Just wondering, how come microsoft has word and whatnot for apple, but apple doesnt release any of its software for PC's? It seems they would sell much more products that way.
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.
Why does MS make apple programs, but apple doesnt make MS programs?
- Thread starter bingbebong
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
michael.lauden
macrumors 68020
MasterNile
macrumors 65816
Because MS is not trying to leverage their programs to get more hardware sales like Apple does. However they have made iTunes, Quicktime, and Safari for Windows. (notice it's only the programs that are free?)
adrianblaine
macrumors 65816
63dot
macrumors 603
Apple is far too small and has enough on their hands with OSX, iPhone, iPod, Mac, iTunes, and an excellent technical support staff. Maybe one day Apple will continue its slow rise and could one day challenge MS Office in market share. That would be very nice but not in the cards anytime soon. Apple's software offerings are far better than when they started out.
but dont pc's and apple use the same hardware now? what is preventing me from putting osx on my pc? it seems kinda weird that to run apple software (not the free software) i must but apple hardware, yet apple people can run word just fine....
SkyBell
macrumors 604
There's a market for MS Office for Mac, one large enough to make it worth the coding time for Microsoft.
There's also a market for OS X on PC's, but it would kill Apple's own hardware sales. So they restrict it to the certain kinds of hardware that they put in Macs.
MasterNile
macrumors 65816
PCs use BIOS, Macs use EFI, there are ways around it but it's not as simple as just putting the OS X disk into a PC and installing it.
EDIT: it is not weird at all, Microsoft doesn't make PCs, they only make software and want that software available to as many people as possible, Apple makes software and hardware, so they want you to buy both to get one or the other.
MasterNile
macrumors 65816
What do you mean no demand, you're saying PC users wouldn't like/use iLife for basic video and audio editing? A lot of college/high school students that I know would love to run iLife on their PCs and for $80 would be a good deal.
clevin
macrumors G3
I do not think you can judge a market by some highschool/college people you know.
there are numerous video/audio editing software out there for free/shareware on pc, etc, what data do you have to show iLife has any significant demand?
MasterNile
macrumors 65816
What data do you have to show it doesn't? I think it has nothing to do with demand, Apple doesn't release iLife for Windows cause they want you to buy their overpriced hardware.
Because you can't install OSX on a PC (w/o major hacking). Even so, Apple has released some of it's software for PC, as people have already mentioned above.
clevin
macrumors G3
that might be part of the reason. But I have yet to see anybody anywhere mention iLife being a significant attraction to switch people to mac.
anyway, I didn't started iLife popularity discussion, so the burden should reside on you to show the positive.
I did started general statement, but I guess since the original discussion started with word. Its better to talk about iWork, which I doubt there is any significant demand from pc users.
DoFoT9
macrumors P6
its not that major to do... its VERY easy..... hardly any hacking at all. unless you know what your talking about please dont give the wrong impressions to people..
IMO i think the main reason is because apple is a niche company, they fit into their own area - they dont want to be generalised as another software company that makes crap for windows!!
apple is mainly a hardware company, software is just a necessity to make their hardware sell.
MasterNile
macrumors 65816
Well we can both agree that Apple's notebooks at least are popular amongst college students yes? Would you not attribute at least some of that to iLife? Not to mention the semi pro apps such as Aperture, Logic Express, and Final Cut Express.
I wouldn't even know how to find actual studies on demand for iLife or other Apple software on PC as I don't believe there have been any to prove either view, but I do have personal anecdotes from 2 people who have bought a total of 3 other Macs that I owned that wanted them partly just for iLife.
I wouldn't even know how to find actual studies on demand for iLife or other Apple software on PC as I don't believe there have been any to prove either view, but I do have personal anecdotes from 2 people who have bought a total of 3 other Macs that I owned that wanted them partly just for iLife.
I would agree with you, there is probably enough demand. However iLife is a great reason for average consumers to buy a Mac, and I don't think we'll ever see it on Windows.
