Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
No, but it does explain what people want. Their biggest profit ever for Q1 2015 is certainly not prove of stupidness as you are saying.

I didn't say they were being stupid. On the other hand, Microsoft was still raking in cash during the Vista years. I take it this means Vista was a rousing success?
 
have you compared the earnings release of both Apple and MS lately??????? Guess not.

here's the problem:

Apple's profits aren't primarily driven by their PC and OS.

Apple's Net sales of Mac's is only 10% of their revenues, or roughly 13billion of their income.

given I don't think apple reports how much profit the Mac division makes of their total profits, if you take the mac profits at 10% of the 31bil profit, Mac profits are 3.1B (estimated)

While this is not bad and nobody should ever think this is bad. Microsoft is predominantly software based company (very little of their revenues are derived from hardware), Microsofts profits were around 6Billion.

In the realm of PC's and computers, Apple is a smaller player. They are just a very visible player.

now, if you're talking about overall consumer preference for consumer devices? Yeah, Apple is the king right now.
 
It wasn't so much that it was a terribly designed OS (though it did have some steep system requirements for the time), so much as they improved a lot of things under the hood that didn't exactly play well with a lot of the old stuff.

This is something Apple can get away with easier than MS can. When they improve the underlying OS, they build their computers around it, and watch their developers fall in line. It's a smooth transition. MS had people shoehorning the old way of doing things onto a new system, and the OEMs slapping it onto machines that weren't capable of running it. The end results made for a terrible first impression.

Naturally Apple has huge advantages in being able to control both hardware and software (and largely - as you point out - developers as well). But MS had never created a significantly bloated (resource hungry) OS before, and they never should have started. Especially when CPU performance advancement was slowing down at the very same time. It was a bad move that didn't make sense.

Moving away from the old standards was going to be hard enough as it was - why throw a wrench in the works?
 
Incredible achievement. This here, folks, is what innovation looks like. Timing couldn't have looked better as the latest offerings from Apple were beginning to make innovation look like something from the video game industry with incremental updates and gimmicks: Force Touch, Touch ID, Apple Pay, Retina HD Display, Taptic Engine. And let's not forget the anorexic iPhone and MacBook. Here's a clue, Cupertino: as a phone's display gets larger, the overall device size should be the same thickness as the previous generation. That's good design. Pack it with a larger battery. Thickness and weight have NOTHING to do with user operability, even one-handed use.

Back to Microsoft: My faith in the tech industry continues to rebound with every new innovation from this company. Couldn't be happier with their design philosophy. I mean, have you seen how Joe Belfiore's hair is coifed? Jony Ive doesn't even have hair. In fact I suspect Ive has his design cohorts surround him and look to his barren dome to inspire the next generation of Apple products.

I simply cannot wait to test Edge out. Safari seems to have gotten lost during its most recent expedition. We all know what's happening in Craig Federighi's office right now. Something tells me that Safari is going to have a whole new design at this year's WWDC...
 
Drawing pictures on the screen and circling content is not creating. That fact aside, does anyone want to do that? Draw on content on a site I mean. Honestly, I'm curious if anyone has a desire to do that. Just because it has no appeal to me doesnt mean its a total waste for someone else.

Thoughts?
Collaborators in a business meeting do it all the time. (Yeah, I know... I mentioned "business" in an Apple fanboy forum so that probably will offend people :))

I can also see a class instructor using this feature.

And let's not forget that in Spar... err, "Edge"... you can send the webpage to others with your annotations intact.

I simply cannot wait to test Edge out. Safari seems to have gotten lost during its most recent expedition. We all know what's happening in Craig Federighi's office right now. Something tells me that Safari is going to have a whole new design at this year's WWDC...
I dunno. There was I time when I felt the same way but Apple does not look over their shoulders. They've never let the competition dictate their actions nor have they ever asked us stupid consumers what we want. Perhaps one day they will change their model but for now, there seems no reason to.
 
Last edited:
You mean CMD + another key and then maybe wait for a window and then click? Wasteful action, that's what I'm talking about. Keyboard shortcuts are still wasted key strokes and not intuitive.


