I love when CDS (Conservative Derangement Syndrome) strikes idgits.

Care to explain?

Read Progressoverpeace’s first post, and note how he proclaims Apple to be “greedy and nasty” because they (wait for it) made different business decisions than Microsoft. I’ll be the first to stipulate that over the years, Apple has made some colossal mistakes in how they have priced & marketed products, and operated their business. It’s still amazing to me Apple survived at all; honestly, they didn’t deserve to survive. But Apple is a private company, and they have the right to make their own mistakes. No true conservative would claim that Apple is “greedy and nasty” because they declined to license their OS and made stupid decisions about pricing. The free market, not some ranting Microsoft apologist, will decide whether Apple’s approach (integrated software/hardware) or Microsoft’s approach (”good luck with your hardware”) is more viable.

And for those who aren’t aware, while Apple’s hardware used to be much more expensive, these days it’s frequently the other way around.

…unlike MS Apple is trying to drag an anchor behind them and it shows in their market share.

Um, care to join us in the 21st century? What anchor? At this point, Apple has zero proprietary hardware, and hasn’t for years. Further, OS X has zero legacy code, unlike Vista. On the contrary, Apple has frequently (and not undeservedly) been pilloried for making two complete changes in their OS (from 68k to PowerPC and from OS9 to OSX). It’s MS that’s pulling the deadweight of backward compatibility. Don’t get me wrong — one of the main reasons MS has thrived is because they have maintained backward compatibility, and I applaud them for doing so. But that decision also comes with its own set of disadvantages, and it would be foolish to pretend otherwise. Similarly, Apple’s earlier decisions to use proprietary hardware and non-standard processors had a distinct set of advantages and disadvantages.

In conclusion, note which direction Apple’s market share is moving. Now that they’ve adopted industry-standard hardware and fixed their pricing, the sky’s the limit. Microsoft’s current business strategy can be summed up in one word: inertia.

Splashman on August 25, 2007 at 1:35 PM

Gawd. Now you’re reduced to whining about commercials, and for the same reason as your previous whining. Apple makes commercials people like and remember (and win awards), while the thoroughly forgettable advertising out of Redmond is “good enough.”

And I love the whole “MS has not been nasty enough” meme. Very cute. What’s next — Microsoft as the victim of big, bad Apple?

Splashman on August 25, 2007 at 2:12 PM

By the by, I’ll be the first to admit that OSX is not a panacea. Both Windows and OSX have their own set of advantages and disadvantages. I’d argue that for the majority of people, the “it just works” nature of Mac/OSX, combined with zero security worries, is a better investment for most people. But that’s just my opinion, and if someone says they prefer Windows for this reason or that, I’m not going to preach hellfire and damnation.

Speaking of advantages, here’s one genuine advantage that Windows will always have over OSX. And remember, it’s a feature, not a bug.

Splashman on August 25, 2007 at 4:07 PM

I said: “What non-Apple hardware can I run their OS on? ”
You said: “hardware that is not available for licensing.”
Thanks.

Ah, yes. Everyone loves a smartass playing semantics pattycake.

My original reference to proprietary hardware was in a response to a commenter who was recycling old FUD about Apple using proprietary components in their products.

So now you’re whining that Apple won’t license its hardware. Yawn. In other words, you want Apple, who gets 95% of their revenue from hardware sales, to slice their own throat by eliminating one of their largest competitive advantages — namely, their tight hardware/software integration. Yeah, that makes sense. Tell you what: go to an Apple shareholder meeting and repeat that suggestion. I’ll start a pool on how long you remain in one piece.

Wouldn’t you say their recent break from their past financially is due simply to the compatibility tie-in between iPods and Mac’s?

Perhaps it had escaped your attention that iPods and iTunes software work just as well for Windows users?

Not that I’m arguing against the existence of the halo effect. But there’s no reason for anyone to switch to a Mac just because they want to use an iPod. Conventional wisdom is that iPods (and Apple retail stores) are exposing people to Apple’s design philosophy, and making them realize that there is something else out there to choose from besides “good enough.” At that point, Apple’s products sell themselves.

It’s still certainly possible for Apple to shoot themselves in the foot with more stupid business decisions, and MS to ultimately reign supreme. But it’s Apple’s game to lose. I’d hate to be an MS investor right now.

Splashman on August 25, 2007 at 5:51 PM

Already seen it. Yep, that’s a great one. Right on the money.

Splashman on August 25, 2007 at 8:36 PM