The same goes for iWork, I think Apple enjoys the fact that they have something like Keynote which just blows away PowerPoint and that users can only get that kind of amazing software on Mac. Hopefully sooner or later Numbers and Pages will also have the same perception in general. That way Apple can sell more Macs, more copies of OS X, and take sales of Windows and Office away from MS.
The current apps Apple makes for windows are the proverbial "glasses of ice water for all the people in hell", to paraphrase Steve.
Safari - Making this available on Windows increases Webkit's market share, which Apple can use to help make sure open standards are used on the web and kept out of the control of MS.
iTunes - Obviously a lot of windows users have iPods and it makes sense for Apple to have their software on windows, they also gain a lot from being able to sell Music/Movies/TV Shows/iPhone Apps to all those people.
Quicktime - Quicktime is required for iTunes so thats a big reason to have t on windows, but it also helps push .mp4 and keeps Microsoft from being able to make WMV the de facto standard. WMV used to be a lot bigger a few years ago and MS's version of WMP for Mac sucked horribly.
miles01110
macrumors Core
Maybe some, but not all. I think the "no hassle" nature of OS X, especially wrt viruses and other sorts of infection are really the underlying causes behind the Mac portables selling so well. Even universities are starting to advertise them. And college students don't typically use Pro apps.
That's great... I've got personal anectdotes from 50 people that have bought Macs that wanted them for something actually useful. Proves nothing.
SnowLeopard2008
macrumors 604
Microsoft is a [fail] software company. Apple is a [successful] software and hardware company. Microsoft is also much bigger than Apple. Porting suites like iLife to PC would wreck havoc and cause damage to both companies. QuickTime, Safari, iTunes, Filemaker are all software that Apple makes available to both OSes (Windows and Mac OS X).
If Apple made iLife for PC, then their quality will slip because PC has all sorts of hardware combinations, most of them aimed towards cheap to manufacture ideals. Not all of them would run iLife well or at all. Apple keeps a tight control (as they should) over their Macs hardware to ensure a great experience. And in addition, Windows changes too much and almost every single new version leaves compatibility a nuclear war zone. For one year, XP programs had problems running in Vista. The platform's coding varied by too much.
Let's not start a Mac vs. PC war...
My last point is that Apple's apps for Windows have maximum compatibility with the Mac versions. Microsoft's Office Suite for Mac sucks because the simple action of using Spaces in Leopard will screw up the Formatting Palette (basic necessity) in any Office app. And there is a cost factor. Office costs an upwards of $300. Apple's much better suite called iWork is just $79. In a business stand point, Microsoft makes more from $300 than Apple from $79.
If Apple made iLife for PC, then their quality will slip because PC has all sorts of hardware combinations, most of them aimed towards cheap to manufacture ideals. Not all of them would run iLife well or at all. Apple keeps a tight control (as they should) over their Macs hardware to ensure a great experience. And in addition, Windows changes too much and almost every single new version leaves compatibility a nuclear war zone. For one year, XP programs had problems running in Vista. The platform's coding varied by too much.
Let's not start a Mac vs. PC war...
My last point is that Apple's apps for Windows have maximum compatibility with the Mac versions. Microsoft's Office Suite for Mac sucks because the simple action of using Spaces in Leopard will screw up the Formatting Palette (basic necessity) in any Office app. And there is a cost factor. Office costs an upwards of $300. Apple's much better suite called iWork is just $79. In a business stand point, Microsoft makes more from $300 than Apple from $79.
miles01110
macrumors Core
MasterNile
macrumors 65816
I think you really missed my point, do your personal anecdotes show lack of demand for iLife on windows? All that shows is demand for OS X, it doesn't disprove anything that I said.
And as I said if there were any kind of study that proved or disproved what I said I would gladly look at it, since I don't believe there is, all we can go by is anecdotes, don't you agree?
miles01110
macrumors Core
Just as yours doesn't disprove the opposite position. Do you want to keep going in circles like this?
No.