Microsoft And Apple: Who's The Copy-Cat?

By Derek Sooman on July 8, 2004, 12:06 PM
You may remember our recent discussion on the new "Spotlight" search feature due to hit future releases of Mac OS X, and that Microsoft have been planning something similar for Longhorn.

It already looks like MS and Apple are ready to start a a mud slinging match of "who-invented-the-cool-stuff-first".

"Apple threw down the gauntlet earlier this week with the Tiger banners displayed prominently at the Worldwide Apple Developer Conference. "Introducing Longhorn: Redmond, Start Your Photocopiers," they proclaimed."

"They're copying our concepts," whined Apple CEO Jobs to the New York Times. "I'd kind of like to get credit some time."

Kind of getting boring, this kind of talk. Isn't it? IMHO, none of you invented anything first, except new and better ways to promote your market dominance.




User Comments: 24

Got something to say? Post a comment
StormBringer said:
kind of deja vu if you ask me. Didn't this all happen once before, when apple stole a gui from (was it xerox or TI) then MS stole it from apple.
Nic said:
And lets not forget that OS X is based on FreeBSD.
Rick said:
"Think different"By making everything the same.:(
---agissi--- said:
Oh god, is this a soap opra now or what.. apple can go blow an apple for all I care.
acidosmosis said:
Apple obviously won't last very much longer anyway. The only think keeping them afloat is the illiterate users who just happen to go with a Mac, and the users who are still left using Mac's for Photoshop and other graphics applications.Not to mention what some people love to call "neat looking" desktops, which I consider to be nothing more than a plastic peice of junk with fruity colors, but I guess it has come down to the public buying computers for nothing more than the "visual appeal".
Federelli said:
Everything i've ever read about this issue tends to say that it's always MS who ends up copying from apple, regardless of wether apple had already copied from anywhere else.The sure fact, no credit is given anywhere
DigitAlex said:
The only credit MS ever gives is the money to buy a company that developed something they want (i.e. Excel, Visio, VirtualPC and so on)
Unregistered said:
I hope you're all dissing Mac in favor of Linux, rather than in favor of Microsoft.Otherwise, you have absolutely no ground to stand on.
Didou said:
Can't we all just get along ? ;)I don't see why so many people hate Apple with a passion. You don't like it ? Fine, don't use it, don't talk about it, heck pretend it's not even there.Whenever there's a thread about Apple, all the Mac haters drop in. [img]http://users.skynet.be/fa426454/images/Smilies/nonono.g
f[/img]
Unregistered said:
[quote][i]Originally posted by acidosmosis [/i]The only think keeping them afloat is the illiterate users who just happen to go with a Mac[/quote] LoL...Thats a bit too far.
Strakian said:
In regards to 'Graphic' programs like Photoshop, A Mac can no longer hold it's ground VS. a higher end (not highest end...) PC. With all the DDR and DDR2 in quantities of 512MB and 1GB, Photoshop is conisderably faster and easier to use. (Take that macintosh keyboard! I'm right-clicking!)That being said,Adobe Premier definitely runs a lot better on a Mac than a PC. It just seems to work better on a Mac, Period.
---agissi--- said:
Strakien is right! Go re-read that!Also didou, its hard to pretend Mac isnt even "there" when its on the TS homepage. Plus this is disscussion more than argument, as of now anyways.If your editing movies, I can understand you having a Mac, even though you should still have a PC, but its understandable, but for all else...[img]http://users.skynet.be/fa426454/images/Smilies/n
nono.gif[/img]
Godataloss said:
Apple sells some sexy gear and you haters are lying to yourselves and everyone else when you dis' it. As far as the industrial design of their products, every one is slick looking-(even if the imac is a little fey).
BrownPaper said:
I am not against Macs as product. I am just against their marketing machine. They are just as or even more deceiving than Microsoft.
Godataloss said:
I'm just against Steve Jobs- he's alot like Ralph Nader- poking his nose into situations where he's neither needed or wanted.
Strakian said:
let's not add politics to this Godataloss... I'll give Mac one thing other than the Premier... That commercial they had with the dude making faces at the iMac in the window was pretty clever... the one where the iMac sticks its CD tray out at him... that's pretty genius. haha. I still won't buy one, but that's because one of my Fav mags did a fair comparison of a Mac and a full blown PC about 6 months ago or something... we'll just say it wasn't pretty...(The mag was MaxPC btw)
acidosmosis said:
