MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

This guy obviously doesn't know what he is talking about. Microsoft will not lose their business in our lifetimes.

I've always loved the PC fanboys statement that Macs are 'toys'. Then usually the next thing out of their mouths are "there aren't any games for Macs".

I've also always found it funny that people think Macs are great at graphics, a task that's exponentially more difficult than word processing, yet they somehow lack the power to do anything in the 'real world'.

Microsoft will be over soon. Id give it not more then 5 years before it loses its number 1 postion.

"Microsoft suffers from a classic case of American obesity." Yes, I agree.

More than fashion statements they are sign of someone who got it: Powerful, reliable hw, reliable sw and OS, flexible, versatile.

And since they can run everything, natively or via virtualization having any other computer (especially laptops) tells you are behind the curve: why wasting money on other computers that do not give you anything more, actually give you a lot less for the same money (sometimes ever for way more money since the MacBook was released).

One can run everything, develop and contribute to the OpenSource efforts, have among the most powerful platforms available today, enjoy Mac OS X on top of it. Why wasting money on anything less?

hmmmm....call me a toy lover then!

Mac toy user/owner since 1989.

"Disclosure: The author is long shares of Apple, and has no holdings in other stocks mentioned."

me2!

There is another division that it is very profitable: The MacBU.

Puts lots of meat on the table. BTW, with Windows installed on it one can use a Mac at Redmond too and not get fired anymore FINALLY!

Yes, OSX is more functional. But that is only half the appeal and potential. In an web/image driven society aesthetics and fashion are huge. Apples owns in that realm. When I go to local coffee shop I open up my G3 ibook and the artsy high school kids gape and awe over it, they don't even see the Window's notebooks. These kids are the future market, they're the ones that are going decide with their dollars in the coming decade.

It's not going to happen any time soon.

Microsoft is deeply embedded in the enterprise and the cost of conversion is immense for large organizations, like the military. It also has products for which there is no easy replacement on other platforms. Microsoft also has an extensive partner network, in which hardware and software companies receive software, beta releases, technical help, support, insight into Microsoft's future direction, and sales leads. Microsoft runs a "dating service" for small companies so they can find partners to pursue busines and it also acts as a subcontractor to them.

Microsoft has built up a huge, complex non-software infrastructure that isn't coming down any time soon, because it is too profitable for everyone involved in it.

Microsoft could lose the consumer market (where Apple has its primary residence) and still be wildly profitable.

"You can fool some of the people some of the but you can't fool all of the people all of the time"

This pretty much sums up Micro$oft and the people are refusing to be fooled any longer.

It's not going to happen any time soon.

Microsoft is deeply embedded in the enterprise and the cost of conversion is immense for large organizations, like the military. It also has products for which there is no easy replacement on other platforms. Microsoft also has an extensive partner network, in which hardware and software companies receive software, beta releases, technical help, support, insight into Microsoft's future direction, sales leads on nearly a daily basis, and free sales seminars. Microsoft runs a "dating service" for small companies so they can find partners to pursue busines and it also acts as a subcontractor to them.

Microsoft has built up a huge, complex non-software infrastructure that isn't coming down any time soon, because it is too profitable for everyone involved in it. IBM didn't have that sort of infrastructure in place when it lost the PC market. IBM does have a partner program of sorts, but it is not nearly as beneficial to the participant as Microsoft's is.

Microsoft could lose the consumer market (where Apple has its primary residence) and still be wildly profitable.

". . . people some of the TIME, but you can't fool all of the people . . ."

the guy has his history wrong, MS screwed IBM over OS/2. It had nothing to do with acceptance by MIS departments; PCs were already commonplace when OS/2 was being built (MS Multiplan was a big hit in the west australian Treasury long before OS/2, IIRC)

if i remember my history correctly, it was all about MS building Windown 3, in secret, while promising IBM that it was all go-go for OS/2. MS and IBM were partners in the new OS/2, but before it was released MS dropped the Windows 3 bombshell.

Taxi,

OS/2 was supposed to be the successor to Windows 3. When IBM and Microsoft parted ways, Microsoft's part of OS/2 became Windows NT.

