The Microsoft ghost town

Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share
61

Potentially, USB 1.1 was the first version of USB widely adopted (1.0 was not), and it came out in 1998. So any computer shipping in 98 like the original iMac would definitely be a candidate. I don’t know that Compaq, Dell, HP, and IBM didn’t have anything out around the same time though.

It’s still irrelevant though, USB was factually invented by a consortium made up of a few parties (notables being Intel, IBM, Microsoft, Nortel) and to the best of my knowledge Apple was not part of the design group in any capacity.

62

I find it ironic that I am defending Apple, when the first PC I ever saw, or used, was a TRS-80 (trash 80). Hell, even Timex had a computer.

But, Apple is generally conceded to have marketed the first successful personal computer. It preceded the trash 80 by about half a year. The Commodore wasn’t effectively available until 1978, but was announced before the Apple II was on the market. Note that Jobs tried to sell the Apple II to Commoodore, in 1976, but Commodore decided it was too expensive, and wait.

63

I don’t think anyone was talking about “marketed the first successful personal computer.” The original point was that Apple did not invent the personal computer and it is 100% correct that they did not invent it, nor did any one man.

64

Those quoting me were quoting my post on Kyrio’s “you’ve gone full retard” post referencing beowulff. In that post he claimed: “Everything you listed was used in the computer market by other companies before, or at the same time as, Apple.” Note the words “computer market”.

That is what I’ve been refuting, and what I stated was flat out wrong. Since he claimed beowulff was “full retard” in his (beowulff’s) fairly reasonable post, I felt the need to correct his “history”.

I also, never claimed Apple invented the personal computer. When someone said, “isn’t IBM generally given kudos” for that one, I merely pointed out that Apple is generally given kudos. I did not consider that the same thing as claiming they invented it.

65

I talked to a Sony rep in the wash room. I mistook his clipboard for one of our which led to the brief chat. I asked him if he was going to go to a nearby Sony store in a mall. He said no because that Sony store has been closed for months. (I haven’t been to the mall in a while.) I mentioned that I read that Microsoft stores are not doing any better, that they are a ghost town ;), and he said “There’s one store doing better: B-O-S-E.” To which I replied, “What about A-P-P-L-E?” He answered, “We’ll see now that the big guy died.” I left saying, “You mean Kim Jong-il?”

66

Apple didn’t market the first personal computer, either. The only thing you said that was true earlier on was they marketed the first wildly successful personal computer, many were marketed pre-Apple II.

67

hay guys,

my favorite multi-billion-dollar corporation can beat up your favorite multi-billion-dollar corporation.

68

It was a commercial product and Xerox did marketed and sell it.

And yes, the Star used a mouse and a windowing OS, as the wiki article states.

69

This isn’t the Pit, Kyrio, so cut the name calling out.

70

I never disputed that.
In my original post, the one that Kyrio was so rude to me in, I said:

71

Could you provide evidence for that claim?

72

This isn’t freakin’ GQ!
Go back and read my first post where I made a list of Apple-first technologies.

73

Well, maybe. In the last 7-8 years this would be true, but unlike IBM and Microsoft that have been consistently profitable for 30 years Apple was nearly bankrupt in the 1990s and was barely a viable company from the mid-80s to the late 90s.

I think it’ll be interesting to see how Apple performs over the next 10 years.

74

Yes, but what you did say is that “Apple invents lots of technologies.” Then you said “but they are better at being the first to adopt new technologies” then you listed a bunch of technologies in which Apple was an early adopter (but not inventor.) So to go back to your original comment that they “invent lots of technologies”, I think it’d be nice if you could name at least one or two.

75

It’s worth noting IBM is the 800 pound Gorilla in the “inventing stuff” category, generating over 4,000 patents a year and has been consistently the #1 patent generator for a long time. Microsoft is coming on strong in that regard as well, they have moved up from #6 in patent generation to #3, and I don’t believe Apple is even in the top 10.

While a lot of these patents are arcane, Microsoft and IBM make real money off of these patents. For example I believe Microsoft has actually made more money off of Android than Google has, because of Microsoft patented technology that is in Android, every Android handset passes a small licensing fee back to Microsoft.

I think Microsoft has made over $1bn off of those fees.

They also won a big patent case against handset manufacturers in recent days which will require them to pay Microsoft licensing fees for fairly common handset physical features as well.

76

Oh, for Og’s sake!
Here’s two:
FireWire
QuickRing
Apple has over 3,000 patents. If you want to browse through them, have at it:

77

FireWire is mostly considered a joke these days, but right, it was Apple invented!

I don’t think anyone denies Apple makes popular products, but the original point you made that set people off was that Microsoft just copies Apple in everything they do. That’s what brought up the discussion of inventions, because it’s kind of disingenuous to claim Microsoft is just copying Apple in everything they do when most of what Apple does is take other people’s inventions and slap them together in ways that make a good product. That’s what Microsoft does with a lot of their products.

