Microsoft vs. Apple: Monopolist vs. Innovator

Both Microsoft (MSFT) and Apple (AAPL) belong to the Most Innovative Companies category; however, we rarely see anything original from MSFT. Rather, Microsoft is widely accused of copying ideas from Apple. I guess the reason MSFT is in this category is because the Windows OS has an innovative meaning to the entire human being. This type of innovation doesn't necessarily indicate creativity, which, on the other hand, is the exact characteristic that differentiates Apple from the rest.

On the other hand, Microsoft is the indisputable monopolist in the Operating System world, owning around 88% of the market, and Mac OS owns around 10%. However, according to many users with Mac experience, the OS from Apple is so much cooler than Vista, and for years, there have been voices arguing that Apple should license the OS to the OEMs, the same way that Microsoft sells its flagship product.

Here are some thoughts on the rivalry.

1) Why is Microsoft less creative?

With such a dominating market share, you might think that the business operation environment for MSFT won't be that tough. But it is the opposite - MSFT is constantly under immense internal/external pressure, which exhausts its power to stay innovative.

First, internally, the Windows OS, if not the most complex software system in human history, is well qualified to be one of the most complex ones. Virtually it is like a platform of your daily life, somewhat matching the unlimited possibilities in real life. To develop and support such a system is a daunting task for any single company. Think about it: billions of dollars in budget, thousands of developers, hundreds of modules, dozens of versions, iterations, releases, integrations, testings, code bases, documents ... there is an endless task list. If you have the experience managing a one million dollar project, you know it only takes a few mistakes to see your process spin out of control. Then try to imagine this monster at MSFT's hand. I have no clue how MSFT manages the life-cycle of Windows, but for sure it is a process demanding rigor, consistency, cautious planning and solid implementation. I won't say these values prohibit creativity, but for sure, they won't encourage creativity.

Second, Windows is an OS independent of the hardware, and MSFT only specifies the minimum hardware requirements. We understand that this is required for MSFT to maximize its market share. The result is, MSFT has to deal with the compatibility issue with hundreds of hardware variations. On the other hand, the OS is a platform, i.e., it opens its interface for thousands of other software companies to build upon, which creates another compatibility issue. Then adding the challenges created by rapid evolving technologies and backward compatibility, these could easily turn into a disaster that devours the company. Again this is the daily task of MSFT.

Third, Windows is estimated to have more than 1 billion users worldwide, which means it is open to unlimited possibilities/challenges/risks created by the immense brain power of a vast crowd, where exist countless usage patterns/habits, unbelievable stupidity and unimaginable brilliance, geeks, hackers, pirates, virus writers, Windows lovers, Microsoft haters..... As an indicator, MSFT never escaped from the criticism about the security flaws of Windows, even after spending billions of dollars year after year attempting to fix it. Here, code quality actually is only one side of the story, the other side, the enormous user base.

In summary, all these demanding tasks that fill the daily life of MSFT ultimately defined the overall operation atmosphere and corporate culture. Here, the top priority is about being solid, thorough, proactive and making less mistakes. Then how about creativity - stay original and novel? Sure it is nice to have creativity, but it is fine to live without it. It is a shame to copy ideas invented by others. But business-wise, what is the big deal? As long as it is legal, it simply means less cost.

2) Why is Apple more innovative?

At first glance, it looks like in the CPU market we have a similar competition pattern with Intel (INTC) controlling the market and AMD as a challenger. Here, the dominating market share gives Intel extra power over AMD, because it may directly squeeze the margin of AMD by reducing the price of its own chips. You may think that in the OS world,MSFT would have the same leverage over Apple, but not really.

The secret lies in Apple's bundling strategy, i.e., it doesn't allow the Mac OS to be installed on any non-Apple branded hardware. In other words, Apple refuses to open its software to the open public. What does Apple gain from this? It avoids the full-blown competition, as well as the big headaches that MSFT has to deal with (listed above). Furthermore, from the space that the monopolist's power can't reach, Apple created itself a very stable niche market with a group of very loyal users.

First, through bundling, Apple has full control over the hardware platform its software runs on, virtually eliminating all hardware compatibility issues that MSFT has, and rendering the backward compatibility into a minor problem. This translates directly into a lean product management process and less cost.

Second, Apple has full control over the look and feel of its product, thus retaining the leverage to consistently maintain the luxury and sleek style of its product, which caters well to its target customer.

Third, fat margins. A Mac normally costs twice as much as a PC with similar processing power.

And fourth, Apple has a small but friendly user base, characterized by higher income and education, which frees the company from dealing with all sorts of malicious behaviors that are very common in the Windows world. As an example, the user doesn't even need an anti-virus software on his or her Mac.

In summary, with MSFT taking on all the hatred and accusation, Apple operates under an environment with much less internal and external pressure, thus gaining the luxury to be internally focused, thus more innovative.

Disclosure: Long AAPL, no positions in MSFT.