Windows 3 was just a shell that ran on MS-DOS and shared its limitations. OS/2 and NT were complete operating systems with user logon, a form of multitasking and other features, including the ability to use larger hard disks and more memory.

I'm glad I never truly grew up. I love playing with toys. And my toys are better their toys.

All in all, I found it was a rather interesting and informative article.

taxi has it about right, I believe. MS was a partner with IBM on OS/2 then jumped and openly criticised OS/2 to the public and press, and IBM felt stabbed in the back.

If there are any lessons in that article it's that cheap always outsells quality. That is part of how/why MS stole the pc market from Apple in the early days. There's more to it than that, but it is a major factor which continues to influence market share today. Apple would do well to ingest this basic truth.

Ken is on the money.

Biz can't function w/out MS technology. Sad but true. MS' most underrated ability is to court developers and as long as that eco system continues MS biz will not be threatened significantly.

Because IT staff is pretty much MS only it will be hard to get Apples in there regardless of how many OSs it may be able to run.

Apple's best bet will continue to be consumers, small biz, and creative industries.

I don't think the loss will be as dramatic

as that of IBM, but they are gonna lose

some market share, hopefully soon. Maybe,

just maybe, the competition will prompt

MS to actually innovate something. Maybe

the era of bullying and buy-outs will soon

end.

I forgot....Education

Ken, it's already happening. Time is a funny thing. It may take 5 years (this being the very beginning of those 5 years) but in retrospect it will seem as though it happened overnight.

The only thing that can screw it up is the Bush Administration sending the world into chaos.

"If there are any lessons in that article it's that cheap always outsells quality."

Sorry, but no. That is not an absolute.

Examples: iPod ('nuff said), Hyundai, Kia, etc.

vs. Toyota and Honda (no way). There are many

exceptions to your point.

JEG:

It's not a matter of the staff being Microsoft-only. Most of those guys are familiar with Linux and Mac, and some even prefer Mac at home, but the key here is "home."

The problem is that organizations like the US military, which is larger than some countries, can't throw away all their hardware and buy new stuff. That would cost as much as a full-scale war. Even the labor cost is prohibitive. Can you imagine how many labor-centuries it would take to convert all of the .NET applications to whatever the equivalent would be on OS X?

As for innovation. I remember in the 50s, all the kids had portable music devices with earphones. They were called "transistor radios." Later, we had portable music devices with earphones. They were called "Walkmans." Now we have portable music devices with earphones. They are called "iPods." Each was better than the previous one. Microsoft doesn't "get" the consumer market, so Zune will probably fail or remain a minor player. Microsoft could lose its entire consumer market and still be wildly profitable.

The most likely scenario--and it isn't very likely-- is Microsoft conceding the consumer market.

Followup:

The Apple ][ was much more costly

that the TRS-80 or Commodore 64,

but it kicked thier respective butts.

Ken,

The most likely scenario is always very likely,

hence, the most likely scenario. Sorry, couldn't

resist.

as much as I would love to see this come to fruition....not going to happen any time in the near future

I've been waiting for the mainstream tech and financial press/media to figure this out and publish it. Yes!!!!! Microsoft is on its way to loss of dominance. It is one of the reason's my investment portfolio is so lopsidedly in AAPL.

Those in the know back when Windows 95 was released recognized that OS/2 Warp was a more solid, robust OS. Windows 95 should, properly, have been treated as Windows 4 on DOS 7. But too many bought into the hype of '95, and ultimately OS/2 became a historic cypher. As a long IT professional, it disturbs me that those up the "food chain" continue fighting those who know of worlds beyond Windows. We're concerned that their next tactic will be to use the issues of "server certification" and "security standards" to push Macs out the door. We all know it's a red herring, so we continue fighting. Installed base and the so-called "network effects" will help maintain Microsoft's footholds until a new generation with authority changes the rules of the game.