[quote][i]Originally posted by Strakian [/i]In regards to 'Graphic' programs like Photoshop, A Mac can no longer hold it's ground VS. a higher end (not highest end...) PC. [/quote] That I know, but there are still those hardcore Mac users who still claim Mac's are graphics Gods.
Rick said:
Yes acidosmosis, that propaganda really is a thing of the past.And this is especially true since Apple has ditched their RISC architecture in favor of 64-bit CISCPCs can be substantially faster (with the proper configuration) and can perform a wide variety tasks using many softwares that simply isn't available for Mac.Mac can do anything that PC does, but with all software available for PCs, you can find something that does the job just as well or even better than Mac. The exception I found is Adobe Premiere. It crashes too often on PC. hehe. :) That's Adobe's fault if anything though. ;)
Unregistered said:
[quote][i]Originally posted by Rick [/i]And this is especially true since Apple has ditched their RISC architecture in favor of 64-bit CISC[/quote] could you post a link with some more information on this subject?thanks.Frank
Rick said:
[url]http://www.hitequest.com/Kiss/risc_cisc.htm[/url]While the G4 processor by motorola was RISC, Apple has recently changed over to the G5 which is not much more than a regular PC processor. RISC is often used for super computers or where performance absolutely necessary. I think things are changing though, as CISC moves to 64-bit.The MHz will be faster, but the actual speed will not. I think Apple did have IBM integrate the "Velocity engine" into the G5 though. (This was found in the G4). Velocity is Apple's answer to increasing graphics / media performance.
Godataloss said:
Rick you get me all misty when you write ;like that ;)
Unregistered said:
Here we go again... Mac or PC??I use both and I've used Linux too. I also use UNIX on my Mac (X11). Why do I use both... PC for mainly games, Mac for mainly serious stuff (web design, dtp etc). Which is best.. depends on how you measure these things.1. price - PC2. features - Mac3. Stability - Mac (PC crashes to mac crashes over 12 years is @ 1000:1)4. Looks - Mac5. Games - PC etc etc etcSo, decide what you need and buy accordingly. As for which will outlive the other one, my guess is that the one who changes quicker in response to consumer needs and IMHO Apple is ahead of Microsoft on the software front (they don't build PC's or iPods either).
Nic said:
[quote][i]Originally posted by Unregistered [/i]2. features - Mac3. Stability - Mac (PC crashes to mac crashes over 12 years is @ 1000:1)4. Looks - Mac[/quote]As regards features, Macs do come with a lot of bells and whistles (visual toys, rather than actual functionality) straight out of the box, but only because software is a little scarce on the ground (and expensive) for Macs.Macs used to have a very poor reputation in the stability front (pre- OS X days), and crashed much more often than PCs. Since OS X, the Mac has become much more stable.The main causes of crashing are usually software related, and because PC users have much more software to choose from, and typically users will install all sorts of trial software and other applications onto their PCs, then they will also be setting themselves up for possible problems. Both Mac OS X and Windows XP are very stable OSes, and anyone having issues is most likely due to hardware, or software incompatabilities.Take a look at the millions of Windows PCs that are in use everyday at large/small companies worldwide. These don't crash regulary, nor do they require regular maintenance, yet they keep working day in, day out, always stable.Claiming that Macs are 1000 times more stable than PCs is utter nonsense, though it may be that you yourself have had issues with PCs and so choose to promote your experience as being the norm, which it isn't. Incidentaly, I like OS X having had the chance to play with an iBook recently.As to looks, then it all comes down to what you buy. There are some very nice looking PC kit available (e.g. Sony laptops) which are the equal of any Mac for style. but they are as expensive as Macs. There isn't as much to choose from where Macs are concerned because Apple don't allow other manufacturers to make Mac compatibles.I would say that Macs have certainly come a long way and have a lot of nice user friendly features these days. I expect Windows Longhorn will adopt many of the niceties of OS X, and will be even better under the covers. For users that don't play games, and that don't buy/install lots of software, then they may find Mac OS X to be a better choice than Windows XP currently. Apple seem to be very good at making their software user friendly, so for those with a fear of computers, then the Mac is a very good choice.
Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.