Comments

[Soccerfanyes:]

Apple = Toys
Microsoft = Tools

Mar 31 06:06 AM

[Roger Knights:]

MS's real error--probably due to top-management’s-ego --was in not developing a clean-slate and incompatible advanced operating system (with the features originally envisaged for new Windows releases ten years ago) for persons who were displeased with Windows. I.e., it should have gone into competition with itself. That would have sucked most of the oxygen out of Apple and Linux (on the desktop).

Incidentally, it's an exaggeration to say that Macs are twice as expensive as similar PCs, except by a non-apples-to-apples comparison. The Apple tax is considerably less than that (especially for the Mac mini)--and worth it, to most people who do serious work on their computer.

I think Apple could eliminate the Apple-tax issue by giving Mac purchasers a voucher for $500 or so of utility programs. This sort of a deal would be acceptable to many software shops, as the MacUpdate Promo has offered an annual Xmas sale of a bundle of ten utility programs for only $50, which is 90% off. (It must pay off for those shops in the long run, via upgrade fees and word-of-mouth sales.) Alternatively, Apple could simply buy the companies or their products and bundle them with the OS. Apple could do it out of petty cash.

Mar 31 06:26 AM

[Jon T:]

You make it sound like Apple and its users have always have a happy ride. They haven't.

Until quite recently, it was dismissed as being irrelevant, while Microsoft was lauded, however bad it's products and service.

If ever two companies deserve to have opposite fortunes it is Apple and Microsoft.

Were it down to Microsoft, the world would still be on balck and green DOS screens. Just so long as Microsoft kept hold of its monopoly...

Mar 31 08:43 AM

[mollytjm:]

it's not just that Apple consumers are better educated (though by % as a group, they are) or friendlier...hard to gauge that except that the staff in the Apple stores are VERY warm and friendly...and smart.
But Apple always wrote very tight code making for fewer holes for the hacker to explore. probably because Microsoft had such a big platform to write for, all their programs are bloated and messy, even the ones that work very well. This makes it easier to hack.

There is another difference...the attitude at Apple...they actually really like their customers and want to keep them happy.
I've used the big King of Prussia Mall Apple store since it's first day and have never encountered a surly, crabby or arrogant staff person...not in sales or tech. Obviously there are no perfect people on the planet, so there must be some working for Apple... but as much as Apple was exclusive about it's OS, it has always been inclusive about it's customers and users. To Apple, if you use their products, there's no 'them and us'...it's just 'us'.

It's hard to explain this, but you feel it. When my PC friend asked me to take her to the Apple store for her first iPod, she was so astonished at the level of service. When we left she said 'i LOVE it in there!'. Apple just knows how to do it better than anyone else which explains why they have the most profitable retail space per square foot in the country.
Long APPL

Mar 31 08:56 AM

[marv08:]

Quite some points are spot on, but there are two huge mistakes as well:

1. Apple does not "bundle" Macs with OS X (you are assuming the viewpoint that all OSs have to be hardware independent, which has never been the case - not even today, it just happens to be that the market leader is playing it that way, this does not make it the only valid model). Macs are designed as integral devices, hardware and software are designed as a whole – this might not be what everybody wants (some may prefer choice and flexibility over ease of use and stability), but it is what Mac users want. E.g. when buying a PC it might come with hardware components that require the purchase of additional software or an upgrade to the crippled basic home edition of the Windows OS to use it. When Apple added webcams standard in all computers, iChat AV and PhotoBooth were included right there and the OS X SDK allowed developers to make instant use of the frameworks, when Apple added the first SuperDrives (with DVD burning), iDVD, DVD Player and DVD burning support in OS X were right there... there are no loose ends – in my 18 years with PCs loose ends and no compatibility were the norm, development tools were always updated with months or years delay and often lacked support for basic UI components or they simply looked different – these things did never happen with Apple in recent history. It is a completely different philosophy, not just bundling.
2. Macs are NOT twice as expensive. If you subtract the price for iLife equivalent software plus the savings from getting the full premium version of OS X (instead of 10GB of malware and trial versions) from the price of a Mac Mini, your thesis is reading: an equivalent PC can be found for under 200 USD? I do not think so. The iMac features higher quality and greener components than all other brand all-in-ones, faster memory, better CPUs, better and bigger TFT panels (quality S-IPS vs. VA or TN in Dells and HPs) and the cost is pretty much identical. So, bottom line, they are cheaper. The Mac Pro is the cheapest Xeon workstation by any manufacturer – a comparable Dell (which cannot even be found as of now, as they are not even shipping the latest CPUs) is at least 15-20% more expensive (for some configurations the difference is even bigger) – all that with a better and more service-friendly chassis and greener components. The MacBook Air is not more expensive than Dell's Adamo, but it is faster (better graphics, better CPU). The updated MacBooks and MacBook Pros are luxury items though – they have features and a build quality that nobody matches (Unibody, backlit keboard) and they are still not "twice as expensive"... compare Lenovo's w700 to the 17" MacBook Pro and you will find that Apple is not expensive at all. The plastic Lenovo with no environmentally friendly parts, more weight, less battery life, a worse display (a better keyboard though) is more expensive and less powerful. So, bottom line: what is twice as expensive here? Apple does not build junk and a HP 17" laptop for 700 USD is junk (and that is not HPs fault – it is impossible to build a quality laptop at this price point).

