Read this and was flabbergasted. From an interview with Jim Allchin, Microsoft Group Vice-President, by The Seattle Pi
Oh dear. Oh dear.
Oh dear. Oh dear.
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.
Apple Copies Longhorn, MS Worried About Future Thefts
- Thread starter munkle
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's one thing for Microsoft to say they'll put these cool features in Longhorn but it's quite another thing for Apple to actually impliment them. That's a really frustrating comment, Mr Allchin.
another window's loser fanboy imo.....
i think the guys in redmond were pretty burned by the longhorn and ms signs at the first preview of tiger (start your copiers and all)
i think the guys in redmond were pretty burned by the longhorn and ms signs at the first preview of tiger (start your copiers and all)
Does he actually think Apple is copying Microsoft? I'm sure some things like that may happen once in a blue moon, but this Tiger/Longhorn debate?
How can you compare the two, and why would you want to?
How can you compare the two, and why would you want to?
But MSs search routine is probably a variation on their web search, since their drive will probably be one massive web page for network hackers to exploit.sorryiwasdreami said:
Apple is still stuck with the Finder and HFS+, so it's doubtful Apple is stealing MS's webpage ideas.
We limited showing things and stuff? Way to be vague.. 'yeah, I kinda thought of that concept so how come you get to implement it?' It gets more ridiculous by the letter! "We didn't show security stuff? Safety stuff?". Isn't that what we OSX users been enjoying, and taking for granted all these years? I guess I see how Microsoft explains away their "swiss cheese" of an OS. There we are again with the "We've been thinking about building a solid, stable, and reliably OS."- so where is it? ( at least 2 years down the road- by that time whose to say where OSX is? ).
I can't believe that there'd be people who'd believe that.
I can't believe that there'd be people who'd believe that.
It's pretty sad when their big feature (and hidden one at that) is better security and safety. IMO, the customers deserve that without having to buy a new OS.
Tiger even has a "Stealth" Firewall now, but I hardly see that even mentioned on Apple's webpages and it's not showcased as the biggest thing in Tiger.
Tiger even has a "Stealth" Firewall now, but I hardly see that even mentioned on Apple's webpages and it's not showcased as the biggest thing in Tiger.
-Question
How can one copy something that doesn't exist?
Just because a person thinks of something and blabs it to the world, doesn't mean they 'invented' it. Pure ideas are not patentable.
Nice try Mr. Allchin.
How can one copy something that doesn't exist?
Just because a person thinks of something and blabs it to the world, doesn't mean they 'invented' it. Pure ideas are not patentable.
Nice try Mr. Allchin.
Yeah, sure. Apple copied Longhon to make Tiger, just like the Wright Brothers copied Boeing to make the airplane.... 
Y'all ever heard of piles? Hm?
More Apple litigation coming? You bet your ass.Sweaty monkey man said:
Wait a second.... I just noticed what he said at the bottom.
Why would Apple copy the "security features"? Microsoft only has to "invent" those "security stuff" to cover their own butts because they never had any "security stuff" before. OS X doesn't need any of their "security stuff", so why copy their crap? These guys just amaze me. I can't even begin to imagine what they'll say next. The irony of this interview is that, as he's saying that Apple copied Longhorn, people are at home USING Tiger! (without installing internet security and antivirus software, I might add) Is there anybody using Longhorn???? Didn't think so. Where's your innovation now, buddy?
dsharits said:Yeah, sure. Apple copied Longhon to make Tiger, just like the Wright Brothers copied Boeing to make the airplane....
-dsharits
I'm getting serious deja vu here. I recall almost the exact same articles in the press and snipes from MS when Panther came out - all around the mythical Longhorn.
It galls me that MS keep screming "Hey we thought of that! We thought of that!" and tries to pass it off as an invention of theirs. With that logic, I've thought of a machine that mines and refines lunar soil for dueterium fusion.
There, I've invented it - now anybody who does it, is merely copying me.
i thought innovation also meant having your product out on the market before anyone else...and do they?
NO!
NO!
Isn't it strange how every time Apple comes out with something new, Microsoft already had it in Longhorn two years ago, even if they said nothing about it at the time?
Okay, at risk of getting slammed by everyone else in this thread, I'm going to go against the grain. I'm not trying to troll but you all run to Apple's defense on this issue. I don't think Apple needs to be defended - they are a company, they saw good ideas and they implemented them.
Microsoft did think of and implement fast user switching before Apple. Apple did in fact copy them, why? Becuase it was a good idea and they were smart to add it to their OS. This is not a matter of pride or who is smarter or more innovative, it's business.
