Have you seen the latest Apple add? Actually you saw it the first time. It's the same add over and over again.I, personally, have gotten a little tired of that theme. All they are, are pot shots at Microsoft. Why not tell me what you can do, instead of spreading lies (and i mean outright lies) about your competition? Funny that one of their selling points is that you can run Windows! The adds no longer are aimed at getting new users, but to make fan-boys chuckle. By the way Apple, a PC also runs Linux. Latest numbers show that there are more world-wide Linux users than Mac users. So tell me what you can do for me and how much it will cost to switch to you (hardware and software), instead of just spreading FUD. It's getting a little old.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Saturday, March 8, 2008
So they released the SDK this week. That was inevitable, and very important to pickup the sluggish sales of the iPhone. New third-party software will empower developers to create much needed new apps for this new platform, which is way behind Windows Mobile or even Symbian in third-party apps. Most will probably be junk, but I would love to see an ebook reader and universal Instant Messenger and even Truphone to make a VOIP client for it.
However, for me the real news, and what could really propel iPhone sales, is the announcement that it will be Exchange compatible. Once again, being more compatible with the company Apple loves taking pot shots at, makes it even more appealing to the masses and will help its bottom line.
Seems that Microsoft is behind the reason of Apple's success over and over again. In 1997 Microsoft bailed Apple out of potential bankruptcy. Then the iPod didn't really take off until they made iTunes for Windows. Even today, most iPod users are Windows users.
Then they switched from Power CPUs to Intel. This speared rumors of being able to run Windows on a Mac. Well the rumors were not only true, Apple created the software to make it happen and even supported it. Macs flew off the shelves.
Now they will support Microsoft's Exchange, and it will undoubtedly skyrocket sales of the iPhone as corporations will buy them up by the truck-load. Once again its Microsoft compatibility to the rescue!
Now don't get me wrong, I love Apple products, and with the announcement of the SDK and Exchange compatibility, I might trade in my N95 for an iPhone this summer. I even bought a brand new Macbook Pro. However, I hate the constant hate coming from Apple fan-boys towards Microsoft.
So lets all thank Microsoft, because without them and the platforms they have built, Apple products wouldn't be as popular and good as they are today.
Thank you Microsoft!
Sunday, February 3, 2008
I am a Mac user, however I have dabbled with Vista over the last year and have had extensive experience with XP since its release in 2001. Although I prefer Leopard, I must admit that Vista is pretty slick. I fail to see what the complaints are all about. Its a more secure OS and they made it a lot more usable than it was before, with features like Desktop Search.
So why all the fuss? There are complaints that old hardware doesn't work. Since when is it an OS manufacturer's responsibility to make sure every piece of hardware on the planet works on your OS? The OS' API was out a year before it was released. So why didn't the manufacturer of the hardware not make a Vista driver? I think the blame should go to them not Microsoft.
Another complaint is the fact that not all software works. Software compatibility is a privilege not a right! Steve Jobs taught us that when he went from OS9 to OSX. Software developers have been given guidelines on how to program correctly for the new multi-user versions of Windows since Windows 2000! How is it Microsoft's fault when software developers make half-assed software that doesn't follow the OS's guidelines? Actually, the only blame I could put on Microsoft is that they didn't force software developers to follow their OS's guidelines sooner.
The most ridiculous complaint is the one about UAC (User Access Control). Microsoft finally put in place a mechanism to force users to run as limited users. Only when software requires system access will it request access from an administrative user. What is wrong with that? Mac OSX has had that for a very long time! You can't install anything that requires system access without OSX asking you for an administrative username and password. The complaint? "I can't do anything without UAC always popping up." Ahh! The problem once again is related to the latter issue about half-assed software that tries to access system resources instead of following Windows software development guidelines.
That is my two cents.