Mar 31 09:27 AM

[Mac'em X:]

I certainly agree that Apple is more innovative and creative than Microsoft, but I don't really follow the thesis here. Windows is complex? Yes, but so is Mac OS X. The latter is arguably *more* complex, if we can assume that higher quality = more difficult to create. I've never seen cause to claim that the robust, well-designed software tools that Apple creates are less complex to create than the weak, cobbled-together toys that Microsoft labels business software.

The claim of "twice the price" is false. Yes, Apple hardware is much more expensive than a no-name PC. But a Sony or other name-brand PC is also more expensive than a no-name PC. You need to back up a claim like that with real numbers. (Also, the article is about Apple vs Microsoft, and MS doesn't sell PCs. The product the two have in common is OS software. It's worth noting that at retail, MS's OS costs *more than* Apple's OS.)

The comments about Apple's loyal user base seem to get things backward. I see no reason to claim that Apple gains the freedom to be creative and make a better product because it enjoys a friendly, loyal user base. Rather, it enjoys the friendly, loyal user base because it's creative and makes a better product.

And so on. The conclusion isn't wrong, but the arguments supporting it seem to come out of nowhere.

Mar 31 09:33 AM

[FreeRange:]

You make is sound like we should feel sorry for MSFT because of their need to support this monster which they created. In fact, they created their own quagmire by continuously building bloated products, continuously adding features and functions that 99% of users could have cared less about, just so they could force you into a new version, while stealing from your pocketbook. And worst of all, their business model said it was ok to send out defective and extremely buggy software because they then could justify that you needed to purchase the "new and improved" version. And this isn't even getting into their anticompetitive behavior - this company should have been broken up a long long time ago. (Just look at how they are trying to bury Linux in the international market.) And adding insult to injury, their new marketing campaign doesn't even try to sell or position their own software, its pushing low end hardware from other companies (using actors pretending they're real consumers), and doing so like these low end, underpowered pc's are some kind of gift from heaven. May they continue their loss of market share....

Mar 31 09:40 AM

[marv08:]

I assume he meant OS X is less complex for the user, and that is definitely true. No driver installations, no messed up Registry, no millions of scary alert boxes... Out of 100 help calls I receive from friends and relatives, at least 99 are from Windows users.

I am not sure if "higher quality = more difficult to create" in this very case either. Windows carries a lot of backward-compatibility with things that were poor design decisions in the first place (Registry, DLLs, etc.). Keeping all that somewhat alive can be more complex than starting with a clean slate, and that is pretty much what Apple was able to do with OS X – the underlying FreeBSD was as rock-solid and free of complexities as an OS could be. And they continue down that road, Carbon and PPC are dead man walking already. MS never made any clean cuts.

On Mar 31 09:33 AM Mac'em X wrote:

> Windows is
> complex? Yes, but so is Mac OS X. The latter is arguably *more* complex,
> if we can assume that higher quality = more difficult to create.

Mar 31 09:46 AM

[Thanga J:]

its just two business models ... one of which started building the software for an established hardware giant in IBM...
Apple innovates in Hardware and Software and have proved that a company that does both with dedication can provide an uniform and desired user experience... people develop software for the Mac as well and they are not controlled by Apple... but a mac developer knows the taste of the end user thanks to apple...
End of the day ... people who use their computers extensively will buy Apple and people who use their computers to watch TV and browse the net will buy a PC...
PCs usually mislead users by putting in older/cheaper components to keep the price low... leading to more hardware issues... this is not somthing Microsoft can control but for the user this is a very frustrating experience...
Talking of Cost... how much is the suggested retail price of MS office(even the student version) 149$ versus iWorks 79$?

Mar 31 09:49 AM

[FreeRange:]

The authors comments regarding Apple are grossly off point. Apple is so successful not through bundling, nor through controlling the hardware as well as the software, but because they are truly customer focused - with a passionate mission of creating the best consumer experience. (Did you ever hear those words come out of MSFT? Not.) They are passionate about delivering ease of use, stable products, superior operating environments (hardware and software combinde), market leading and exceptional customer service, and innovating in areas that people really care about. And your comment that Apple's products cost twice as much as a comparable PC are just flat out wrong and misleading. Shame on you! If that were the case their margins would be near 100%! PC's are a commodity and sold as such, stripped down at the low end of the market (you know, the one's MSFT's new ads describe), while Apple sells high value computing systems that contain advanced hardware and software, bundled with market leading applications, that out perform the competition, and create market leading, and significantly higher, usability and satisfaction levels.

Mar 31 09:54 AM

[FreeRange:]

The response below is from a typical uneducated brainwashed MSFT user....


On Mar 31 06:06 AM Soccerfanyes wrote:

> Apple = Toys
> Microsoft = Tools

Mar 31 10:01 AM

[iJah420:]

Soccerfanyes

Apple = Toys
Microsoft = Tools

Are u suggesting that certified UNIX is a toy OS?

