Why Apple win and PC sucks (or vice versa)

[Deadman1709]

This topic over [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] has just been exploded by the sparring between Apple and non-Apple user. I will attempt to explain in rather impartial way why different people are in different camps. Just a few footnotes:

- I will write in English. If you don't like it, screw you. I don't care

- I'm a PC user. I don't like using Apple product.

First problem of computers: Hardware made by who-the-fuck-made-this?

Virtually every computer on the planet today uses [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] design. The design is the exact reason why IBM isn't very popular today. The design allows incredible interchangeability of parts: you can build an entire computer based on IBM design using no IBM parts whatsoever.

In the end you get thousands of hardware manufacturers for the thousands of parts in your computer. Each part need its own driver to run on an OS, which must be written by the manufacturer, which may not speak English, has crappy coder or is based in Taiwan and the latter got invaded by China. Or the simple case of "fuck it, this was made a year ago so I won't write a driver for it".

Apple got around this by basically monopolizing the distribution of its parts and the drivers along with them. Stability is ensure. However, with most monopoly, you gotta pay the extra.

The rest have to get by, but at the benefit of paying less per part. Also, if you're using Windows 7, you may notice that it crashes less frequently; that is because the OS is better at not letting crappy programs crash your system. Microsoft also has to fix other people's problem by writing their own drivers for parts no longer supported by the original producer.

Second problem: programs written by who-the-fuck-was-that?

With every update and upgrade of Windows, Microsoft attracts complains about some program crashing or simply being incompatible. The fault is visibly Microsoft's: why do they change their OS to become incompatible with the perfectly reasonable codes of the programs? Or is there some conspiracy to force you to buy new programs?

Well, to be perfectly fair, Microsoft deserve a break for this. Have you ever play survival mode in any game? There are just more and more of tougher and tougher enemies and you just keep killing and killing them until you mistime one asshole and you die. And the game call you a loser (most won't. Because other wise there will be a controller-sized hole on every gamer's monitor).

Which is exactly what Microsoft was and is doing.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] pretty much describe what happens but I'll give you the short version.

Programmers outside Microsoft are just ordinary programers, if not just human. They do make mistakes and bugs are introduced to their programs, which generally do stupid shit and may crash your system.

Microsoft obviously can not just sit there and wait until complaints start flying in (which is bound to happen because, well, if your system crashes it OBVIOUSLY the OS fault). So they usually go around deconstruct the faulty program codes and write a small patch for Windows to work around the broken programs. (The classic example provided in the article was SimCity, with a minor memory problem).

Then at some point the original programmer realize his flaw and fix the code, as a patch for the original program. Now Windows won't work with the fixed program. Imagine buying a one-legged pants for a one-legged man and it will work just fine. If he got a prosthetic leg, the "fixed" pants won't work anymore, right?

Apple works around this by expressively ban ALL programs which it has not give a blessing before (Similar thing was done previously by Nintendo and their Seal of Approval: if you don't have one, you can't get your game played on their NES and SNES. They fucked it with the Wii though). And this is on ALL of their systems and products. That's why you have your iTunes and AppStore. Which is the exact reason why Mac are more stable, Mac-fan likes it and everybody else hates it.

Microsoft's way of unregulated software on their platforms (also now extended to Google's Chrome and Android) allows a much more varied software pool, experimental programs and highly customizable environment while still being somewhat user-friendly (Linux is extremely customizable and totally unregulated while being very nerve-wrecking to everyone who is not a competent coder). The price to be paid is the increased workload for Microsoft and Google, inherent instability of their systems and (depending on whose side you take here, it can be a benefit or a price) rampant piracy. Which is the exact reason why Mac-fan bash PC-fans for and the reason why everybody else uses a PC.

It's a no-win game. Either you run around fixing other people stupid mistake or make everyone who is not your subject hate you.

Now personally, I don't like Apple, for the reasons stated above (and the hipster crowd surround it). Also, it's because Apple try way to hard acting like a "liberator", hipster, cool and shit of some sort. Just watch their commercial.



The commercial is a parody of the novel 1984. The big guy talking on the monitor is supposed to mirror Big Brother, some sort of over-seeing, omnipotent being/dictator. The Big Brother is supposed to be IBM's head of the time (I don't remember who). Apple is supposed to be the girl wearing track shorts and tank-top smashing the screen by throwing a sledgehammer.

In reality, by 2011 they became the Big Brother. IBM, the company they were mocking, became the exact thing that liberates the hardware market. It'll be insensitive to direct any vulgarity against Steve Jobs since he just died. But "Fuck Apple".

[thanh_kinkin]

I still remember IBM was a big name like about 15-20 years ago, but now, hardly leaves any impressions.
I used to like Apple (wasn't a fan though), but then I took an arro... sorry, but then I don't like the way they do things in the last 5-7 years, especially with iPod products.

[Aoi_sora9x]

I really do agree with your point that Microsoft really need a standardization for its hardware. It should not give out license to anyone and everyone. It should even start a fucking hardware company by itself just so that it can even attempt to sell Windows notebook as some sort of an equivalence to a Macbook. :O But I think Microsoft is finally wising up with its Windows Phone 7: Finally it's placing restriction on the hardware minimum requirement, and follow a sort-of-restricted path to the development of the OS :) I think windows 8 tablets will have the same kind of restriction. Overall, it should try to sell its OS as an experience (something Apple has been trying to do for years) and not just a workable OS. The age for the mechanical PC is indeed, over. OS nowadays should focus on the experience that it gives the users - and Apple has done this right: they have made their hardware more than just simple phones or notebooks - people feel attached to their iPhones because they love the experience, the prestige status, the whole package, not just the phone for what it is.