I honestly believe that both Microsoft and Apple have very intelligent, talented and creative employees working for them. The big differences in the way Microsoft and Apple operate has to do with their marketshare and primary markets. Microsoft is mostly targeting businesses - not home consumers. Microsoft's multimedia software sucks, it is horrible, IMO. Apple's OS X and iLife are great products and very intuitive. I really do believe that Macs are much better systems for average home users who don't wish to know much about computing. However, Apple cannot hold a candle to Microsoft whe it comes to enterprise software. Active Directory, Exchange, Sharepoint server, MS SQL Server.. I couldn't list all of the enterprise server products. Yes, some other companies offer some competing products in this market, but few cover the entire needs of medium to large scale businesses. It all integrates and it's a huge system of software that is supported, that is why companies buy it and that is why Microsoft makes a killing. Microsoft "plays" with the home market and it wants more, it is greedy. However, the home market has never been their focus.
Apple can implement these features much more quickly because they are smaller, they do not have as many obligations to meet. They are quick and nimble and can take an idea from concept to release much faster. They don't have a plethora of hardware to support with their OS, that helps them develop OS X more quickly. They take more risks though, the initial releases of OS X have sometimes had rather large bugs. Apple also does not support their software very far back. You can't even install iLife '05 on Jaguar. Microsoft is still supporting NT 4 for corporate customers with support. Apple supports older hardware much better, but they do not support old software very well. Microsoft puts out fewer OS releases because that is what the corporate world asked them to do, particularly for server OSes. It is VERY expensive for a company to migrate to a new operating system internally. It is a very complicated process, I work in this area of computing. I write software to help companies make such migrations.
IMO, Apple is a "fun" company. They are fun to follow, they are allowed to innovate more quickly because their target market allows them to move quickly. Their products are more interesting for consumers, outside of the IT world few get excited about a new Active Directory feature... "Oh, oh - it is easier to setup a Forest now!"
I think Mr. Allchin's comments are very accurate in the original poster's quote. Does that mean Apple is not innovative, no of course not. As an enthusiast I like Apple explicitly for the reason that they can bring new ideas to fruition more quickly than Microsoft. It's fun to play with the newest software concepts earlier than most. However, I think it is foolish to say that Apple doesn't copy good ideas from competitors, yes, even Microsoft. They do copy and they will continue to copy good ideas from Microsoft or any other competitor. If they didn't they would be stupid and acting out of pride. This is business, plain and simple.
Dare I say it... I think Steve's RDF has gotten to some people in this thread. I hope the Kool-Aid was tasty! I like the Kool-Aid too, but I try not to drink too much of it.
Microsoft did think of and implement fast user switching before Apple. Apple did in fact copy them, why? Becuase it was a good idea and they were smart to add it to their OS. This is not a matter of pride or who is smarter or more innovative, it's business.
I honestly believe that both Microsoft and Apple have very intelligent, talented and creative employees working for them. The big differences in the way Microsoft and Apple operate has to do with their marketshare and primary markets. Microsoft is mostly targeting businesses - not home consumers. Microsoft's multimedia software sucks, it is horrible, IMO. Apple's OS X and iLife are great products and very intuitive. I really do believe that Macs are much better systems for average home users who don't wish to know much about computing. However, Apple cannot hold a candle to Microsoft whe it comes to enterprise software. Active Directory, Exchange, Sharepoint server, MS SQL Server.. I couldn't list all of the enterprise server products. Yes, some other companies offer some competing products in this market, but few cover the entire needs of medium to large scale businesses. It all integrates and it's a huge system of software that is supported, that is why companies buy it and that is why Microsoft makes a killing. Microsoft "plays" with the home market and it wants more, it is greedy. However, the home market has never been their focus.
Apple can implement these features much more quickly because they are smaller, they do not have as many obligations to meet. They are quick and nimble and can take an idea from concept to release much faster. They don't have a plethora of hardware to support with their OS, that helps them develop OS X more quickly. They take more risks though, the initial releases of OS X have sometimes had rather large bugs. Apple also does not support their software very far back. You can't even install iLife '05 on Jaguar. Microsoft is still supporting NT 4 for corporate customers with support. Apple supports older hardware much better, but they do not support old software very well. Microsoft puts out fewer OS releases because that is what the corporate world asked them to do, particularly for server OSes. It is VERY expensive for a company to migrate to a new operating system internally. It is a very complicated process, I work in this area of computing. I write software to help companies make such migrations.