Mac OS X Leopard receives UNIX 03 certification

Mac OS X Leopard is now UNIX 03 certified, joining a very short list of official UNIX 03 vendors. This ultimately makes Leopard a more attractive server option for business and enterprise uses.

UR obviously are living in the 90s.

One of the big draws of OS X has always been the UNIX-like, BSD heritage of the operating system. Apple has always touted OS X as UNIX-based and played up the security, stability, and compatibility that comes with the BSD foundation. The company has also gotten in some trouble with The Open Group over Apple's use of the UNIX name, when in fact OS X wasn't actually UNIX-certified. All that is changing, though, since the upcoming Leopard release has received the UNIX 03 certification (PDF) as of May 18, meaning that Mac OS X 10.5 on the Intel platform is a "true" UNIX OS, rather than just being UNIX-like.

It may all sound like semantics, but the certification is actually quite important for Apple and for the OS. The UNIX 03 certification means that Leopard conforms to the Single UNIX Specification Version 3 (SUS), a specification for how things like the shell, compiler, C APIs, and so on should work. Of course, the UNIX 03 certification is only for Intel-based Macs, but I suspect that has more to do with Apple not bothering to get OS X certified for an older architecture. This latest news marks Leopard as the first BSD-based OS to receive the UNIX 03 certification, which is quite an impressive feat, and also adds Apple to a very short list of official UNIX 03 OS vendors (IBM, Sun, and HP being the others).

The fact that Apple can use the UNIX name more freely is cool, but the certification will have a far bigger impact on enterprise customers. Any software written for the SUS specification is easily portable to a UNIX 03 operating system, meaning that enterprise customers who need a "real" UNIX for their applications can now use Leopard servers if they so desire. Leopard's certification also gives developers another option for a development platforms, which could translate into some extra Mac sales. Things like the GUI may not be portable, but any code written according to the specification should be. This would make the UNIX 03 certification a big draw for developers and enterprise customers alike, by providing another (perhaps cheaper) option for developing and running UNIX applications.

Mar 31 10:13 AM

[beech_35:]

"A Mac normally costs twice as much as a PC with similar processing power." This is a false and horribly outdated statement. There is no difference in price between an Apple and similarly equipped Windows PC. None. Apple simply does not build stripped computers - they all have built-in wired and wireless networking, a variety of connection ports, webcams, generous memory and hard disk capacity. They all come with iLife, a product with no Windows counterpart. Safari is the world's fastest, secure, and standards compliant browser. You can run any number of other browsers too, while MSIE represents the biggest virus vector there has ever been. They require no virus protection or removal software - I've never used any and most Apple users don't either.

OS X is a mature and rock-solid operating system, while Vista has been an abject failure. Now MSFT wants us to ignore this and all its previous failed promises and run out to buy Windows 7? Apparently, they are counting on 88% of the market being really, really ignorant. Perhaps they are.

Apple's products also last longer. When you factor replacement cost, Apple computers become much cheaper than any Windows PC. Not only does any significant release of Windows usually require an investment in new hardware while OS X doesn't, Apple's build quality is legendary. I have several laptops, the oldest of which is seven years old and still runs Apple's latest version of OS X, comfortably. None of my Apple computers - NONE, since 1985, has ever broken. Ever. All I've done is added memory and upgraded their hard disk drives. Compare this with my two year old HP/Compaq NC6400, which has been sent back to the factory twice and now has a failing display.

Conclusion: Apple is better, cheaper, easier to use, and easier to own. To spend $599 on a Windows computer is to throw away $599.

Mar 31 10:16 AM

[brewer:]

Get a grip! Macs are nowhere near twice the price. For comparable hardware, I have seen Macs cost LESS at times.

But the Mac is and always has been the better computer. It's a compliment to say a computer is 'Mac like'--indeed this is the industry standard for quality. Windows like has the opposite connotation.

Mar 31 10:24 AM

[roadracer:]

"A Mac normally costs twice as much as a PC with similar processing power"

Pure fiction. Configure a Dell laptop with the same specifications (processor, speed, memory, graphics engine, hard drive, optical drive, etc) as the cheapest Apple MacBook Pro as I did online and.....myth busted!!! The Apple is over $100 cheaper.

Mar 31 10:39 AM

[LongAAPL:]

Your assertion that a comparable Apple computer will cost twice as much as a windows computer is incorrect.

This is a well documented fact proven by many over the past few years.

Other than that, I agree with what you say about the Apple creative environment, but you left out the most influential element - leadership.

Bill Gates is a great person and I admire his success and philanthropic endeavors, however he never was and never will be a charismatic creative leader. He is a genius that had good advice on business strategy, but he was never able to foster an atmosphere of unity or creativity at Microsoft. No one believes that Steve Ballmer is any better.

Steve Jobs on the other hand has always had personal vision and creativity. Sometimes, no one else agrees with him and his often narrow focus may have led to lost business opportunities for him and his companies over the years. I think that with age, this has been tempered with a common business sense. He sets the bar high at Apple and gives the employees a common goal to work toward. That type of creative atmosphere will last well beyond the day when he is no longer involved daily at Apple. The top management people at Apple share his vision and creativity even if they are not as charismatic or visible. They wouldn't be there otherwise.

