saarek

kiwimachead said:

Why do PC makers have to constantly release new product? Sony by comparison have released 5 PlayStation models in 29 years. It’s become as wasteful as fast fashion despite all the bullshit talk of recycling materials etc. The irony is of course that Apple products have a really long service life if you’re not a power user. I have had 3 Macs since 1999; ‘99 Tangerine iBook, 2005 iMac G5, 2011 MBA. Will be upgrading to an M4 MBP when they’re released this year and see how long I can keep it trucking! 

ITGUYINSD said:

Regarding Zune, it's unfortunate that back then, MS couldn't market itself out of a paper bag.  Zune was superior to iPod as was the Zune software superior to even today’s lame iTunes software.  Zune software was one of the best music apps for years.  It's just unfortunate that MS couldn't make anything of it.

AppleZulu said:

Microsoft's strength - a large base market of third-party PCs - is also its weakness. Rolling out an on-machine artificial intelligence operating system is made orders of magnitude more difficult when their only control over the hardware is a set of somewhat optional hardware specifications. Even if this AI-based operating system is really pretty good when running on an optimally-designed PC that carefully observes all of the recommended specifications, the implementation across-the-board will trail downward from that. The hardware manufacturers will compete in both directions, with many cutting every possible corner to lower the price of the device, while others will try to push out new bells-and-whistles faster than the Windows design teams can reasonably anticipate them. Both will tend to yield suboptimal user experiences.

It boggles the mind that still no other major manufacturer has sought to replicate Apple's closed-system design paradigm, with operating system and hardware conceived and implemented as a single, unified thing. This is how Apple is actually the company that repeatedly enters product categories "late," but then flips the whole category on its head by implementing something that's actually well thought out and ultimately desirable and useful to customers. I suppose the ability to start now and be competitive with any sort of new closed-system device is a nearly vertical uphill climb for a competitor, but it's how Apple has made it to where it is now. It will be unsurprising if we one day learn that Apple's shift to in-house silicon from Intel was all about implementing on-device machine-learning and AI. This would mean that for years now, while folks in places like this have heaped snark and criticism on Apple for missing the AI boat and under-powering Siri, etc., Apple has been cruising down a long runway to implement a next-big-thing that will actually fly. Meanwhile, others are alpha-testing on an unsuspecting public things like generative AI chatbots, search and audio/visual media that's of questionable utility and bereft of ethics at its best. 

So, you know, good luck to Microsoft. Competition can be a good thing. Still, if you only have a dollar to invest in either Microsoft or Apple and this product category is the basis for your decision, you might want to put that dollar towards Apple stock.