PDA

View Full Version : Apple versus Microsoft: The top 20 stolen ideas of the OS wa...


MacBytes
Oct 12, 2009, 09:27 AM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: Mac OS X
Link: Apple versus Microsoft: The top 20 stolen ideas of the OS wars (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20091012102750)
Description:: none

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug

Chobit
Oct 12, 2009, 09:52 AM
I remember using command tab to switch between apps and command` to switch between windows within an app back in the classic days. I'm not sure when it first appeared in the MacOS, but it was certainly not 10.3, though that may be when the application icon preview started appearing. My memory is a bit foggy. Anyone have a better timeline on this?

SPUY767
Oct 12, 2009, 09:59 AM
I remember using command tab to switch between apps and command` to switch between windows within an app back in the classic days. I'm not sure when it first appeared in the MacOS, but it was certainly not 10.3, though that may be when the application icon preview started appearing. My memory is a bit foggy. Anyone have a better timeline on this?

Don't bother. It's quite obvious that the author is simply trying to appear unbiased by saying that each side copied. I mean seriously, you choose the Control panel as a feature stolen from Windows? On a Mac all the control panels were always in a convenient place. A Folder.

iJed
Oct 12, 2009, 10:07 AM
NeXTSTEP, which OS X is based on, contained most of theses features years before Windows did...

whooleytoo
Oct 12, 2009, 10:20 AM
Before System 7, wasn't the control panel one app; or am I imagining it?

Saying Apple stole the idea of including backup in the OS is a bit odd too, it's a rather obvious inclusion in any OS.

jaw04005
Oct 12, 2009, 10:24 AM
My favorite is saying Terminal was copied from Windows. It’s not like Unix existed years before MS-DOS or anything.

And I like how they left out the biggy — the modern GUI was invented by Apple and Xerox PARC.

Saying Apple stole the idea of including backup in the OS is a bit odd too, it's a rather obvious inclusion in any OS.

At least, he didn’t say Time Machine was a copy of Window Vista’s Shadow Copy/Previous Version. As someone who uses both, that drives me nuts. They’re not even comparable.

yoyo5280
Oct 12, 2009, 10:33 AM
Anybody notice that apple was stealing back in the day, and microsoft is stealing now?

I just found the interesting. I'm just curious who left behind the scenes at the windows group to make that happen.

zombitronic
Oct 12, 2009, 10:35 AM
The funny thing is that this article is a link to two other articles. Call me skeptical, but this seems like an attempt to generate page hits.

Apple "stealing" Screen Sharing from Remote Desktop was featured on both lists. While that, itself, is an obvious error, these two features are not the same thing. RDC uses the proprietary RDC protocol and only allows a user to log into a remote computer. It does not share the screen and the remote user does not see what's going on while the screen is being controlled. Screen Sharing, on the other hand, uses the VNC protocol and literally shows the screen of the remote computer that's being controlled. The user at the remote computer sees everything that's going on.

And number one on the list should have been the GUI.

And where is Linux or other operating systems in all of this?

It disappoints me to know that people get paid to come up with these articles.

bruinsrme
Oct 12, 2009, 10:42 AM
Personally I couldn't care less if ms is stealing from appla or vice versa. All I care about is that I, as a pc user, get to enjoy the same features as a mac user and that a mac user can enjoy what pc users get to enjoy. To me the pc vs mac war is wearing. How about both companies pull their heads out of there asses and come out with an os that doesn't need updates days after it's released.

BC2009
Oct 12, 2009, 11:19 AM
Before System 7, wasn't the control panel one app; or am I imagining it?

Saying Apple stole the idea of including backup in the OS is a bit odd too, it's a rather obvious inclusion in any OS.

Saying "backup" was a stolen idea is ridiculous -- not to mention the fact that only
certain versions of XP included the backup utility (specifically the professional version).
The XP Home edition did NOT include backup -- I guess Microsoft felt that "Home"
users were less vulnerable to viruses and hard drive failures -- either that or home
users' files did not really matter.

spillproof
Oct 12, 2009, 11:25 AM
This is why competition is good. I don't care who created the idea, I'm just glad I can use it.

rdowns
Oct 12, 2009, 11:28 AM
Some people just can't let this go away. The OS wars are long over. Microsoft won.

yoyo5280
Oct 12, 2009, 11:32 AM
Since vista, its the OS games II... And Apple is winning.