Mar 31 10:43 AM

[roadracer:]

APPLE:
MacBook Pro 15.4 inch, 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2GB DDR2-800 RAM, 250 GB Serial ATA 5400 RPM Hard Drive, 8x DVD, iSight integrated webcam, Nvidia GeForce 9400M + Nvidia 9600M GT with 256 MB RAM

$1999.00

DELL:

Precision Mobile M4400 15.4 inch, 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2GB DDR2-800 RAM, 250 GB Serial ATA 7200 RPM Hard Drive, 8x DVD, integrated webcam, Nvidia FX 1700M with 512 MB RAM.

$2122.00


AND I had to go to a Dell business series of laptops to get a 15.4 inch screen with an Intel Core 2 Duo processor.


The argument that Macs are more expensive does not hold water when comparing apples to apples, so to speak. Even considering the slight differences the two might cost the same.

Mar 31 10:43 AM

[iJah420:]

AND

You can install Windows on the Mac if you so choose.

OSX can not be installed on the Dell.

What is the average cost of for the Dell for Virus & Anti Spam?

The Mac $0 for Virus & Anti Spam.

Some people u just can't reach.

Mar 31 10:54 AM

[Flightmaster:]

Mac = Toys. Humbug.

A very important point from someone who has just converted his whole company (60 users) to Mac.

1) Mac OSX server costs $1000 and supports UNLIMITED users. It was a cross to bear when -- above 20 users, we had to start spending $200 or so per user to upgrade our Windows Server. This saved us about $8K right off the bat.

2) Virus expenditures dropped though the floor. IT issues have dropped (although we're still struggling with a our IMAP mail.)

3) By installing the iWork suite, we saved about $200 per seat, and are *fully* compatible with .xls and .doc formats. (and .ppt, but Keynote is simply the best presentation software out there. However, spreadsheet power users, which 90% of my staff are not, still do need a copy of Excel, probably until Numbers v.3
This was another $12K saving.

4) Built-in VOIP, Video-conference, meeting planning (iChat and iCal) just works.

5) Happy staff. Priceless.

cP

Mar 31 11:26 AM

[Carousel:]

Before Apple killed the "MacOS" and put 'Mac OS X" stickers all over NeXTSTEP, they did license their OS to OEMs for a while. That, among other things, is what was leading to their demise. Fortunately Jobs came back and killed that terrible idea, and their market share has either doubled or tripled depending on who you ask.

Mar 31 11:43 AM

[Proof is in...:]

Look at the computer of choice at any high-power technology conern. NASA, CalTech, FermiLab, you pick'em. Macs are the morn. Why? As said before, UNIX. What powers the Internet?.....UNIX. Figure it out Einsteins!

Mar 31 11:47 AM

[WayneS:]

Companies buy MSFT so they can get government contracts.

Mar 31 12:15 PM

[Jade Queen:]

My son's grant at MIT just specified Mac. His new machine does everything. He's in geophysics, not art.

He needs reliable crunch power, and he got switched to Mac after many years of something else. He loves it.

The fellow posting about toys needs to update himself.

My guess is some schools have also gotten tired of the Microsoft police at their bookstores.

Microsoft's model seems to be customer-as-serf. It isn't a big surprise that a company that likes customers is doing better.

Bill Gates just spent millions on grants to Monsanto et al. I don't understand what is charitable about that. He is heavily invested in companies with interesting plans for controlling and owning life forms.

It may be that human life forms will figure out how not to be controlled once the controllers cross a tipping point in hubris.

Mar 31 12:45 PM

[jack dee:]

Jack Wx is simply trolling here, the title itself is designed to get feedback without another line.

Seeking alpha has completely given up trying to add value to the site and has opted for volume instead.

Mar 31 12:52 PM

[marv08:]

Well, this goes back a long way... see: www.organicconsumers.o...

On Mar 31 12:45 PM Jade Queen wrote:
> Bill Gates just spent millions on grants to Monsanto et al. I don't
> understand what is charitable about that.

Mar 31 12:53 PM

[Astrochimp:]

The "Apple Tax" is real. I bought a Toshiba Tecra 12/1/08, and love it. Comparable mac hardware cost twice as much at the time - and didn't have a fingerprint reader (which I use all the time) or even enough USB ports.

The idea that Macs are more secure is a myth, happily reinforced by Apple's mendacious "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" ads. Search for the name "Charlie Miller" and see what he has to say about the Macs alleged security - this man knows what he's talking about.


On Mar 31 06:06 AM Soccerfanyes wrote:

> Apple = Toys
> Microsoft = Tools

Mar 31 01:04 PM

[brewer:]

Charlie Miller is a shill. They never got control of any Mac system without having physical access to it. You just took the bait.

Have fun reading fingerprints. Have you tried navel gazing?