What are you clicking? Do you have a specific example of how Windows requires less actions? My experience using Macs has always been just as fast if not faster once I learned how to properly use the OS and the hotkeys. Anytime you elect to use the mouse you are going to be slower.
 
Naturally Apple has huge advantages in being able to control both hardware and software (and largely - as you point out - developers as well). But MS had never created a significantly bloated (resource hungry) OS before, and they never should have started. Especially when CPU performance advancement was slowing down at the very same time. It was a bad move that didn't make sense.

I'd say that it was a gambit that got them a ton of flak up front, but eventually paid off for them in the end. While Vista required a pretty stout machine by 2007 standards, Windows overall system requirements haven't changed a bit since. Win7, 8/8.1 and 10 (though only 32-bit for the latter two) can run on the exact same hardware Vista can just as well, if not slightly better.

To put that in perspective, our smartphones are probably more powerful than those stout 2007 machines. By forcing some things, they ended up creating a more stable codebase to build their future OSes on.
 
And in typical MS fashion, these aren't even references that they invented. They took (bought) them from Bungie.

Motorola also bought "Droid" from Lucasfilm.

----------

Save everyone time when IE is one of the most used browsers in the world? What type of logic is that?

Used by people who don't know you can download other browsers or haven't tried anything else. Nobody would miss it.
 
Last edited:

Dude. Netmarketshare is famous for its ridiculous statistics that have long lost any touch of reality. Like every statistics of every major website you'll see makes you wonder what Netmarketshare counts.

Try this one instead:
http://gs.statcounter.com/#desktop-browser-ww-monthly-200807-201503

or this one:
http://www.w3counter.com/trends

IE is dead and that's why Microsoft is getting rid of it.



This is a telling chart:
600px-Usage_share_of_web_browsers_%28Source_StatCounter%29.svg.png
 
Windows management in OS X is terrible compared to Windows. OS X requires at least two clicks for every action that only requires one in Windows. Apple needs to hire a UX expert to make OS X more efficient and user friendly. And allow users to customize the interface with color! Black and white is boring.

I think widow management isn't that bad in OS X. One thing I really like is that the app switcher switches between running apps and not every open window in an app. The latter becomes really messy in Windows when one has a lot of open windows and apps running. The small thumbnails of each window isn't of much help. I have much better flow working in OS X when it comes to this and it is great being able to set a separate keyboard combo for switching between windows in the frontmost app. One thing I don't like in OS X is how multiple ”full screen running” apps are treated (i.e. Spaces). I think they are rather clumsy to work with and switch between, so I rarely use an app in full screen.

”OS X requires at least two clicks for every action that only requires one in Windows.”

Please give an example, because I think it's the exact opposite – more clicks fro common tasks in Windows compared to OS X. For example if an app ha more than one window open a click on the app icon in the task bar brings up thumbnails of the open windows then you have to move the mouse to the one you want (after you've figured out which it is…) and then click it yet again. Same with the ”task switcher” – if you activate it (alt tab) and then found the window you want on top you have to click it. In OS X you can just point at the app you want to come to the front and then ”release”*the app switcher (cmd tab).

Finding preferences for the frontmost app is almost always possible using ”cmd ,”

While I agree there are several things that can improve in OS X, I'd say it overall requires less clicks than Windows.
 
I didn't say they were being stupid. On the other hand, Microsoft was still raking in cash during the Vista years. I take it this means Vista was a rousing success?

Of course Vista was a success, short-term.
It's not that people who bought a new $500 computer in 2007 had much of a choice.

Long-term it was a huge problem, because it made people happily switch over to worry-free smartphones and tablets that don't run Windows.
If Vista had been really good, that wouldn't have happened that fast and thoroughly.

However, I think the original discussion wasn't about quality, it was about success. And ignoring that Apple was much more succesful than Microsoft in the past few years is just silly.
 
I'd say that it was a gambit that got them a ton of flak up front, but eventually paid off for them in the end. While Vista required a pretty stout machine by 2007 standards, Windows overall system requirements haven't changed a bit since. Win7, 8/8.1 and 10 (though only 32-bit for the latter two) can run on the exact same hardware Vista can just as well, if not slightly better.