BongoBanger
Oct 12, 2009, 12:31 PM
Since vista, its the OS games II... And Apple is winning.

Increasing you global market share by less than 2% when your opposition releases its poorest received OS in a decade or so is not 'winning', it's 'making marginal gains'.

Windows outsells OS X by at least a factor of 20. This game is over.

As for the article, it's largely true - Apple and MS have copied from each other and from third parties. The winner is the consumer who gets the best of everybody's features and I really couldn't give a crap who made it first.

yoyo5280
Oct 12, 2009, 01:07 PM
Increasing you global market share by less than 2% when your opposition releases its poorest received OS in a decade or so is not 'winning', it's 'making marginal gains'.

Windows outsells OS X by at least a factor of 20. This game is over.



Look at numbers, microsoft wins. Look at trends, Apple is winning.

Don't get me wrong, I want microsoft to stay the winner, and Apple to be the little guy. But behind all the design and innovation, apple is just a big company who is really really trying to overpass the big guy, and doing a good job of it.

Sun Baked
Oct 12, 2009, 01:15 PM
NeXTSTEP, which OS X is based on, contained most of theses features years before Windows did...

Yes, but many of these authors never saw or used NeXT or Rhapsody, so it is pointless to argue with them.

They also probably think electric cars are new ideas, instead of something that competed with and lost to the internal combustion engine a hundred years ago.

Why tell them to open a book and read from it, I'm sure the history book is much better used if we simply pick it up and beat them with it.

OllyW
Oct 12, 2009, 01:25 PM
This is why competition is good. I don't care who created the idea, I'm just glad I can use it.

Some people just can't let this go away. The OS wars are long over. Microsoft won.

Two excellent points.

Sadly, I fear the remainder of this thread will revert back to the normal tit-for-tat argument.

rdowns
Oct 12, 2009, 02:11 PM
Since vista, its the OS games II... And Apple is winning.


OK, let's just throw out the previous 30 years and call it a do over. :rolleyes:

yoyo5280
Oct 12, 2009, 02:13 PM
OK, let's just throw out the previous 30 years and call it a do over. :rolleyes:

Think olympics.
Just in 30 year increments.

BongoBanger
Oct 12, 2009, 02:52 PM
Look at numbers, microsoft wins. Look at trends, Apple is winning.

I am. It isn't.

Look, Apple are doing well but there is no chance they will become the dominant consumer OS because they would have to release OS X to third party hardware and, frankly, I don't think it's up to that.

The Flashing Fi
Oct 12, 2009, 03:18 PM
Look at numbers, microsoft wins. Look at trends, Apple is winning.

Don't get me wrong, I want microsoft to stay the winner, and Apple to be the little guy. But behind all the design and innovation, apple is just a big company who is really really trying to overpass the big guy, and doing a good job of it.

*sigh* Don't get caught up in all the advertising. As much as Apple tries to use that little guy image, the truth is, Apple doesn't want to beat Windows in marketshare. You may be going, "Woh, wait, what?" In order for Mac OS X to beat Windows, under Apple's current scheme of only having Mac OS X available on Macs, Apple would have to license their OS to gain more marketshare, which won't happen because Apple is a Hardware company who uses software to sell their hardware, or Apple would have to release cheaper computers. Both of which seem unlikely. Apple is perfectly content in being a niche market.

But as long as you can get a complete Dell PC with a Quad Core, 4 gigs of memory and 20" screen for less than 800 bucks, it's going to be hard for Apple to overtake MS in marketshare.

Apple's "real" competition is companies like Dell. They're the ones who they're trying to take marketshare away from in the home desktop and laptop markets. But trying to pit a war against Dell, HP, ect wouldn't be as effective as making a war against Windows.

But as long as Apple appeals to the higher market, they will eventually reach a saturation point, where if they want to sell more units, and thus take away marketshare from PC companies and thus, Windows, they'll need to lower their prices and offer more low-end models.

