This actually lines up reasonably well with market cap -- Apple is at $85B and Microsoft at $195B. Apple has seen resurgence in growth (75% year over year is pretty kick ass), but they are much more heavily tied to consumers than microsoft so it seems logical that the current economic troubles will hit them harder.
Personally, the only thing I would like more than Apple surpassing Microsoft as the giant computing behemoth is Ubuntu making good on its goal of surpassing Apple in usability/UI.
This market cap stuff is not really meaningful when looked at this way. Microsoft pays a dividend if it didn't all that cash would stay on its books and would have to result in an increase in its market cap. If you want to make a proper comparison (of this dubious stat) you should subtract the cash of each company from the market cap and then compare. Microsoft has returned more money to its shareholders than Apple is worth.
Sadly I dont see Ubuntu doing that any time soon (I could write an essay on how much I dislike Ubuntu's UI!).
It's just not a "glamorous" part of the OS-making process (IMO it's the great stumbling bloack of all modern Linux distros...).
Agreed over the luxury branding of Apple though. It will be interestign to see how they fare over the next 18 months.
Although with that said the Ipod is (probably annoyingly) one of those luxuries that isn't a luxury any more - so that should keep them going.
> so it seems logical that the current economic troubles will hit them harder.
Not sure I agree - corporates can tighten their belts as much as consumers.
A lot of corporates might choose to delay upgrading products coming out of support and/or cancel their support agreements. These are lucrative part of Microsoft's revenue.
Except that's not actually true. Apple has luxury products like the iPod, sure. The current generation iPhone has features that are very obviously aimed at competing with corporate stalwart RIM.
Apple (well, Jobs) doesn't focus on marketing to corporations as a strategy to be more appealing to consumers, but I'm certain if they had to they could. Do Sun have any desktop Unix customers left? They're Apple's obvious first target.
the iphone has outlook integration, yes. But the /brand/ is overall, a luxury consumer brand. People pay (or used to pay, depending on which sites you read) the "apple tax" to use OSX and etc.
Apple uses style and design as key selling points and differentiators. Hence, the upscale nature of the brand. Apple will never sell anything that resembles an eMachine.
That is true only in the sense that Nikon is a luxury consumer brand that people pay a premium for. I'd argue that Apple is a "creative professional" brand and leverages that to appeal to consumers too. If Nikon only made digicams, no matter how good they were, if they took their eye off the photojournalists, the consumers would lose interest.
Ubuntu can't surpass Apple until someone figures out how to teach open source developers to create good UIs. Or at least get them to stick to standards.
Yeah. And I think this is the source of a lot of the Mac/Linux bickering that I've seen on that site. A lot of Mac users really do like the idea of open source. It's just that as things stand right now, no one Linux distro comes even close to having the level of polish that OS X does. They're on two separate playing fields. And usually some straw man, like Compiz, gets dangled as "proof" that Ubuntu is graphically superior to the Mac, when a part of OS X is that the graphical flourishes tend to actually aid usability. Think Exposé - any one of the various things Exposé does - or the new Stacks, or even the genie minimalism. And while I'm certain that there are patches for Ubuntu that do each of these things, they aren't as well-incorporated into the system and that's the point of OS X. They're built into the core so developers can rely on them and build plugins that tie into the various features.
And even then, that's ignoring all of the small details, like the completely polished beauty of the current window system, or the drag-file-icon-in-window-to-move, or the ability for programmers to change their Dock icon's image to represent information. There's just too much that any distro right now would have to do to catch up, and it frustrates me - and, I'd guess, other Mac users - that rather than acknowledge this ridiculous gap and figure out how to surpass it, Linux users raise stupid arguments and claim that every last Mac user uses their computer because of marketing hype. It's getting the Linux distros I've seen and participated in the community of - Ubuntu and Kubuntu, so maybe I've missed something - nowhere.
I think a lot of people are confusing "good UIs" with "pretty windows". When it comes to usability and general quality of the UI, Gnome has surpassed dumbed-down OSX UI long time ago, they just don't have pretty windows to win the masses.
I own a Mac and use it daily. I can't stand how poorly everything is made and how limited I am on a Mac compared to Ubuntu/Gnome. A few obvious examples:
- Non-resizeable windows (only one corner)
- Non-maximizale windows (the first lesson I learned on OSX - never click on a green "+" button: generally you never know what's going to happen)
- File open dialog doesn't have a edit field for me to type a file name, so I can't quickly open /etc/whaterver when I need to.
- Spaces are dysfunctional: applications aren't isolated in their virtual desktops, all mixed up together in a giant Alt+Tab list
- Finder is a joke: nearly impossible to use without a mouse and its list of limitations is well known
- Poor support for FTP/SFTP
- