stole this quote from me in one of our previous discussions.

No, I did not. It's formerly Apple Computer Inc. and Steve has said numerous times if they were a software company they'd license OS X.

When did I compare the two? Quite to the contrary, I've noted how Microsoft feels they need to close the system up a bit and support less hardware in order to give the end user the experience they deserve.

[Zool]

Where did I say that you compared the 2? I said you stole the quote from me. Unless you identify as an Apple zealot, which I've been calling you for 2 years and you deny.

[Partial]

Where did I say that you compared the 2? I said you stole the quote from me. Unless you identify as an Apple zealot, which I've been calling you for 2 years and you deny.

Bah. I don't have a preference. Honestly. Mac has a better interface but is too overpriced for me.

[digitaldean]

i've been a Mac-"zealot" since the Mac SE in the 1980s.

I don't see Apple toppling MS anytime soon, because MS is so entrenched. But there has to be a reason why market share is increasing so much with Apple vs. Dell and others.

The Mac has a cleaner interface and is more secure than Windows. As more people buy Macs, hackers will gravitate toward that and Apple users will have to plan accordingly.

Apple has been rewarded by their leadership in a variety of areas like desktop publishing, iPods in the digital music field and the iPhone (present MobileMe and 3G issues not withstanding.)

If MS cleans up their OS, they will be fine. If not, they'll lose more market share to Apple.

The only thing I do dislike in the mainstream media is when Apple gets to #3 in market share and record profits, their stock goes down. That just baffles me.

Apple has to continue to be consumer focused and forward thinking like they have in the past. If they stick to that, they'll succeed.

[Zool]

Thats the most straight forward well thought out zealot answer I've ever heard. You may not use the zealot tag anymore.

[MJZiggy]

DD, I've used both for graphic work and frankly just can't tell the difference...

[Partial]

DD, I've used both for graphic work and frankly just can't tell the difference...

Yeah I personally don't understand this argument anymore either. Back in the hay day, the PowerPC chips ran Photoshop, rendering software, etc more effectively due to the chips floating point calculation advantage (I believe).

Now that everything is x86 (Intel or AMD), their isn't an architecture difference.

One thing I guess is that Apple has it's own series of high end professional tools, but I don't know how frequently they are used.

[3irty1]

See the post on the closed system. Microsoft is going to be competing with open source where as Apple is not. Cost trimming and linux improvement will someday lead to linux workstations for your average office worker.

This I don't buy. Linux workstations would be cheap, secure, and make a ton of sense for businesses that have enough IT to do self support on free software but It's a long shot that many corporations could make a huge shift like this. Not enough critical commercial software is cross platform. Even in the cases where all productivity software is usable under linux, most corporations are dependent on Outlook for much more than email. Linux is likely to always be more trouble than its worth. American business still runs quarter to quarter.

In the future it will be. OO is pretty much completely compatible with Microsoft Office. Eclipse is linux native. There are plenty of email clients that do the same things as Outlook or Lotus. Give it about 10 years.

Well anything can happen in 10 years. I think the strongest chance of this coming true is in cross platform software not linux programs to replace other programs. A company that already chooses to use software like eclipse, pro/e, Eagle, etc on Windows will be the ones that can potentially switch. Lotus notes is already cross platform too. Lotus notes is also a complete piece of shit. We use it at work and as much as we'd love to switch to Outlook we just can't because of all the collaborative software and custom shit that's been developed over the years. Its way more than an email client. To my knowledge there is nothing that can do what Outlook can do as well as Outlook can do it.

Oh believe me I know my company is hooked on Lotus as well. It sucks balls because I had to make an HTML email for our project that the CEO wants to work in Notes and it is impossible to make anything not look like ass.

We're switching September 1st to Outlook 2007, which is retarded because it has worse HTML support than Outlook 2004. Dumb dumb dumb.

Dude, Outlook is a piece of shit too. I wish more companies would use Google's Corporate suite, as it'd be cheaper than Outlook, and has much better calendars, mailing, document management, etc.

But, imo Thunderbird out "Outlooks" Outlook 2007 by a significant margin.

The big linux apps are cross platform.

Outlook is practically free since it comes with Office. Thunderbird is impressive for what it is but can't be compared to the collaborative capabilities of Outlook. After working with Outlook and exchange, Lotus and Domino, or any other groupware for that matter comes up way way short.

I have no idea what you are talking about with Outlook 2007. I'm pretty sure it can handle a simple HTML email. I've been very happy with the updates to Outlook and all of Office 2007.

What do you mean by all the big Linux apps are cross platform?

[Partial]

Outlook 2007 has far worse support for HTML emails. They switched rendering engines to something more along the lines of IE5/6 instead of the vastly improved almost-standard-friendly IE7.

I'm pretty sure Thunderbird can schedule meetings on calendars, allow you to view others calendars, etc. I don't know for sure because I've never used it in a corporate environment. But, I am confident there is something available because like firefox it has a million add-ons.

[3irty1]

Outlook 2007 has far worse support for HTML emails. They switched rendering engines to something more along the lines of IE5/6 instead of the vastly improved almost-standard-friendly IE7.

I'm pretty sure Thunderbird can schedule meetings on calendars, allow you to view others calendars, etc. I don't know for sure because I've never used it in a corporate environment. But, I am confident there is something available because like firefox it has a million add-ons.

You must be doing some pretty intense HTML if you can't get it to look right.

[Partial]

Outlook 2007 has far worse support for HTML emails. They switched rendering engines to something more along the lines of IE5/6 instead of the vastly improved almost-standard-friendly IE7.

I'm pretty sure Thunderbird can schedule meetings on calendars, allow you to view others calendars, etc. I don't know for sure because I've never used it in a corporate environment. But, I am confident there is something available because like firefox it has a million add-ons.

You must be doing some pretty intense HTML if you can't get it to look right.

Nah dude. HTML emails are actually really hard to make. Every email reader looks quite a bit different. I have an email that looks perfect when loaded as a page in firefox and IE, but looks like crap in safari unless aligning the elements as blocks and defining a doctype.

Notes doesn't have support for backgrounds or styles. I don't think that Outlook has any support beyond CSS1. Said email looks like shit in Yahoo, looks good in GMail and Hotmail. Looks horrendous in Notes due to the lack of background image support.

Of course there would be ways around it for Notes by not having to use repeating images for the inner part of a panel with rounded edges, but then it is impossible to have a dynamic table size. Curses.. curses.

CSS4 will have a built-in rounded corner functionality for panels. How glorious that will be!

http://www.campaignmonitor.com/blog/archives/2007/01/microsoft_takes_email_design_b.html

[HowardRoark]

Apple has it's own series of professional tools

Hey Ty, you should dust off your resume. At least you will get paid.

[MJZiggy]

Ok, that took me a minute. (need coffee) :lol:

[Tyrone Bigguns]

If Apple isn't intersted in the battle they will never win the battle. And if they never win the battle they'll never be the power that Microsoft is, or even close to it.

THEY DON'T WANT TO BE. YOU CANNOT BE THAT BIG AND HAVE GOOD QUALITY. THAT IS THE POINT. THEY MAKE OODLES AND OODLES OF CASH.

So Apple cares more about making good products than making more money?

Yeah. Sure.

For having 3% market share yet making 25% of the profit of MS, that is pretty damn good. For one, growing too fast can be detrimental to business, profits, quality control, etc. Secondly, if they wanted to be the leader they'd sell their stuff cheaper. From Steve's mouth they are a hardware company first, and a software provider second. That fact alone shows that they're not in competition with Microsoft at all.

Based on stock growth and cash on hand, Apple has virtually nothing to worry about anytime soon. They're doing just fine and growing quite rapidly.

Do you think BWM or Maserati are competing with GM?!?!?

More bs from the dipshit....you put the profit as equal to MS...yet, they aren't making that huge profit in the pc division..that comes from other products.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Apple has it's own series of professional tools

Hey Ty, you should dust off your resume. At least you will get paid.

Thanx for the career advice. I will get right on it.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Microsoft has been stealing good ideas from Apple since the dawn of the PC. Snore.

Um, Apple and MS stole from Xerox Parc.

ya, Xerox came up with the BIG IDEA of graphical interface, but Apple made nice implementation & innovations, which Microsoft copied, but not too closely to lose court battles.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Microsoft has been stealing good ideas from Apple since the dawn of the PC. Snore.

Um, Apple and MS stole from Xerox Parc.

ya, Xerox came up with the BIG IDEA of graphical interface, but Apple made nice implementation & innovations, which Microsoft copied, but not too closely to lose court battles.

MS copied? Proof?

When you both steal from the same place..you are bound to wind up looking pretty similar.

[Harlan Huckleby]

MS copied? Proof?

When you both steal from the same place..you are bound to wind up looking pretty similar.

Details escape me, but Windows regulary incorporated apple innovations with slight variations. I remember, sonny, but I just can't remember.

[Zool]

Windows came out before Apple, and they build MS DOS as its background. Apple decided to build an actual GUI instead of a front end for DOS. Thats, and the antiquated x86 registry are the reason MS is behind.

MS could scrap x86 code entirely right now, but that would not sell well for 3-4 years. There's people running XP on P2's. I myself went for Vista64 with my new setup. It runs quite well because a lot of the backwards compatibility was removed. As soon as they remove all of it, the MS OS will catch up.

[Zool]

MS copied? Proof?

When you both steal from the same place..you are bound to wind up looking pretty similar.

Details escape me, but Windows regulary incorporated apple innovations with slight variations. I remember, sonny, but I just can't remember.

Sorta like every other corporation does? The PC industry is a copy-cat industry just like the rest of them.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

MS copied? Proof?