Mar 31 01:20 PM

[SiliconVall...:]

Atrochimp,

What graphics card does the Toshiba Tecra use?
What size is the hard drive?
Camera built-in?
iLife?
iWork family for $69?
Unibody case for rugged use?
What OS are you using?

You pay for what you get. There is no "tax", there is only price differences in what we get.


On Mar 31 01:04 PM Astrochimp wrote:

> The "Apple Tax" is real. I bought a Toshiba Tecra 12/1/08, and love
> it. Comparable mac hardware cost twice as much at the time - and
> didn't have a fingerprint reader (which I use all the time) or even
> enough USB ports.
>
> The idea that Macs are more secure is a myth, happily reinforced
> by Apple's mendacious "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" ads. Search for the name
> "Charlie Miller" and see what he has to say about the Macs alleged
> security - this man knows what he's talking about.

Mar 31 01:28 PM

[jmmx:]

"Third, fat margins. A Mac normally costs twice as much as a PC with similar processing power."

Why do you perpetuate this ridiculous lie? By now anyone who writes for the business must understand that this is - and always has been - a falsehood promoted by those tied to the MS/DOS/Windows system. There are many, many articles out there that give side by side analysis of comparable systems. As has been illustrated by Roadracer and Flightmaster above, in many cases macs are actually cheaper. See also:
apple20.blogs.fortune..../

So to continue to make totally outlandish statements such as you did, is nothing short of deceitful.

Mar 31 02:05 PM

[stefn:]

Apple succeeds because it looks at products through the correct end of the telescope. Call it the user's viewpoint. Or the marketing viewpoint. Or the designer's viewpoint. All of which viewpoints most companies, including MSFT, hardly seem to know exist.

Of the four (Aristotelian) causes for every object, most companies recognize the material cause (what the object make of) and the efficient cause (how is it make) but not the formal cause (design) or final cause (what's its purpose and place in society). Additionally telling the story of why users as individuals might want or need its products (marketing) is Apple's forte.

Mar 31 02:28 PM

[Chris Tom:]

Yeah, gaming on a Mac is awesome. You can play any game you want, so long as it is World of Warcraft. You also can have any video card you want, so long as it is two years old, and costs 3 times as much as the PC equivalent. RIP Power Computing, the only good Mac that ever existed.

Mar 31 02:33 PM

[RLLH:]

It is hard to say whether or not Apple is so much more innovative until it is forced to leave the nest. What will happen when and if it must support non Apple products? As you point out it does quite well in it's small portion of the market, although at a very high price.

But what about the millions of people in the world who want more function at a smaller price? Somehow I don't think they all want to march to Apple's regimented beat, and pay whatever price Apple deems is best for them.

Mar 31 02:39 PM

[stefn:]

@ "leaving the nest" Where have you been the last five years? Apple is succeeding the the great wide world of consumer electronics, an arena that MSFT has failed at miserably.

It's MSFT that hasn't learned to leave its monopolistic nest. It can't fly so all it's doing these days is "messing" where it lives.

Mar 31 03:01 PM

[SiliconVall...:]

RLLH,

Not sure what is meant by "supporting non Apple products".

Apple does not make printers so that is one product that Apple supports. Apple does not make routers. Apple works with other WiFi stations. Apple connects to hard disks from various brands. Apple has also been used to drive devices in labs.

So Apple does "support" non-Apple products.

On Mar 31 02:39 PM RLLH wrote:

> It is hard to say whether or not Apple is so much more innovative
> until it is forced to leave the nest. What will happen when and
> if it must support non Apple products? As you point out it does
> quite well in it's small portion of the market, although at a very
> high price.
>
> But what about the millions of people in the world who want more
> function at a smaller price? Somehow I don't think they all want
> to march to Apple's regimented beat, and pay whatever price Apple
> deems is best for them.

Mar 31 03:07 PM

[Cheat Sheet:]

It is awesome. Boot into Windows XP or use Wine on an Intel Mac and you're playing Windows games. It's only software.

On Mar 31 02:33 PM Chris Tom wrote:

> Yeah, gaming on a Mac is awesome. You can play any game you want,
> so long as it is World of Warcraft. You also can have any video
> card you want, so long as it is two years old, and costs 3 times
> as much as the PC equivalent. RIP Power Computing, the only good
> Mac that ever existed.

Mar 31 04:26 PM

[Roger Knights:]

On Mar 31 02:33 PM Chris Tom wrote:

> Yeah, gaming on a Mac is awesome. You can play any game you want,
> so long as it is World of Warcraft. You also can have any video
> card you want, so long as it is two years old, and costs 3 times
> as much as the PC equivalent.

The new Macs with Nvidia graphics chips, especially the high-end ones with the advanced Nvidia chip, will be much better game-players. And Snow Leopard, which will further empower that chip, will be a big help too. The Mac is approaching parity under OS X.
============

PS: In my post earlier (the 2nd in this thread) I blamed MSFT's managerial ego for its failure to develop an alternative, clean-slate OS ten years ago. Other factors I should have mentioned was the cost of doing so--probably a cool billion--and the possible negative PR effect it would have had on Windows' image. (But MS could have "spun" its offering of an alternative in a positive manner, such as "Have it your way," etc.)