Having said that, I think being too restrictive like Apple is, sooner or later, destructive. Its garden has been locked for as long as anyone can remember, but it still has a lot of visitors who are willing to come in and lock themselves inside this garden. This is because the gardener himself is Steve - a very charismatic person who also happens to be a genius. But now with this gardener gone, a very significant pulling force of this garden has been lost and people starts to doubt whether this garden will be tended for at all. With Steve gone, the iPhone experience loses a piece of itself and the experience is not whole again. Who are we kidding, without Steve, no fucking way in hell Apple would be what it is today.

I will just wait and see the fall of the almighty Apple. /me thinks Steve is the centre of gravity that holds the Apple planet together. Without him, the planet will start to crumble to pieces.

/rant.

[Deadman1709]

Nguyên văn bởi Aoi_sora9x

I really do agree with your point that Microsoft really need a standardization for its hardware. It should not give out license to anyone and everyone. It should even start a fucking hardware company by itself just so that it can even attempt to sell Windows notebook as some sort of an equivalence to a Macbook. :O But I think Microsoft is finally wising up with its Windows Phone 7: Finally it's placing restriction on the hardware minimum requirement, and follow a sort-of-restricted path to the development of the OS :) I think windows 8 tablets will have the same kind of restriction. Overall, it should try to sell its OS as an experience (something Apple has been trying to do for years) and not just a workable OS. The age for the mechanical PC is indeed, over. OS nowadays should focus on the experience that it gives the users - and Apple has done this right: they have made their hardware more than just simple phones or notebooks - people feel attached to their iPhones because they love the experience, the prestige status, the whole package, not just the phone for what it is.

/rant.

Personally, I feel that Microsoft is fine as it is. Microsoft should not try to mirror Apple as being hip, cool, revolutionary, personal or anything of that shit. Why? Because they are not. and trying too hard just make them more of a joke. Generally I believe there's a time and a place and a man for something to be successful. Apple succeeded selling itself being hip, cool and personal (while it's not; in names and appearance only) that the market is final. A success recipe of one may not be replicable for the next.

Microsoft tried for years to imitate others' cool stuff, without being very successful: the Zune (everything Ipod does), Bing (Microsoft's Google). I should not do the same. Microsoft flagship is their OS, and they should stick with it.

Another less obvious issue, but highly important nonetheless is [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]. You may think that it's easy for Microsoft to become another Apple and sell the whole package of computer (or phones), OS, their Office, browser, Windows Media Player, etc ... It's not and there's a legal reason for that. You may not believe it but USA actually has law to prevent a company to grow way too big, dominate the market and crush any competitor in its path (yeah, you Socialist, Marxist-Leninist can say what you want about monopolies in the capitalist world, but the law is real. And enforced. And US's lawyers are pretty sue-happy)

Remember that during the last years of the last century, Microsoft was under [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] for unfair competition in the OS market; because Microsoft was so big at the time. And eventually, Microsoft had start giving out license to everyone.

Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission lawyers are pretty diligent in monitoring the activity of companies in the US for anti-trust cases. Most of the time, companies steer clear of them and do their best to limit their business (or expand only to comfortable margins, before the government start jumping in; what's also why you rarely hear of these cases). Or they do business outside the US in places with no anti-trust law

Japan is a rather case of super strong [but implied] anti-trust law. You can't just march into Japan and start building supermarkets [or Starbucks] left and right. There are implied zoning restrictions for placing a supermarket; for the protection of small time business owner. Honda, Toyota, Mitsubishi can't stamp out one another[in the sense that you will be quietly told off if you violate those. They just won't give you the permission]. Nikon and Canon (and Sony, Olympus, Casio and others) can not stomp one another out for the domination of ANY camera type. And you probably stand a better chance buying Vaticano Cappella Sistina [Vatican's Sistine Chapel] than buying ... say ... Sony.

And crappy studios with crappy anime still exist

Remember, Microsoft was under investigation ONLY by selling their OS and the accompanying software. Now imagine them trying to sell the whole package: United States of America's government lawyers will have one heck of a field day. Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer aren't stupid for not doing what Steve Jobs was doing: they know their boundaries.

Then why can Apple do what they did? Because they are smaller. That's why.

Instead Microsoft have always been good at making what they've done all along: creating a workable, general purpose OS which incorporate as many patent and other people's idea as possible without getting into legal trouble while allowing people to write as much stupid shit as they can and run those on their OS. "Good" as in, among the non-Apple, they are the best without forcing you to become a coder like Linux. Also, they dominate the cooperate, industrial and server market (still rivaled by Linux; which is understandable given the army of hardcore coders in that sector); the place where there's no job for a Mac.

In other words, Microsoft can never become another Apple, unless they have the market share of Apple today. And if Apple grows to dominate the market the same way that Microsoft is doing today (or even sooner, given that they are selling the whole package), its practice will immediately come under fire by the US government. Then Apple will not be Apple of today.

[Aoi_sora9x]

The image that is associated with Microsoft based off mostly on Windows, its primary OS. However, with windows mobile 7, Microsoft has paved a way for itself to be hip/cool/trendy/relevant again. A lot of people say that WP7 is really "un-microsoft" and I think they are right

Why do i keep coming back to WP7? Because windows 8 is based on the path that WP7 has pioneered. Don't believe me? Install windows 8 for yourself and see how massively the interface has changed.

Therefore, with WP7 and 8, I think Microsoft has already gathered enough elements to create its own ecosystem

GOOGLE, on the other hand, lack a solid, good main machine OS. Sure they have ChromeOS, but an OS that is based on solely Chrome Browser hardly counts.

Anti trust is a big issue, but then Apple's market is growing too, and they are no longer the underdog.

[Mano]

Nah apple is going down. Look how many lawsuit they filed this year.