Microsoft and Apple are Clearly Heading in Different Directions

BCXtreme · 17 Jan 2011

Buddahfan said:

The fact that both are named Windows and that they happen to be on the same version is confusing and makes it sound like it is Windows 7 unless it is explained correctly.

Why did MSFT name the phone OS "Windows whatever"? Apple does not use the same OS name for its desktops and mobile units. MSFT should have been more original, in my opinion, in naming their mobile operating system.

They certainly could have been, and might still be at some point. Like I said, Apple originally called their mobile software "OS X" just like the desktop software, and then they changed it later on. Microsoft might do the same thing.

Stratos said:

Not trying to defend Apple but the term "affordable" isn't a static value, it's a relative term in relation to one's budget.

Which is why I said "affordable to the masses". Most people (the masses) don't have enough money to justify buying a Mac for $2000 when they could buy a PC of equal or greater power for half of that figure.

Stratos said:

I didn't just mention the kernel, I did mention very clearly that Windows was built from the ground up. It starts at the kernel which is the core of any operating system all the way up to the frontend (GUI) to include all additional apps which accompanies it. The Windows kernel is not open source like OSX, I was merely stating that MS offers a true MS product, not something they "took over" based off someone else's work.

The whole "updating" of OSX isn't necessarily a bad thing. Apple chose a very solid foundation to build upon, a tried and test proven Unix base which offers raw simplicity, incredible flexibility and above all else, solid security. I nor any professional believe they should necessarily overhaul something that's proven to work. No sense in fixing something that's not broken. However the needs of an end user is ever changing and they're doing their best to provide features with real value. My only beef with Apple (and OSX) is that they appear to mislead people into thinking OSX is superior/more secure than Windows due to what Apple did. That's not the case, the primary reason why it's so good is due to the parts of the OS Apple had nothing to do with. I don't like how they appear to take credit for work they never did in that manner. Apple can take credit for how the OS interacts with the user through its GUI, like how unmounting an external drive is as simple as dragging the icon into the trash, compared to using Safely Remove Hardware and Eject Media on Windows 7.

Windows has taken the approach of re-inventing the wheel, it's a much tougher road to walk but all credit towards its development is due to Microsoft's efforts without open source development. I admire this as this is what I consider a "genuine product". They didn't pull a "chinese trick" where they took a photo of a completed product, ran home and created an updated version that's cheaper to produce. MS is also taking on a much broader range of customers, not just limited to consumer end users. I currently support MS more because I believe Microsoft Windows Operating Systems and the PC computer format represent "computing freedom". MS doesn't have to resort to "Hi I'm a Mac and he's a PC" type of ads to promote their products.

I wasn't disagreeing with you; I apologize if it sounded that way. I was only adding to what you said.

Stratos · 17 Jan 2011

BCXtreme said:

Which is why I said "affordable to the masses". Most people (the masses) don't have enough money to justify buying a Mac for $2000 when they could buy a PC of equal or greater power for half of that figure.

I don't agree and I've explained why. You're assuming that the "masses" don't have have raw funds to buy a Mac. An individual may have $5000 in their pocket, that doesn't not mean they'll going to spend all of it. An institution might have $300,000 to spend on buying new computers, that doesn't mean they want to spend all of it.

- There are many people who can afford Macs but simply choose not to for each person's unique reasons. Obviously these people didn't find value with Macs and looked elsewhere.

- You're also leaving out people who are simply "cheap". I've stated this before. There are those who simply refuse to pay, for example more than $1000 on any computer. That naturally limits their choices since Macs target a specific price market.

- Again, there are those who are on limited budgets, who simply lack raw funds, like full-time college students who aren't lucky enough to have "bank of mom and dad" buying everything they need and want, however there are those who do. If they only have $500 in their pockets, well that's what they must work with. If that $500 could buy them a shiny new Macbook Pro, I believe they would.

The decision to buy a Mac does not start and end at how much cash someone has in their wallet, the decision often times involves a certain value the buyer seeks. This value is sometimes intangible and difficult to measure but it's still a very realistic factor when making the purchase.

It's the same reason why people by LV and Gucci bags, Porsche and BMW's instead of nylon backpacks and Kia-made cars.

Macs also involve a unique experience loyal users enjoy, something a lot of them believe they're not finding by using a Windows PC, nothing wrong with that.