However, Apple's current model of sell less units, but with a higher revenue per unit, seems to be working really well. If I were them, I wouldn't change anything until they felt a need to change something. But unless they adapt a business model that is similar to Dell, or HP's, where they lower their prices and make less money per-unit, but with a higher sales volume, eventually that higher-end market will be saturated.

SnowLeopard2008
Oct 12, 2009, 07:54 PM
Apple was/is/and always will be the first to have a working OS that is virus-free, with a non-resource hogging GUI, and incorporate features that Microsoft will later copy and fail at doing.

Microsoft was/is/and always will be the first to rip off everything Apple made, sue them for copyright, win because they paid the judge $X billion, and create bloated OSes that doesn't work and is home to viruses galore.

F Microsoft. The only good thing that could ever happen will be Steve Ballmer fired. I liked Microsoft Pre-Ballmer. Go Gates!

GeeYouEye
Oct 12, 2009, 08:28 PM
Definitely a poorly researched article; Control Panels were all in one window as late as System 6, and except for OS 9 were always all in one place (The Digital Color Meter and Map Control Panels in OS 9 were in the Apple Extras folder).

gctwnl
Oct 13, 2009, 02:18 AM
Terminal (or as they explain it "a command line") came from the early days of computing (the first terminals in fact in the 60s).

Much of what Apple had copied from windows they inherited with NEXTSTEP which they brought in as a basis for the replacement of classic Mac OS. Having backup as 'part of the OS', is as much an OS feature as having an internet browser as 'part of the OS. Saying 'support for Exchange' was copied is really silly. Does Microsoft have support for iCal Server etc? And is Outlook not part of Office and not of Windows?

More interesting is the list of features they would like to copy but are unable to. Windows would like to copy some of Mac's security. Windows will at one point probably move to the more logical Mac's way of one menu, multiple windows instead of one-window-per-app with a lot of hacking around to make these apps look as one on the interface level (shared menus).

gctwnl
Oct 13, 2009, 02:27 AM
*sigh* Don't get caught up in all the advertising. As much as Apple tries to use that little guy image, the truth is, Apple doesn't want to beat Windows in marketshare. You may be going, "Woh, wait, what?" In order for Mac OS X to beat Windows, under Apple's current scheme of only having Mac OS X available on Macs, Apple would have to license their OS to gain more marketshare, which won't happen because Apple is a Hardware company who uses software to sell their hardware, or Apple would have to release cheaper computers. Both of which seem unlikely. Apple is perfectly content in being a niche market.

But as long as you can get a complete Dell PC with a Quad Core, 4 gigs of memory and 20" screen for less than 800 bucks, it's going to be hard for Apple to overtake MS in marketshare.

Apple's "real" competition is companies like Dell. They're the ones who they're trying to take marketshare away from in the home desktop and laptop markets. But trying to pit a war against Dell, HP, ect wouldn't be as effective as making a war against Windows.

But as long as Apple appeals to the higher market, they will eventually reach a saturation point, where if they want to sell more units, and thus take away marketshare from PC companies and thus, Windows, they'll need to lower their prices and offer more low-end models.

However, Apple's current model of sell less units, but with a higher revenue per unit, seems to be working really well. If I were them, I wouldn't change anything until they felt a need to change something. But unless they adapt a business model that is similar to Dell, or HP's, where they lower their prices and make less money per-unit, but with a higher sales volume, eventually that higher-end market will be saturated.Don't focus too much on PCs. Apple is rather succesful in creating or taking over appliance markets. iPod/iTunes, iPhone, AppleTV (not a success, but a trial attempt). Microsoft tends to be tech-oriented (turning a PC into a TV-like media system, OS for mobile, etc.). Apple starts from the user perspective more and their foundational tech work (think os x, quicktime, codecs, core this and that) is done with these possibilities in mind. The current iPod/iPhone runs Mac OS X and contrary to Windows mobile (which is entirely separate) it is in fact *based on* the same system as the OS that powers the XServe.

Microsoft is also completely locked into the x86 architecture while Apple (and before them NeXT) have proven (and impressingly so) that hardware migration (even big-endian/little-endian differences) are no hurdle. Which is why the iPhone runs a slimmed down but true OS X and your HTC does not run Windows other than in name.