Mar 31 05:59 PM

[Mac'em X:]

Chris Tom says that for gaming, it's Windows all the way. That hits the nail right on the head: Windows is a *gaming platform*. OS X is a professional platform. Microsoft's greatest coup has been fooling the world into believing that its gaming platform is to be used in professional environments.

Unfortunately for MS, the world is wising up. And unfortunately for PC makers, even gamers are saying, "Wait a sec, with Mac hardware I can run *all* games, for Windows, OS X or Linux."

Mar 31 08:14 PM

[MADodel:]

You trivialize Macs, but your comment is silly since it has nothing to do with the main premise. Microsoft steals from Apple, so how is the Mac a toy?


On Mar 31 06:06 AM Soccerfanyes wrote:

> Apple = Toys

Apple just works

> Microsoft = Tools

Windows = viruses and exploits.

And I rarely use a Mac. But it shines in ways MSFT can only dream of.

Mar 31 09:19 PM

[beech_35:]

On Mar 31 03:07 PM SiliconValleyJoe wrote:

> Not sure what is meant by "supporting non Apple products". ...
> Apple does not make routers. Apple works with other WiFi stations.

Actually, Apple does make routers: The Airport Extreme, Express, and Time Capsule. Each are capable of performing the functions of routers, switches, and bridges. They all work with other wired and wireless devices from any manufacturer that complies with network standards.

Any Apple computer can share its drives, network connections, and printers with any other computer. You can also install any operating system you like, and as many as you like. Apple's computers are the epitome of interoperability.

Apr 01 12:04 AM

[beech_35:]

Hmm... The dominant OS for the servers that run the internet is FreeBSD and other Unix-like open source kernels. OS X is built on these kernels. OS X Server has been around for years. It runs on all its computers including its server grade hardware, Xserve. I'm not concerned :-)


On Mar 31 02:39 PM RLLH wrote:

> What will happen when and
> if it must support non Apple products?

Apr 01 12:17 AM

[Jack Wx:]

I published the third section on the same topic on my site, which discusses the competition pattern between MSFT and AAPL. Read it here if you like. I have the fourth section to finish, to cover MSFT's chance against Google in the search market. I will combine the last two and submit to SeekingAlpha when I finish. Or you can visit my site for the latest update, though the posts there may be not as finalized as here.

Apr 01 01:48 AM

[wobatus:]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Wow. A cellphone. Innovative.

Apr 01 07:15 AM

[Chris Tom:]

Wine, don't make me laugh. So how are you playing those games at a much reduced framerate on an old and overpriced video card? Oh yeah, you have to use Windows because you are using PC hardware. Way to innovate Apple. In fact Apple's last innovation in hardware was what exactly? Oh, right. They are just using Intel, AMD, ATI, and Nvidia hardware, and having Asus make everything for them. Of course none of you are smart enough to realize this. I mean you have to buy a Mac Pro to game on. A Mac pro just to get an old 512MB Radeon 4870. You can't even get a 1GB version. You can't even do CrossFire or SLI. You are paying $2,499 for a jock GeForce GT 120, 3GB of memory, a paltry 640GB hard drive, and a basic Core 920. $2,499. Wow. You have to add $100 to add a DVD burner, a $20 DVD burner. So to get a good GPU, you have to upgrade to the 4870 for $200. Oh, whoops, sure that is the price of the 1GB card at Newegg. www.newegg.com/Product... Sure you are probably actually paying closer to $400 after you factor the cost of the 120. It is a rebadged 8600GT. That is over two years old now. They are putting a budget GPU with years old tech in there. Amazing. Anyway, I can build 4 quad core AMD systems with 4870s and 4GB of memory with good Asus boards that will outperform the supposed Mac Pro. It is Pro in name only. Since Power Computing was put out of business by his holiness we have not seen any hardware innovation from Apple at all. If you think you have then name something Intel, AMD, Nvidia, or ATI didn't make for them. If you think anything else, well then you just don't know. If you don't know what Power Computing is, then you aren't qualified to even comment.

Apr 01 07:58 AM

[Chris Tom:]

Mac'em X you are a fool if you think that the gaming class motherboards from Asus, MSI, DFI, Gigabyte, Foxconn or any major motherboard manufacturer are lower quality than what goes in a Mac. All the hardware innovation is in gaming. That is how it has always been, that is how it always will be. A gaming system, with gaming class enthusiast parts is superior in build quality, component quality, and performance to anything Apple puts out. That is clear, and obvious. I'm sorry for the idiots that buy a cheap Dell, but I don't work there anymore. The systems I build, and use, are above workstation grade. Suckers not rolling their own, well, too bad for you. Pay quadruple for less performance, and the enthusiasts will continue to laugh at you.

Apr 01 08:04 AM

[Mac'em X:]

@Chris Tom: "Mac'em X you are a fool if you think that the gaming class motherboards from Asus, MSI, DFI, Gigabyte, Foxconn or any major motherboard manufacturer are lower quality than what goes in a Mac..."