IMO, Apple is a "fun" company. They are fun to follow, they are allowed to innovate more quickly because their target market allows them to move quickly. Their products are more interesting for consumers, outside of the IT world few get excited about a new Active Directory feature... "Oh, oh - it is easier to setup a Forest now!"
I think Mr. Allchin's comments are very accurate in the original poster's quote. Does that mean Apple is not innovative, no of course not. As an enthusiast I like Apple explicitly for the reason that they can bring new ideas to fruition more quickly than Microsoft. It's fun to play with the newest software concepts earlier than most. However, I think it is foolish to say that Apple doesn't copy good ideas from competitors, yes, even Microsoft. They do copy and they will continue to copy good ideas from Microsoft or any other competitor. If they didn't they would be stupid and acting out of pride. This is business, plain and simple.
Dare I say it... I think Steve's RDF has gotten to some people in this thread. I hope the Kool-Aid was tasty!
I like the Kool-Aid too, but I try not to drink too much of it.
-feakbeak
Interesting perspective, and ultimately I don't think atrue, accurate picture of this morass can be found here in a discussion board.
Though I'm still reminded that one can't steal something that doesn't exist - no matter how slow a company is in developing it. This is why Apple keeps their stuff so silent - it reduces others developing their ideas.
I place the blame of this firmly in MS's lap for blabbing so much.
Interesting perspective, and ultimately I don't think atrue, accurate picture of this morass can be found here in a discussion board.
Though I'm still reminded that one can't steal something that doesn't exist - no matter how slow a company is in developing it. This is why Apple keeps their stuff so silent - it reduces others developing their ideas.
I place the blame of this firmly in MS's lap for blabbing so much.
No, I don't consider it stealing either. These are broad ideas, user switching without logging out. A fast system search performed based on metadata and/or journaled drives. These are generic ideas - nothing concrete that could be considered stolen.patrick0brien said:
I also agree that Microsoft was stupid to for hyping these concepts intended for Longhorn 3-4 years before launch. I don't know what they were trying to accomplish with that move. I will add that with all the delays and the trimming of the feature list for Longhorn there is no way that it can live up to the hype and expectations. I believe it will be a disappointment. I hope I am wrong, I really like Windows XP Pro and I hope the next installment from MS is an improvement, but I am skeptical at this point.
The main point of my post was to add a different perspective to the thread. Plus, it always bugs me when people on MR act as if Apple can do no wrong. Apple is not the only innovative and intelligent company making software. I just don't understand - it's not as if Apple taking and implementing other people's initial ideas makes them a "bad company". It is simply lost on me. *shrug*
Okay, let's take Microsoft's fast user switching for example. When last I looked, XP's fast user switching was anything but fast, not to mention the fact that it bogs down the rest of the system when it tries to keep two or more users logged in at the same time. Apple innovated fast user switching, bucause they made it work. How many people can you think of that have at one time or another thought about making a time machine? Are they innovative? No, because they have not found a way to make it work. Microsoft does the same thing with a lot of things, fast user switching being one of them. Who's saying that Apple didn't have the idea for fast user switching a long time before MS did, anyway? MS cannot claim the invention of fast user switching, because the purpose of fast user switching is to be able to switch users quickly! While XP can switch users in no less than 4 clicks, OS X does it in one click. Which one is actually fast user switching? You tell me.
feakbeak said:Okay, at risk of getting slammed by everyone else in this thread, I'm going to go against the grain. I'm not trying to troll but you all run to Apple's defense on this issue. I don't think Apple needs to be defended - they are a company, they saw good ideas and they implemented them.
Microsoft did think of and implement fast user switching before Apple. Apple did in fact copy them, why? Becuase it was a good idea and they were smart to add it to their OS. This is not a matter of pride or who is smarter or more innovative, it's business.
I honestly believe that both Microsoft and Apple have very intelligent, talented and creative employees working for them. The big differences in the way Microsoft and Apple operate has to do with their marketshare and primary markets. Microsoft is mostly targeting businesses - not home consumers. Microsoft's multimedia software sucks, it is horrible, IMO. Apple's OS X and iLife are great products and very intuitive. I really do believe that Macs are much better systems for average home users who don't wish to know much about computing. However, Apple cannot hold a candle to Microsoft whe it comes to enterprise software. Active Directory, Exchange, Sharepoint server, MS SQL Server.. I couldn't list all of the enterprise server products. Yes, some other companies offer some competing products in this market, but few cover the entire needs of an medium to large scale businesses. It all integrates and it's a huge system of software that is supported, that is why companies buy it and that is why Microsoft makes a killing. Microsoft "plays" with the home market and it wants more, it is greedy. However, the home market has never been their focus.