It’s worth noting that while Apple outperforms Microsoft overwhelmingly in the smartphone and tablet markets, Microsoft was actually involved to a big degree in both of those markets since before they were mainstream, with major involvement in PDAs and tablets in the 90s. I agree Microsoft would love to copy Apple’s “success” in those markets, but the idea that Microsoft is only in those markets because of Apple just isn’t true. Microsoft has been trying to make money on handheld devices and tablet computers for a long time (unsuccessfully.) Windows Phone is no more a copycat of Apple than is any other smartphone a copy cat of iPhones. Apple fans refuse to believe it but there are very few things in iPhones that were really groundbreaking. You can see a lot of the ideas that went into the iPhone in Nokia and BlackBerry smartphones that predate it.

Both Nokia and BlackBerry phones had a lot of elements that you see in the first iPhone. They could play MP3s, you could develop custom applications for them, and they provided many features common to PCs. Even the touchscreen isn’t something iPhone pioneered, Symbian touch screen devices predate iPhones by like 4 years.

What Apple did that made them many billions of dollars on handsets is copy a lot of existing technology and implement it better than anyone else. Symbian and BlackBerry OS were clunky in terms of their GUI, Apple really focused on making a user friendly GUI. BlackBerry and Symbian OS were difficult to develop applications for, and even more difficult to deploy applications to the devices. Each individual handset had quirks that might require different builds of the same application. Further, there was no real market place where you could easily get these applications. You’ve been able to install custom applications on BlackBerry and Symbian phones since probably 24 months prior to the first iPhone launch, but I don’t believe either had a real marketplace where developers could easily deploy their applications and users could easily download them. When RIM and Nokia finally implemented marketplaces they were clunky and unmanaged, with lots of garbage applications (and by the time they did this the iPhone was already out and no one was interested.)

Anytime I try to talk about Apple’s real accomplishments people assume I’m bashing Apple, I’m not bashing Apple. I’m not Japanese, so I don’t have a favorite Fortune 500 company I root for as a “fan.” I’ve also said in the past that I own both Microsoft and Apple stock (and I don’t mean just in funds, I actually have bought real shares in these companies through brokers, going back to the 1980s), I support both companies and it is in my vested interest when Apple or Microsoft does well. But it just annoys me that Microsoft say, releases a smartphone and they are “trying to copy Apple.”

That’s a hypocritical criticism, because what Microsoft is blatantly trying to do is “copy Apple’s success” meaning learn from the successes of Apple to have their own successful handset. Microsoft correctly realizes just blindly copying iPhones won’t work, and in truth Windows Phone 7 really is different from an iDevice. However, what you’re criticizing Microsoft for is exactly what Apple did. They saw a market for smartphones, and they looked at the reasons the two big players (Symbian and BlackBerry) hadn’t quite succeeded at the fully featured smartphone concept, then Apple cobbled together a lot of existing technologies and developed a good UI to lay on top of it and released a phone that was wildly successful. They destroyed Nokia and Symbian at their own game, that means they are a good product-design company. It doesn’t mean that they are somehow morally superior to a company like Microsoft that basically is trying to do the same thing Apple did: take a bunch of existing technologies, look at the existing market, and try to release a more compelling product than the competition. (Plus, as I mentioned, Microsoft has been involved in tablets and handhelds since the mid-90s.)

78

An awesome summary Martin Hyde. In fact I have copied it into a file for use in future Apple vs. Microsoft arguments. Much obliged.

79

Are you deliberately misreading what I wrote? Kryio claimed that Beowulff was a retard for claiming that Apple sold the first GUI computer, presumably meaning a personal computer with an operating system based on a windowing computer. I stated that Xerox developed the first, but never sold it. Reading the article, I see that they sold a.system based on the software, but not as a stand alone system - not as a personal computer.

I still stand by my claim that Apple is generally given kudos as the creator of the PC. To me that sentence means that when a company is picked as having created the personal computer, they are generally given credit. That is not saying they were the first to sell one. I seem to recall thinking of getting a build it yourself PC, called an Altair(?). But, the fact remains that Apple is generally considered to have created the market for a personal computer.

And, truthfully, we are actually not far from each other. I agree with your main point that Apple did not originate many of the technologies in their very successful products. Until Beowulff posted they’re 3000 patents, I never realized Apple was an “invention” company; I picture them as more of a stove pipe integrator. They are probably the best at that, at least right now. As I accurately claimed before, they did not invent the 3.5 inch diskette, but were the first to implement it in a personal computer with a reliable interface. They were the first company to sell a personal computer with a mouse and windowing operating system. Heck, they were even the first to have a failure at that.

Btw, I’m not sure firewire should be considered a joke. When it came out, it was much faster than USB. I have no idea why it didn’t take off, if it was a Sony Betamax, or if there is something intrinsic to it that makes it less viable, but it wasn’t a joke at the time.

80

Waitaminit. What exactly is this thread about? It started with a description of the apparent lack of interest in Microsoft’s new retail stores, in comparison with the success of Apple’s retail stores. Is it really deniable that Apple has done well with this?

How exactly does that lead into a “You Apple worshipers are sucking Steve Jobs’s dead cock” rant? with a splinter of “Prove Apple has ever done anything good?”

Fer Pete’s sake.