DoFoT9
Oct 13, 2009, 02:27 AM
*sigh* Don't get caught up in all the advertising. As much as Apple tries to use that little guy image, the truth is, Apple doesn't want to beat Windows in marketshare. You may be going, "Woh, wait, what?"
of course they dont! why would they want to? they are perfectly fine as is. even Jobsy has said they dont want the majority.

But as long as you can get a complete Dell PC with a Quad Core, 4 gigs of memory and 20" screen for less than 800 bucks, it's going to be hard for Apple to overtake MS in marketshare.
again, apple doesnt want that title. "cheapest computer around" seriously who wants that. "elegant classy looking machines" now thats better!

Apple's "real" competition is companies like Dell. They're the ones who they're trying to take marketshare away from in the home desktop and laptop markets. But trying to pit a war against Dell, HP, ect wouldn't be as effective as making a war against Windows.
appl is a software company dont forget, apple really does not care about dell/HP deep down.



However, Apple's current model of sell less units, but with a higher revenue per unit, seems to be working really well. If I were them, I wouldn't change anything until they felt a need to change something. But unless they adapt a business model that is similar to Dell, or HP's, where they lower their prices and make less money per-unit, but with a higher sales volume, eventually that higher-end market will be saturated.

when you have a 30%+ CLEAR profit on your products, why wouldnt you be doing well!? ;)

jodelli
Oct 13, 2009, 02:32 AM
Who cares?
The underpinnings of the first Intel 4004 and Unix go back to about 1970, the first attempts at GUIs and mice from SRI from the late 60s, and the first wysiwyg monitors from the early 70s.
Nothing has fundamentally changed since then, other than the newer touch interfaces. And that was envisioned by people like Alan Kay in the late 70s.

This is bigger than Mac vs Windows. There is nothing stopping any PC maker from cobbling together their own version of a Unix gui that runs a wide variety of apps using pre installed Wine and automatic program loaders and installers.

HP was making noises along theses lines not long ago. Windows 7 may dampen their enthusiasm but a working compatible ix OS would sell because porting would be a breeze.

Apple could sell millions of Leopard copies if they chose to do so, but of course they don't, ostensively because they've chosen the hardware route and the OS remains an ace selling point.

gctwnl
Oct 13, 2009, 02:33 AM
Increasing you global market share by less than 2% when your opposition releases its poorest received OS in a decade or so is not 'winning', it's 'making marginal gains'.

Windows outsells OS X by at least a factor of 20. This game is over.
- said the railway tycoon when airplanes appeared in force
- said the horse supplies store owner when cras appeared
- etc.

The game is never over.

Microsoft will not have marketing myopia (they are brilliant marketeers after all) but the way they are largely failing often outside their monopoly is stunning. Think Zune.

Microsoft is also way ahead in the area of collaboration (think Exchange, SharePoint, MS Dynamics and stuff). This is where Microsoft is currently fighting and with a lot of success I might add.

DoFoT9
Oct 13, 2009, 02:35 AM
Apple could sell millions of Leopard copies if they chose to do so, but of course they don't, ostensively because they've chosen the hardware route and the OS remains an ace selling point.

well what would you rather?
1. wider variety of hardware supported
or
2. smaller variety of hardware that is more optimised*

*thats how its meant to work, in practice it doesnt always work like that haha

jodelli
Oct 13, 2009, 04:49 AM
well what would you rather?
1. wider variety of hardware supported
or
2. smaller variety of hardware that is more optimised*

*thats how its meant to work, in practice it doesnt always work like that haha

I like your placement of the asterisk.
For me Apple is the software. The hardware is optimized for the proprietary integrated OS and apps.

I don't care if Apple does a wide release of its OS. I don't need a Mac for more than the half dozen utilizations it's good at.

If I need a hot rod I'll build one. And the vs thing is getting so ridiculous. There's a universe out there people, a true cornucopia, i's and X's and O's, P's, Q's, more letters than in a post box.

BongoBanger
Oct 13, 2009, 06:03 AM
- said the railway tycoon when airplanes appeared in force
- said the horse supplies store owner when cras appeared
- etc.

The game is never over.

It is in this instance since there is no material difference in what a Mac and PC actually do. There's no major paradigm shift here as there was with the aeroplane and the car - they're just variations on a theme.

