Comments

• mcinsand

  2012-07-03 16:54:03

  The main intolerance that Apple has always had is with respect to choice. Apple has been fighting against diversity since the day it was founded, which is why it has always been a minority share. Apple has always refused to compromise. MS doesn't really compromise, either, but Apple has been truly calcified. For most of the past 3 decades, Apple has had MS to prop them up. Tired of blue screens, quirky hardware support, and constant reboots? Leave your choice (and more money behind), to use only Apple's hardware and software guaranteed to work only in the way Apple wants it to. For some people giving up freedom, performance, and money for reliability and/or 'shiny' is the choice they make. Apple will always have those fans that will fork over a wad for a set of The Emperor's New Clothes.
  
  A large chunk of Apple's numbers, though, are from people that are focused on reliability, which is why MS' demise will cause no end of headaches for Apple. Why pay a fortune for a Macintoy when you can pay a lot less for a FOSS-equipped PC that includes CHOICE?
  
  In the late '90's, MS found a way to fund Apple to keep Apple from going under. We might see a turnabout in the next few years. Without MS' unreliability to scare enough people to fund Apple's economy of scale, the lemmings will have to pay a whole lot more for their shinies.

• Dr. Roy Schestowitz

  2012-07-03 17:34:13

  In exchange, Apple helped prop up some Microsoft 'standards', such as the MSIE cancer.

• Michael

  2012-07-05 10:07:43

  The main intolerance that Apple has always had is with respect to choice. Apple has been fighting against diversity since the day it was founded, which is why it has always been a minority share. Apple has always refused to compromise.

  Apple has a strong focus on quality, but what choices do you think they stop? I have an iMac and run OS X, Windows, and multiple Linux virtual machines. Not only does Apple does not work against these choices the actively assist in the creation of software to assist with this (they work with the companies that make such software and even offer their own dual booting solution.

  MS doesn’t really compromise, either, but Apple has been truly calcified. For most of the past 3 decades, Apple has had MS to prop them up. Tired of blue screens, quirky hardware support, and constant reboots? Leave your choice (and more money behind), to use only Apple’s hardware and software guaranteed to work only in the way Apple wants it to.

  Only as Apple wants it to? I have a massive amount of third party software - including software that alters things such as window tiling and the like. When I did not like Apple's dictionary I used a version of aspell instead.

  For some people giving up freedom, performance, and money for reliability and/or ‘shiny’ is the choice they make. Apple will always have those fans that will fork over a wad for a set of The Emperor’s New Clothes.

  I use a Mac for the benefits to productivity, for the reduction in "user errors", and for the increases in efficiency that it offers over other systems. Can you find anyone who uses it based on it being "shiny"? That is just a weird claim.

  A large chunk of Apple’s numbers, though, are from people that are focused on reliability, which is why MS’ demise will cause no end of headaches for Apple. Why pay a fortune for a Macintoy when you can pay a lot less for a FOSS-equipped PC that includes CHOICE?

  As I said: I am willing to pay for a Mac because it offers what the open source ecosystem does not - better productivity, reduction in "user errors", and for the increases in efficiency. Right now the best the open source community can do is offer desktop systems which are a mish-mash of competing UI paradigms (KDE / Gnome / other) that are often poorly followed by developers. With the lack of a consistent system, this means many features are not really possible on desktop Linux. Some that come to mind: proxy icons, integration with any form of media browser, easy methods to use the title bar to get to the path of a program, a visual versioning system, saved status indicators, QuickLook, PDF Services... and Apple is planning on improving these and adding to these. They can because they have a good consistent base to work with. This prevents software which as "equal" to the software on the competition to run as well as on desktop Linux - the system itself is not offering the same services. But in many cases there is no "equal" on Linux. I personally use MS Office and iWork and Photoshop and Dreamweaver and ScreenFlow and Tofu and Automator and many other programs where there is simply nothing in the same class on desktop Linux. I know many others who use Electric Quilt and software designed for schools or doctors' offices, etc. which, again, have nothing even close in the Linux world. Recently in COLA (comp.os.linux.advocacy) there was a discussion about using networked scanners. I showed video proof of how easy the process was on the competition. Even with the proof, at least one of the Linux "advocates" there could not believe how easy it was compared to Linux. Heck, just look at the software developers site's for the instructions: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4505 and https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ScanningHowTo The difference is night and day.

  In the late ’90′s, MS found a way to fund Apple to keep Apple from going under. We might see a turnabout in the next few years. Without MS’ unreliability to scare enough people to fund Apple’s economy of scale, the lemmings will have to pay a whole lot more for their shinies.

  By calling people who appreciate better services "lemmings" you are showing you do not understand why people are attracted to higher quality tools. Now do not get me wrong. I am not against desktop Linux nor ignorant of how it has improved greatly. I am inspired by it and respect it greatly - for a system you can get without spending a penny it is truly amazing. A gift to the world. I am in no way anti-Linux or against people using what they like. I do not call people who opt to use a different OS names nor try to talk them out of it (to the contrary, I have recommended OS X, Windows, and various Linux distros to people based on their needs and situations). But let us not pretend desktop Linux is, in general, ready for the average user's desktop. It is great for people who spend their time in the terminal and for those who use their machines largely for web kiosks (Google is going after this market with Chrome OS). It is not a choice, though, that would be right for most users... which is why it's usage numbers remain so low.