I know, I know, I know... yet another 'Duh' moment for the tech media...

We knew that (at least some or most of us, depending on how one approach this); after all, we have been watching and generally supporting Apple for the longest time.

Guest, getting tired of these 'Duh' moments...

while there are significant reasons that the Apple is better than M$ one of the most important is there dependence on supporting OLD systems. The transition to OSX and Intel provide the best roadmap that M$ should follow. There allowing major software manuf. to dictate to them is a major failure.
Not forgetting trying to accomodate every piece of hardware. Apple clearly defines hardware, reducing problems.

Did MS really have a five-year plan? I thought it was a two-year plan gone awry.

Too funny! I nearly bust a gut laughing at that one.

Quote

kennylucius wrote:
Did MS really have a five-year plan? I thought it was a two-year plan gone awry.

I hardly think that the changes from Tiger to Leopard can be compared to a Windows service pack.

Windows service packs are released to fix bugs and correct design problems just as software updates to OSX are released periodically. They are not the next major version.

Hmm. So by that logic, Apple was wrong to make OS X. They should have instead slowly improved Mac OS 9!

These guys have it all backwards. It's Microsoft that's been making slow steps. They've been building on the same code base for much longer than Apple. It's the cause of most of their problems, from security holes to multi-year delays.

In the early days of Longhorn, it was supposed to be revolutionary, closer to what OS X was to OS 9 than anything else. But Microsoft slowly backed away from that, to the point where Vista IS more of a "slow step in OS evolution."

I guess Longhorn was really more akin to Copland (the ill-fated "modern" successor to Macintosh System 7). It was just too big a task. Apple's couldn't do it, and years later they figured out why: they were going too slow. They had to do something drastic, and that was OS X, with a completely new foundation. I think Microsoft is in a similar situation now.

Now that Apple has made that big leap to OS X, they have the luxury of reverting to a slower pace. Microsoft can't pull that off, and the sooner they realize that, the better off Windows will be. The fact is, Microsoft and Apple face very different challenges. You can't just look at what works for Apple now and assume it will work for Microsoft, too (or vice-versa). A quick look through tech history shows more comparable situations.

Back in June, Mary Jo Foley of ZDnet fame wrote a stunningly concise article, "Leopard looks like … Vista". Truer words were never spoken! Many of you peolpe out there do not realize the truth, all software is born at Microsoft, even our competitor's! You see the Apple hackers constantly scour our site for hints of what we are planing for the future, they send spys, moles, fake pizza-boys,... In their desperation they even steal experimental betas so far from production that even most MS employees don't realise that we are developing them. They then slap some of their crappy code under these interfaces and claim to have developed it first.
This is why Leopard and all of the so called versions of OSX over the past 5 years looks like Vista, you see, Vista is the real thing. We just take our time to make sure it is done right before releasing to the public. We care, we take our time, we do stable coding. Don't be duped by imitations.
Ms Foley, you have been backing down, trying to explain, apologising, ... DON'T! Stand strong, tell the truth, you were absolutely right all the time, "Leopard looks like Vista!"
http://fakesteveballmer.blogspot.com