In the IT departments of the last two companies that I have worked for, the IT guys run linux on their "field" laptops because it is more stable, better supports 5 year old hardware, and is free. Their choice is not MS or MAC. That being said, I think that MS software is in decline. Office 2003 is full of options that get in my way and slow me down. It is so dummed down that I think that it is harder for me to use than 2000. I think that as Linux becomes more ready for the main stream (anyone tried suse 10/KDE!!!)and that the MAc makes in into more homes, the tide is shifting from the Microsoft juggernaut to other options. Winn Swartau predicted that Linux and Mac will command nearly 1/3rd for the market share by the end of 2007. I think, hope that he is correct. I hope that Apple will capitolise on their loss

After spending two days dealing with an ancient iMac running OS 9.2 (shudder), I am more in awe of Apple's improvements than ever. I'd forgotten how bad it could be...

From Brad:
"This guy obviously doesn't know what he is talking about. Microsoft will not lose their business in our lifetimes."

Top executives at IBM were saying that exact thing back in the 80s. IBM invented business machines. They watched on the sidelines as PCs running Windows overtook them. Then they said Ooops and tried to answer, but it was too late.

Windows Vista will most likely ship after OS X Leopard, so Microsoft will be behind SIX versions of OS X. The operating system isn't the only software arena where Microsoft will be challenged. If Apple doesn't release an Office suite, there will be plenty of Web 2.0 office suites in a couple of years to choose from.

Although I think the transition away from MicroSoft software will be slower than th e transition from IBMs to PCs, Microsoft needs to start reinventing itself soon if they want to survive this next wave, because it will crash upon them hard within ten years.

"Look at Apple. In the time since Windows XP was released, Apple has released five versions of its Mac OS X operating system."

Soon to be six!!! Only 12 more days, baby! Until the preview, that is.

While Microsoft may see losses to Web 2.0 apps and other platforms, I think this comparison is overly simplistic.

IBM in the 1980s did not have millions of people already running a previous version of OS/2 with an IBM Office productivity suite on top of it, all connected to networks with OS/2 servers providing access control and IBM Collaboration services providing email, calendaring, address book, etc.

For there to be much real momentum away from Microsoft, there will have to be seamless drop-in replacements for:

-MS Office (including Outlook, Access and Visio)
-Active Directory (including Group Policy)
-MS Exchange (with Blackberry/Treo/etc features)
-All the crappy 16-bit custom apps that zillions of companies are STILL running

Brad,

It's too bad about that terminal illness you have. However most of the rest of us will live long enough to see Microsoft become irrevalent.

ken wrote "Microsoft is deeply embedded in the enterprise and the cost of conversion is immense for large organizations . . ."

now, do you honestly think that most large organization are going to switch to vista? it's going to not only require upgrading hardware, but also take time to retrain workers to work in the new vista gui, and let's not even go when the new word gui. time and money.

where i work there are roughly 1400 to 1500 employees. i seriously doubt that in 2007 i'll be working in a vista environment.

Working on Vista? HAHHAHHHAHHHAHAHA

In our organization we deployed Windows XP only after SP2 and it took months. It will be LOOOONNG time till the time the IT people will even only start to look at Vista documentation!

I'm eating lunch in a cafe with wireless internet. There are six laptops in here, all Macs running Mac OS X.

For whatever its worth:

IMHO the only thing saving Microsoft from sliding into irrelevence is that Apple won't license out OS X. I have huge respect for Steve & Company sticking to their guns on this, but..... if if it ever did happen Microsoft would be toast.

The priesthood in the modern corporation is IT. Many are headed and staffed by arrogant, inflexible and opaque people trained not in computer science but in Microsoft Systems-- not the same thing. They have been on a multi-year mission to drive reliable UNIX systems out the door in favor of insecure and unreliable MS sh*t that they know well. They will fight anything running UNIX, LINUX or Mac OS that touches 'their' network because they either don't understand it or cannot control it.

I work in healthcare and have fought IT luddites for years. The extent that they are willing to misrepresent, FUD-cast, and outright lie to keep out a vendor's product if it isn't running M$ sh*t is incredible. This is not isolated to the healthcare industry or to just a few places of business. They know that much of their power, budget, independence and job security is tied to their co-dependent relationship to the MS ecosystem.