You'll want to recheck who your comment is aimed at. I said nothing about motherboards, video cards, or any such thing.

If gaming is your thing, then your dream gaming rig will certainly be something custom made, and not anything off-the-shelf from Dell or Apple or anyone. Build that custom machine! And you might as well top it off with a gaming OS, Windows.

Those of us wanting computers for business or other professional pursuits will often do better with a solid UNIX-based OS - and, for maximum software flexibility, on top of hardware able to run any OS. That might make for the ultimate professional machine, if not the ultimate gaming machine.

Why, it's almost as if different products were ideal for different people! Imagine that!

Apr 01 09:32 AM

[winindthedust:]

Asking Charlie Miller, he runs, owns, & prefers Macs, and HE doesn't run virus software..... he said running virus software on a Mac would be a waste of money. As you said, "this man knows what he's talking about".

Additionally, Charlie is an ex-CSA security expert, that spent various parts of a year, in his spare time to develop a "hack" for the contest. The "hack" required the user to visit a prepared malicious website, click on the link, download & install the payload, which requires the user to input his user name and password.

As Mr. Miller also emphasized, ALL computers can be hacked. But their is no commercial value in doing so, especially for the Mac. What plagues the Windows world of regular users, is not security "hacks", but rather self-loading, self perpetuating, and transferable executables called "viruses", "worms", & "botnets", something that Mac users don't have trouble with, nor will they, as Charlie has pointed out with his own words.

On Mar 31 01:04 PM Astrochimp wrote:

> The "Apple Tax" is real. I bought a Toshiba Tecra 12/1/08, and love
> it. Comparable mac hardware cost twice as much at the time - and
> didn't have a fingerprint reader (which I use all the time) or even
> enough USB ports.
>
> The idea that Macs are more secure is a myth, happily reinforced
> by Apple's mendacious "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" ads. Search for the name
> "Charlie Miller" and see what he has to say about the Macs alleged
> security - this man knows what he's talking about.

Apr 01 11:31 AM

[User 387112:]

People really like to get on one side or the other don't they. It seems as though if you like Apple you have to hate Microsoft and if you love Microsoft you must despise Apple.

Apr 01 04:26 PM

[TEEM:]

This is ridiculous! You guys are comparing APPL with MSFT, and it appears that most of all you guys are APPL fan rather than an objective observer.

You guys are all bought into APPL hype, a typical American phenomenon of idol and brand worship.

I believe both MSFT and APPL brings values, but to say that APPL is more important and valuable than MSFT, is quite stupid.

I read statements like the workers at APPL store are very nice and courteous. Wait a minute! what does that have to do with anything here.

I use APPL iPhone and I believe APPL is as monopolistic as MSFT. Try even putting a freeware at APPL iStore, APPL is very anal about their products and how one can use it. It like dictating, and personally, I believe APPL is a ripp off.

But, ain't American love folks who ripp them off?

Apr 01 07:15 PM

[Paul H. M.:]

For my business, Macs just don't make sense.

Not only are they overpriced, but most of the best open-source software is written for PC only.

Macs only have about 10% of the software and hardware options of a PC.

If you want something pretty, get a Mac. If you want the best selection of hardware and software that is easily installed, Vista, with all its flaws, still beats the hell out of Mac.

Apr 01 11:39 PM

[Paul H. M.:]

I actually like Mac's operating system because of it's security and tight code.

But because of their unreasonable prices and lack of compatibility with many of my favorite software programs, I have no choice but to use Windows.

If you're a web developer, trying to get work done on a Mac is just not as efficient, because PC has such better tools available (and many of them for free).

Apr 01 11:42 PM

[Sonia Mirza:]

True Re: the Apple shopping experience in KoP - had to get an iPhone and was completely astonished by the willingness to help. Made me want to buy a Mac :)




On Mar 31 08:56 AM mollytjm wrote:

> it's not just that Apple consumers are better educated (though by
> % as a group, they are) or friendlier...hard to gauge that except
> that the staff in the Apple stores are VERY warm and friendly...and
> smart.
> But Apple always wrote very tight code making for fewer holes for
> the hacker to explore. probably because Microsoft had such a big
> platform to write for, all their programs are bloated and messy,
> even the ones that work very well. This makes it easier to hack.
>
>
> There is another difference...the attitude at Apple...they actually
> really like their customers and want to keep them happy.
> I've used the big King of Prussia Mall Apple store since it's first
> day and have never encountered a surly, crabby or arrogant staff
> person...not in sales or tech. Obviously there are no perfect people
> on the planet, so there must be some working for Apple... but as
> much as Apple was exclusive about it's OS, it has always been inclusive
> about it's customers and users. To Apple, if you use their products,
> there's no 'them and us'...it's just 'us'.
>
> It's hard to explain this, but you feel it. When my PC friend asked
> me to take her to the Apple store for her first iPod, she was so
> astonished at the level of service. When we left she said 'i LOVE
> it in there!'. Apple just knows how to do it better than anyone else
> which explains why they have the most profitable retail space per
> square foot in the country.
> Long APPL

Apr 03 08:39 AM