Apple can implement these features much more quickly because they are smaller, they do not have any many obligations to meet. They are quick and nimble and can take an idea from concept to release much faster. They don't have a plethora of hardware to support with their OS, that helps them develop OS X more quickly. They take more risks though, the initial releases of OS X have sometimes had rather large bugs. Apple also does not support their software very far back. You can't even install iLife '05 on Jaguar. Microsoft is still supporting NT 4 for corporate customers with support. Apple supports older hardware much better, but they do not support old software very well. Microsoft puts out fewer OS releases because that is the corporate world asked them to do, particularly for server OSes. It is VERY expensive for a company to migrate to a new operating system internally. It is a very complicated process, I work in this area of computing. I write software to help companies make such migrations.
IMO, Apple is a "fun" company. They are fun to follow, they are allowed to innovate more quickly because their target market allows them to move quickly. Their products are more interesting for consumers, outside of the IT world few get excited about a new Active Directory feature... "Oh oh - it is easier to setup a Forest now!"
I think Mr. Allchin's comments are very accurate in the original poster's quote. Does that mean Apple is not innovative, no of course not. As an enthusiast I like Apple explicitly for the reason that they can bring new ideas to fruition more quickly than Microsoft. It's fun to play with the newest software concepts earlier than most. However, I think it is foolish to say that Apple doesn't copy good ideas from competitors, yes, even Microsoft. They do copy and they will continue to copy good ideas from Microsoft or any other competitor. If they didn't they would be stupid and acting out of pride. This is business, plain and simple.
Dare I say it... I think Steve's RDF has gotten to some people in this thread. I hope the Kool-Aid was tasty!
Thank God I'm not the only on in here that thinks that way. Phewww, I thought it was bad when I was called a troll.
One of the things that has to be taken into account with Microsoft and Longhorn is the fact that Microsoft is still trying to maintain some form of backwards compatability with their operating system. Many Windows users today are still operating on Win 98 (heck I have a machine running 95!). I recently had to install Office 97 before running my Office 2000 upgrade on a Win XP machine. It's kind of nice to have that backwards compatability.
However, with that luxury comes problems and delays because you're trying to spin so many plates at once: virus security, ease of use, file system, enhanced network security, etc. When Apple dropped support altogether for OS 9 and disabled newer systems from booting into OS 9, many diehard macusers bithced about that. Classic mode in OS X was only a patch and it didn't not fit seemlessly with OS X as a whole, and at times classic programs even crashed frequently in OS X.
But they did what they did (Apple). And even though many users pouted and dragged their feet from 9 to X, they switched over anyway. It's easier to kind of "force," if you will, the transition if you have the kind of market Apple has.
The security issue is also misrepresented. How many security updates have we been getting for OS X? You know full well that hackers don't care to waste their time attacking OS X. They're not trying to bring down 15 or 20 mac users groups scattered about, they're trying to bring down networks of hundreds of thousands of business machines running Windows, not just to poke at Microsoft, but to bring many business down to their knees. And those actions are illegal and carry severe punishment. Think of it this way, the South Sandwhich Islands may not experience many terrorist attacks or high crime, but does that necessarily make it a better and safer place than the US? If Apple were Microsoft and had 90% marketshare, do you think you'd all sit comfortably without having to run any antivirus software? In the early days viruses weren't simply isolated to DOS and Windows, many were coded in UNIX and even UNIX had some major holes in its OS at the time (GNUemacs hole for one).
dsharits, was your post in response to mine? I think you are missing my point. I said nothing about quality of implementation. I was talking about implementing another company's idea. Even Jim Allchin admitted that Apple had done a better job implementing some of the features, particularly the visual aspect. I thought he his comments were accurate and fair and not really offensive towards Apple.
I hate these "you copied us, we copied them" stuff.
Windows is working on a what, 5-year-old platform that is full of secutirity holes, glitches and driver issues?
Shutup already, M$.
Windows is working on a what, 5-year-old platform that is full of secutirity holes, glitches and driver issues?
Shutup already, M$.
feakbeak said:
How do you copy a concept?
Let's say you have Company A that makes stoplights with standard bulbs in them, and you have another Company B that comes along and makes stoplights with LEDs. Would say the Company B is copying Company A just because Company B is making stoplights?