Cubert, et al:

You're correct!! There have been five releases and almost six since the release of XP!!

But that’s not bragging right material when you want big business and government to switch.

That many releases is what scares “large” corporate and government buyers away. Too many releases and release related upgrade problems, too often. Not to mention single source vendor on the hardware side. It’s great for the consumer, new stuff all the time, only 1-5 computers to make run properly.

But 1,000, 5,000 or 10,000 seats? That gets very expensive very fast. Why do you think that XP is only now hitting full stride in the corporate world? Big business and government only want to upgrade every several years.

And, if Apple had all of those corporate and government clients it would suck for us consumers. They wouldn’t be able to release as many upgrades and new features taking advantage of new technologies. They’d need to be behind the tech curve by 3 years, maybe 5. They couldn’t drop one platform for another when they feel like it.

They’d become Microsoft.

Amen to "IBM Luddites". The school district where I work is gradually eliminating Macs, not because of teacher choice, but because the IT people, all three of them, only know Windows and Novell. Teachers have been literally arguing and fighting to save their choice of tool with which they want to work, and are being told by a few people that they have to switch. "IBM Luddites'" description of IT people exactly, in my experience.

-All the crappy 16-bit custom apps that zillions of companies are STILL running

Man, i just love the way you put this-;

I love my Powerbook, and my iMac too.

The Military: Microsoft's only market.

Imagine the possibilities!

If they want to stay afloat, they need to scrap the existing kernel, API, registry and start over!

If Macs are toys, why does XP have the Fisher Price interface?

Great article, and a few factual errors that have been cleared up by others.

However, Apple Mac's are not going to completely replace Microsoft Windows PCs. Ever.

I'd love this to happen, but unfortunately it won't because:

a) Companies are not going to replace all their Windows PC's with Mac's because they would not trust their entire infrastructure to one company. They have it bad enough being tied to a proprietary OS, with open hardware, they're not going to move to a closed OS, tied to closed hardware.

b) Even if those companies wanted to, Apple could not meet the demand. Just not possible.

No. what will happen is, is that Apple will take over the consumer place. Period. With a few special niche markets as well. It might take 10 years, but it will happen. I think we can all see the beginnings of that now.

The professional business space will be taken over by Linux. Again, it might take 10 years, but it will happen. Linux allows all those IT Pros with inferiority complexes to keep your average user at arms length, and it allows them to keep their jobs, in fact we'll probably need more of them. They won't move from proprietary OS, open hardware to closed OS, closed hardware, but they will move to open OS & open hardware.

The consumer market and Apple are made for each other. Consumers want an easy to use computer that you just switch on, use it and switch off with little or no need of access to a geek. This is Apple's market to grab, and they will grab it.

The business market and Linux are made for each other. Business people want a no frills, cheap as chips computer, that can do just about anything. This is Linux's market to grab, and they will grab it, if they'd just stop arguing, settle down a bit, and present a clear, cost effective business solution to businesses.

If I were Apple I'd start putting as many Linux network friendly features in Mac OS X as I could, in readiness for the gradual move towards Linux by businesses, and I'd reference all output back to open standards where ever possible.

If I were Linux, I'd grow up, understand who the real enemy is (Microsoft) and realise your potential.

If I were Microsoft, well, I'd panic. This's why BG has left, he knows it's game over.

No, I don't think there is going to be a massive, abrupt switch to Vista in the enterprise, mainly because of cost and the disruption in business operations during the switchover period as employees are retrained.

Microsoft's problem is that the enterprise market has a lot of momentum. They are definitely not early adopters. Entire industry segments can be dependent on legacy applications that can't be updated or replaced. I used to work for a company that couldn't update their OS because the only financial application that met their needs wasn't going to be updated. Microsoft's legacy problem is largely externally caused.

Vista is going to be a hard sell, even if it is vastly better than its predecessors, and as a Microsoft Parter administrator, I can tell you that Microsoft knows it. OS X is an even harder sell than Vista, for all those reasons, plus the cost, time, and labor for replacing all the hardware. Quite a lot of system administrators have UNIX expertise, so it would be possible for entire departments to switch their workstations to Macs, but otherwise, you aren't going to see Macs as the standard in a large company any time soon.

It is actually better for Apple's corporate image and for their bottom line if they concentrate on markets other than the enterprise.

I love using my toy, it delivers, like no other, my G5, keeps me satisfied

There was a time (early 90's) where many defense firms (Hughes Aircraft, an excellent example) and even some Federal agencies were "Mac shops". System architecting applications, drafting and 3D rendering, desktop publishing, and Microsoft's Office suite (Word, Excel and Powerpoint) were at that time faster on Macs than on the pre-Windows 95 machines. I loved my office Mac IIci, a fast but compact machine that could do anything. It even sounded and looked nice when the machine booted up. AppleTalk built-in networking and Apple Remote Access were in many ways way ahead of their time, allowing people to work from home, exchange messages. etc. Remember also that AOL at one time was a Mac-oriented service. Many people forget that Microsoft's Word and Excel gained their initial fame as Mac applications (Word 5.1 may have been the best word processor ever), while the PC world was dominated by Lotus, WordPerfect, Novell Networks, and command-line interfaces. Jobs may have been gone from Apple thanks to John Sculley, the man he hired from Pepsi, but the Mac was Jobs' legacy.

Microsoft and IBM succeeded in wooing the enterprise, however, while Mac got stuck in John Sculley "we're pricey but we're worth it" mentality. In essence, Sculley began selling the "sugared water" that Jobs disparaged when he first hired Sculley from Pepsi. The Motorola chips just could not keep up with Intel, even with the PowerPC conversion in '95. Then, the PC manufacturers figured out how to design laptops and caught up to the Powerbook with its trackpads and vivid graphics. Conversely, the PC manufacturers figured out how to build or integrate with MIS servers. And when Microsoft stepped all over Netscape by giving away Internet Explorer with Windows (and working with developers to assure that web sites would be compatible with nothing else), Apple was becoming sadly quaint.

It took the return of Steve Jobs, by now an animated movie magnate and failed NextPC guru, to get Apple back to its rebellious role in the computer business - his genius in the late 90"s was to integrate computing into the consumer electronics business, as well as to cleverly cozy up to Microsoft (which I believe still owns a few million shares of Apple stock) to make sure they would still sell products for the Mac. He made the Mac attractive again by differentiate it even more radically from a PC. Using the operating system (more specifically, the user interface) to sell hardware, in many ways the antithesis of the "open systems" concept, has worked well for Apple. (The ultimate irony being Jobs has made the ultimate open system, UNIX, ready for prime time thanks to the brilliant interface design of OS X.) The industrial design of every Apple product these days cannot be separated from the user interface. The iPod in that regard has done better than any of the pre-2001 Macs in demonstrating the value of the user interface as the core of a brilliant, simple, smooth, high-quality industrial design. The "Apple Stores" and the look and feel of the new Apple products all seem to be an extension of the iPod.

If you look at an iMac these days, it is basically a beautifully-crafted picture frame for its user interface and display, banishing all non-wireless communication and peripheral interfaces to the back in a nice little nook. Especially with the wireless keyboard and mouse, it is probably the slickest personal computer ever made. Even the home end of the power cord is cleverly recessed. And the MacBooks are the BMW's of the laptop world - high performance wrapped in a slick-high-quality package. The fact that the Mac quietly switched to the same Intel Core 2 Duo processors that Windows PC’s use was frosting on the cake. Intel is laughing all the way to the bank.

In contrast, Bill Gates has always treated computers and their functions as appliances, although any appliance with the reliability of Windows would be on the trash heap in 6 months. Nevertheless, in America "size matters", and Bill has marketed that to the hilt. His one brilliant move has been with the development and evolution of Xbox, and his blending of Windows and XBox features, as klugey as it might be, will likely be his saving grace before he leaves the business to go save Africa.