To put that in perspective, our smartphones are probably more powerful than those stout 2007 machines. By forcing some things, they ended up creating a more stable codebase to build their future OSes on.

I think the cost was too high. Way too high. It actually completely changed their "position in the race."
 
Wait... People use explorer????? :eek::confused::eek::confused:

Wtf...

That they do.

Dude. Netmarketshare is famous for its ridiculous statistics that have long lost any touch of reality. Like every statistics of every major website you'll see makes you wonder what Netmarketshare counts.

Try this one instead:
http://gs.statcounter.com/#desktop-browser-ww-monthly-200807-201503

or this one:
http://www.w3counter.com/trends

IE is dead and that's why Microsoft is getting rid of it.



This is a telling chart:
Image

So my stat is bad because you said so and yours is right because you said so?

----------

Of course Vista was a success, short-term.
It's not that people who bought a new $500 computer in 2007 had much of a choice.

Long-term it was a huge problem, because it made people happily switch over to worry-free smartphones and tablets that don't run Windows.
If Vista had been really good, that wouldn't have happened that fast and thoroughly.

However, I think the original discussion wasn't about quality, it was about success. And ignoring that Apple was much more succesful than Microsoft in the past few years is just silly.

And all of that still isn't to say that they haven't had some missteps this last year. If Microsoft is smart, they'll capitalize on those missteps.

----------

Motorola also bought "Droid" from Lucasfilm.

----------



Used by people who don't know you can download other browsers or haven't tried anything else. Nobody would miss it.

Or people who are happy with IE. The clever days of "IE sucks lol" are gone.
 
According to Microsoft, the Edge name refers to being on the edge of consuming and creating.

"EDGE" is a name for something we had before 3G and loooooong before 4G LTE. To tech consumers, it sounds antiquated. Haven't marketers learned anything from the "HD-DVD" debacle? It sounded older than Blu-Ray (after all, we already had "DVD"!), even though it was technically superior. We all know how that worked out for them.
 
Or people who are happy with IE. The clever days of "IE sucks lol" are gone.

The only people happy with IE are those who haven't tried other browsers. It's not just an Internet meme that IE sucks. Every new version of it actually sucks. Sure, it's not as bad as before, but it's still the worst.
 
The only people happy with IE are those who haven't tried other browsers. It's not just an Internet meme that IE sucks. IE proves itself worthless with every version.

I have used plenty of web browsers and it's still my browser of choice on Windows devices. It takes up fewer resources, is generally about the same speed (or faster in some cases) and renders fonts better on HiDPI screens. Spartan does better, so I'll be moving to that.

Edit: As for it being the worst, it's no Chrome. High resource use, laggy rendering, poor font rendering on HiDPI screens, and a continued reliance on proprietary prefixes.
 
I think the cost was too high. Way too high. It actually completely changed their "position in the race."

Not really. The one thing that hurt MS the most was the iPhone and the halo effect surrounding it. But even that only put the barest dent into their desktop/laptop OS dominance, which is still sitting at ~85% in the US, and higher elsewhere in the world.

If there's one place MS is really suffering right now, it's their mobile lineup. The Surface RT died an ignoble death, and Windows Phone is just hanging in there. But that doesn't have anything to do with Vista.
 
I have to say, Windows 10 is looking awesome. Definitely more exciting than OS X where all we're getting is translucent bugs lately.

----------

Not really. The one thing that hurt MS the most was the iPhone and the halo effect surrounding it. But even that only put the barest dent into their desktop/laptop OS dominance, which is still sitting at ~85% in the US, and higher elsewhere in the world.

If there's one place MS is really suffering right now, it's their mobile lineup. The Surface RT died an ignoble death, and Windows Phone is just hanging in there. But that doesn't have anything to do with Vista.

There latest offerings are really promising though. Windows 10 looks great.
 
I wonder if Apple hadn't updated Safari for 4 years with any new features and then suddenly sprung the current Safari we'd all be impressed too.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.