When you both steal from the same place..you are bound to wind up looking pretty similar.

Details escape me, but Windows regulary incorporated apple innovations with slight variations. I remember, sonny, but I just can't remember.

Well, pardon me if i don't trust your memory.

But, incorporating innovations isn't copying. Or will you take apple to task for copying alt-tab?

[digitaldean]

I think maybe HH was referring to Microsoft's GUI (graphical user interface) that was taken from Apple's OS and incorporated to upgrade Windows 2.0. (which really was taken from Xerox)

MS won this case. I disagree at the court's premise that a graphical interface was the only way to do it.

When somebody came up with a derivative of Windows through open source (e.g., Lindows OS back in 2001-2002), the MS legal team was dispatched post-haste.

HH, if I "ass"umed too much into your post, my apologies.

[Partial]

MS copied? Proof?

When you both steal from the same place..you are bound to wind up looking pretty similar.

Details escape me, but Windows regulary incorporated apple innovations with slight variations. I remember, sonny, but I just can't remember.

Well, pardon me if i don't trust your memory.

But, incorporating innovations isn't copying. Or will you take apple to task for copying alt-tab?

What about the spotlight like searching in Vista? Tiger had that first. What about the poorly executed expose rip-off? Expose has been around since 10.5.2. Why did the Zune and Zune store come out?!?

[Partial]

If Apple isn't intersted in the battle they will never win the battle. And if they never win the battle they'll never be the power that Microsoft is, or even close to it.

THEY DON'T WANT TO BE. YOU CANNOT BE THAT BIG AND HAVE GOOD QUALITY. THAT IS THE POINT. THEY MAKE OODLES AND OODLES OF CASH.

So Apple cares more about making good products than making more money?

Yeah. Sure.

For having 3% market share yet making 25% of the profit of MS, that is pretty damn good. For one, growing too fast can be detrimental to business, profits, quality control, etc. Secondly, if they wanted to be the leader they'd sell their stuff cheaper. From Steve's mouth they are a hardware company first, and a software provider second. That fact alone shows that they're not in competition with Microsoft at all.

Based on stock growth and cash on hand, Apple has virtually nothing to worry about anytime soon. They're doing just fine and growing quite rapidly.

Do you think BWM or Maserati are competing with GM?!?!?

More bs from the dipshit....you put the profit as equal to MS...yet, they aren't making that huge profit in the pc division..that comes from other products.

What difference does it make? We're comparing companies...

[Tyrone Bigguns]

If Apple isn't intersted in the battle they will never win the battle. And if they never win the battle they'll never be the power that Microsoft is, or even close to it.

THEY DON'T WANT TO BE. YOU CANNOT BE THAT BIG AND HAVE GOOD QUALITY. THAT IS THE POINT. THEY MAKE OODLES AND OODLES OF CASH.

So Apple cares more about making good products than making more money?

Yeah. Sure.

For having 3% market share yet making 25% of the profit of MS, that is pretty damn good. For one, growing too fast can be detrimental to business, profits, quality control, etc. Secondly, if they wanted to be the leader they'd sell their stuff cheaper. From Steve's mouth they are a hardware company first, and a software provider second. That fact alone shows that they're not in competition with Microsoft at all.

Based on stock growth and cash on hand, Apple has virtually nothing to worry about anytime soon. They're doing just fine and growing quite rapidly.

Do you think BWM or Maserati are competing with GM?!?!?

More bs from the dipshit....you put the profit as equal to MS...yet, they aren't making that huge profit in the pc division..that comes from other products.

What difference does it make? We're comparing companies...

WHat difference? Umm, then your statements like..3% and making 25% of the profit aren't valid. You dont' compare automakers to software companies do you?

[Partial]

The point is Apple is making money hand over fist. They make it in several different fields. Microsoft is making their money in Zune :lol: and crappy Winmo phones as well don't forget :lol: .......

[BallHawk]

I think maybe HH was referring to Microsoft's GUI (graphical user interface) that was taken from Apple's OS and incorporated to upgrade Windows 2.0. (which really was taken from Xerox)

MS won this case. I disagree at the court's premise that a graphical interface was the only way to do it.

When somebody came up with a derivative of Windows through open source (e.g., Lindows OS back in 2001-2002), the MS legal team was dispatched post-haste.

HH, if I "ass"umed too much into your post, my apologies.

I think this was the first time somebody in the thread give a legit reply without showing a lack of class.

Props to you, DD.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

The point is Apple is making money hand over fist. They make it in several different fields. Microsoft is making their money in Zune :lol: and crappy Winmo phones as well don't forget :lol: .......

Of course that is your point NOW. Must be nice to constantly shift your argument. :oops:

MS is barely involved at this point in zune and phones.

You the discussion was about computers..now you switch to other products.

Should i crow about the Xbox and apple not being a player in the gaming field. :roll: