I still believe when Apple debuts their AR/VR product, they will market it around Apple Fitness - where they can do their workout virtually anywhere, watching the fitness instructors through the glasses instead of a television set. Peloton killer.
Apple developed a great new operating system that used a mouse and it was unlike anything up until that time. Before it was finished, Steve Jobs showed the operating system to his friend Bill Gates. Gates' company, Microsoft, made business software for the Mac and Jobs was hoping that Microsoft would do the same for the new operating system. Instead, Gates stole the idea and announced the Windows operating system well before they had developed anything on it. They beat Apple to the punch and as a result, dominated the Operating System business. I hope Apple doesn't wait too long to announce its AR/VR devices. Just put it out there and state that it'll be coming. They probably have done a ton of work on it and maybe it's time to take a bite out of the AR apple instead of continuing to polish it.
That is a massively dumbed down version of what happened. To summarise:
- Microsoft didn’t steal the “idea” any more than Apple stole it from Xerox. Apple were very aware that Microsoft were in the operating system business. - on that note, Apple didn’t develop an OS “unlike anything up until that time”. It was significantly like the Xerox Star. Better in many ways, but very much like it.
I can't find it now, but it has been documented elsewhere that MS engineers we literally copying Macintosh OS libraries and function/API/toolbox calls almost verbatim to get started.
Apple riffed off of Xerox PARC (after paying for access BTW). Microsoft ripped off Apple (or tried to). It wasn't really until Windows 95 that they really started getting it right (and even then they had started aping the NeXT UI.
I believe that the code copying that you're referring to was particular to Quicktime, not Mac OS.
Apple developed a great new operating system that used a mouse and it was unlike anything up until that time. Before it was finished, Steve Jobs showed the operating system to his friend Bill Gates. Gates' company, Microsoft, made business software for the Mac and Jobs was hoping that Microsoft would do the same for the new operating system. Instead, Gates stole the idea and announced the Windows operating system well before they had developed anything on it. They beat Apple to the punch and as a result, dominated the Operating System business. I hope Apple doesn't wait too long to announce its AR/VR devices. Just put it out there and state that it'll be coming. They probably have done a ton of work on it and maybe it's time to take a bite out of the AR apple instead of continuing to polish it.
That is a massively dumbed down version of what happened. To summarise:
- Microsoft didn’t steal the “idea” any more than Apple stole it from Xerox. Apple were very aware that Microsoft were in the operating system business. - on that note, Apple didn’t develop an OS “unlike anything up until that time”. It was significantly like the Xerox Star. Better in many ways, but very much like it.
I can't find it now, but it has been documented elsewhere that MS engineers we literally copying Macintosh OS libraries and function/API/toolbox calls almost verbatim to get started.
Apple riffed off of Xerox PARC (after paying for access BTW). Microsoft ripped off Apple (or tried to). It wasn't really until Windows 95 that they really started getting it right (and even then they had started aping the NeXT UI.
I believe that the code copying that you're referring to was particular to Quicktime, not Mac OS.
Yes, that may have happened too. But MS had engineers actively copying early Mac OS from the pre-release computers they had received for app development. Problem was that MS was copying. They hadn't done the hard work of understanding and solving the problems themselves. This is likely one of the reasons they couldn't do overlapping windows from the get go. That was an Apple innovation. Even Xerox didn't have that working as well as Apple did.
They had access to the source code, for sure, and no doubt used that access. Not the same thing as copying though. What you're saying doesn't make a whole lot of sense, that they would copy code, but code that worked in the Mac didn't work in Windows?
Anyway, the claims I was responding to was that Microsoft stole the idea, and that it was a complete original from Apple. Neither of those claims stand up, the idea was given to them on a plate just as Xerox gave it to Apple.
Apple developed a great new operating system that used a mouse and it was unlike anything up until that time. Before it was finished, Steve Jobs showed the operating system to his friend Bill Gates. Gates' company, Microsoft, made business software for the Mac and Jobs was hoping that Microsoft would do the same for the new operating system. Instead, Gates stole the idea and announced the Windows operating system well before they had developed anything on it. They beat Apple to the punch and as a result, dominated the Operating System business. I hope Apple doesn't wait too long to announce its AR/VR devices. Just put it out there and state that it'll be coming. They probably have done a ton of work on it and maybe it's time to take a bite out of the AR apple instead of continuing to polish it.
That is a massively dumbed down version of what happened. To summarise:
- Microsoft didn’t steal the “idea” any more than Apple stole it from Xerox. Apple were very aware that Microsoft were in the operating system business. - on that note, Apple didn’t develop an OS “unlike anything up until that time”. It was significantly like the Xerox Star. Better in many ways, but very much like it.
I can't find it now, but it has been documented elsewhere that MS engineers we literally copying Macintosh OS libraries and function/API/toolbox calls almost verbatim to get started.
Apple riffed off of Xerox PARC (after paying for access BTW). Microsoft ripped off Apple (or tried to). It wasn't really until Windows 95 that they really started getting it right (and even then they had started aping the NeXT UI.
I believe that the code copying that you're referring to was particular to Quicktime, not Mac OS.
Yes, that may have happened too. But MS had engineers actively copying early Mac OS from the pre-release computers they had received for app development. Problem was that MS was copying. They hadn't done the hard work of understanding and solving the problems themselves. This is likely one of the reasons they couldn't do overlapping windows from the get go. That was an Apple innovation. Even Xerox didn't have that working as well as Apple did.
They had access to the source code, for sure, and no doubt used that access. Not the same thing as copying though. What you're saying doesn't make a whole lot of sense, that they would copy code, but code that worked in the Mac didn't work in Windows?
Anyway, the claims I was responding to was that Microsoft stole the idea, and that it was a complete original from Apple. Neither of those claims stand up, the idea was given to them on a plate just as Xerox gave it to Apple.
Also, coming up on 40 years ago. Time to move on.
What you might be referring to is how Microsoft reversed engineered the very first Mac OS with help from Kyocera. They talked about it in “Pirates of Silicon Valley”. That douchebag Ballmer was the one behind it. Apple trusted Microsoft to give them a prototype Mac and they brought it to Kyocera to figure it out.
The more iPad flirted with macOS and ‘pro use’, the more it failed to fulfill its promise.
To me the iPad (not the pro) is the best tablet product Apple has, because it is clearly positioned as a consumption device. It’s wonderful for kids, it’s great to watch movies and do some very light productivity. It’s wonderful for pencil users to draw. It’s great for my parents. Even more so, the price point makes sense in relation to what is offers (although the amount of storage offered and upgrade pricing is problematic).
The Pro model however gets into laptop territory pricing wise. Even though the hardware specs are superior to the iPad, it implies being a professional laptop replacement (marketing does at least) but fails to be one. The file handling, moving between apps, the ergonomics, etc is all extremely annoying when your mindset is “to get shit done”. I recently attached the iPad as a “second screen” and hated the experience because it surfaces UX issues; a similar desktop look but two different operating systems and capabilities. I like them better detached.
I do hope Apple will improve iPadOS for Pro users - it should be a fairly substantial improvement IMHO - but also thinks about how to protect the casual iPad user from increased complexity.
Apple developed a great new operating system that used a mouse and it was unlike anything up until that time. Before it was finished, Steve Jobs showed the loperating system to his friend Bill Gates. Gates' company, Microsoft, made business software for the Mac and Jobs was hoping that Microsoft would do the same for the new operating system. Instead, Gates stole the idea and announced the Windows operating system well before they had developed anything on it. They beat Apple to the punch and as a result, dominated the Operating System business. I hope Apple doesn't wait too long to announce its AR/VR devices. Just put it out there and state that it'll be coming. They probably have done a ton of work on it and maybe it's time to take a bite out of the AR apple instead of continuing to polish it.
That is a massively dumbed down version of what happened. To summarise:
- not “instead”. Microsoft made software for the Mac. It was pretty good for the time and continued for many years. - Microsoft didn’t steal the “idea” any more than Apple stole it from Xerox. Apple were very aware that Microsoft were in the operating system business. - on that note, Apple didn’t develop an OS “unlike anything up until that time”. It was significantly like the Xerox Star. Better in many ways, but very much like it. - Microsoft did not “beat Apple to the punch”, Windows 1.0 came out almost 2 years after the Mac and was a pile of crap that had very little adoption until 2.0 in 1987.
Microsoft certainly used a privileged position to glean certain advantages in their own software business, but it benefits no one to warp the truth.
Yes. And there were other players on the market around that time. For example Commodore, who offered a vastly superior operating system to macOS with a much better user experience and hardware. Amiga / Workbench had preemptive multitasking which only arrived on Mac with the introduction of OSX, and ran on a computer with dedicated hardware acceleration & 4096 colors. Another huge player was Atari.
Yes, 1 or 2 years later but that doesn’t change the fact the innovation for more user friendly computing was happening broadly.
This is a bit of a “History is the propaganda of the victors” kinda thing.
Note also that Apple didn’t “steal” anything from Xerox. Xerox wasn’t going anywhere with it, and Apple officially sat in with their engineers and paid for the privilege in stock options, IIRC.
Apple developed a great new operating system that used a mouse and it was unlike anything up until that time. Before it was finished, Steve Jobs showed the loperating system to his friend Bill Gates. Gates' company, Microsoft, made business software for the Mac and Jobs was hoping that Microsoft would do the same for the new operating system. Instead, Gates stole the idea and announced the Windows operating system well before they had developed anything on it. They beat Apple to the punch and as a result, dominated the Operating System business. I hope Apple doesn't wait too long to announce its AR/VR devices. Just put it out there and state that it'll be coming. They probably have done a ton of work on it and maybe it's time to take a bite out of the AR apple instead of continuing to polish it.
That is a massively dumbed down version of what happened. To summarise:
- not “instead”. Microsoft made software for the Mac. It was pretty good for the time and continued for many years. - Microsoft didn’t steal the “idea” any more than Apple stole it from Xerox. Apple were very aware that Microsoft were in the operating system business. - on that note, Apple didn’t develop an OS “unlike anything up until that time”. It was significantly like the Xerox Star. Better in many ways, but very much like it. - Microsoft did not “beat Apple to the punch”, Windows 1.0 came out almost 2 years after the Mac and was a pile of crap that had very little adoption until 2.0 in 1987.
Microsoft certainly used a privileged position to glean certain advantages in their own software business, but it benefits no one to warp the truth.
Yes. And there were other players on the market around that time. For example Commodore, who offered a vastly superior operating system to macOS with a much better user experience and hardware. Amiga / Workbench had preemptive multitasking which only arrived on Mac with the introduction of OSX, and ran on a computer with dedicated hardware acceleration & 4096 colors. Another huge player was Atari.
Yes, 1 or 2 years later but that doesn’t change the fact the innovation for more user friendly computing was happening broadly.
This is a bit of a “History is the propaganda of the victors” kinda thing.
No argument from me there, I was an Amiga kid for a long time before I came to the Mac. And still miss a lot of the ways Workbench worked.
Comments
Anyway, the claims I was responding to was that Microsoft stole the idea, and that it was a complete original from Apple. Neither of those claims stand up, the idea was given to them on a plate just as Xerox gave it to Apple.
Also, coming up on 40 years ago. Time to move on.
To me the iPad (not the pro) is the best tablet product Apple has, because it is clearly positioned as a consumption device. It’s wonderful for kids, it’s great to watch movies and do some very light productivity. It’s wonderful for pencil users to draw. It’s great for my parents. Even more so, the price point makes sense in relation to what is offers (although the amount of storage offered and upgrade pricing is problematic).
The Pro model however gets into laptop territory pricing wise. Even though the hardware specs are superior to the iPad, it implies being a professional laptop replacement (marketing does at least) but fails to be one. The file handling, moving between apps, the ergonomics, etc is all extremely annoying when your mindset is “to get shit done”.
I recently attached the iPad as a “second screen” and hated the experience because it surfaces UX issues; a similar desktop look but two different operating systems and capabilities. I like them better detached.
I do hope Apple will improve iPadOS for Pro users - it should be a fairly substantial improvement IMHO - but also thinks about how to protect the casual iPad user from increased complexity.