As far as sales of dekstop operating systems are concerned the race was run and Microsoft crowned the winner a long time ago. It'll take another paradigm shift - perhaps to cloud computing - to open the race up again.

DoFoT9
Oct 13, 2009, 07:42 AM
I like your placement of the asterisk.
For me Apple is the software. The hardware is optimized for the proprietary integrated OS and apps.
thanks :)

i agree with your statement, apple is the software and their hardware is optimised to run the software to their likings. as a mac user i accept that.

I don't care if Apple does a wide release of its OS. I don't need a Mac for more than the half dozen utilizations it's good at.
i dont think i would care, but it would most certainly reduce the image of the OS, as more problem would of course arise.

If I need a hot rod I'll build one. And the vs thing is getting so ridiculous. There's a universe out there people, a true cornucopia, i's and X's and O's, P's, Q's, more letters than in a post box.

its not what the others think, its what you think to yourself because in the end that is all that matters*

unless you're a teenager, then i take it back.

AlmostThere
Oct 13, 2009, 07:54 AM
Microsoft is also completely locked into the x86 architecture while Apple (and before them NeXT) have proven (and impressingly so) that hardware migration (even big-endian/little-endian differences) are no hurdle. Which is why the iPhone runs a slimmed down but true OS X and your HTC does not run Windows other than in name.

Microsoft has already migrated across multiple platforms (including PPC) and still releases on IA64. And until I can run my Mac apps in my iPhone, it is not OS X other than in name. From a customer perspective, it may as well be Windows CE under the GUI.

If anything, it is the rest of the computing world that is locked in to x86. The dominance of Microsoft has ensured that architecture has flourished and even Apple, with all their "amazing hardware migration skills", have not been able to find a better architecture.

Compile 'em all
Oct 13, 2009, 08:21 AM
I am. It isn't.

Look, Apple are doing well but there is no chance they will become the dominant consumer OS because they would have to release OS X to third party hardware and, frankly, I don't think it's up to that.

If you think so then you are very shortsighted. Apple might not "now" or in a year or two have a significant market share but the more popular their other gear (iPhone et. al) get and the cheaper the Macs become things will start changing. Two years ago, I had ZERO friends with Macs. A year ago, a couple of them got iPhones. Now, not only do they have Macs but their friends now also do. Some of these guys have never touched a Mac in their life, let alone used one. This might be in my own little world, but this exact same story has happened with my brother (whom his friends also did the same). Multiply this by thousands and it becomes viral.

A consumer will look at the iPhone and go, "wow, that thing is really easy to use. May be I should take a look at a Mac for my next computer. It will probably be the same".

Just wait and see...

DoFoT9
Oct 13, 2009, 08:26 AM
A consumer will look at the iPhone and go, "wow, that thing is really easy to use. May be I should take a look at a Mac for my next computer. It will probably be the same".

Just wait and see...

a consumer would yea, but us smart ones that actually want a usable phone just turn our noses up at it.

dont get me wrong i do love it and the concept, but i would not buy one - i am a uni student doing IT and i love my "businessy" phones, my nokia e63 is my pal! i need reliability and ease of use, not a good looking interface (thought that does help) that can play music, play games and all of this.

apple will never be the dominant company. if that day comes then that is the day that apple goes bust.

BongoBanger
Oct 13, 2009, 09:35 AM
If you think so then you are very shortsighted.

No, just a realist, History doesn't back up the theory that Mac sales will 'explode'. The iPod, for example, dominates the PMP market yet aside from a slight increase in sales volumes it had little impact on the computer market.

The iPhone has done better and that coupled with Microsoft's poorest recieved OS for years helped push things up a few more percentage points but there has been no tipping point and sales growth is slowing from it's peak in 2008.

The iPhone itself is also kind of at risk - at the moment it's cool but the phone industry is notoriously fashion driven and fickle and there's no guarantee that this will be the case in the coming months and years. Of course Apple may update the design or diversify the product range but the market has caught up now and it doesn't stand out as much as it did before and, again realistically, won't stand out at all in 2010 unless there's some major surgery undertaken.

I'm not saying this to denigrate Apple - they do very, very well in their niche - but they're never going to compete against Microsoft in terms of operating system market share and, to be honest, I'm not sure they'd want to.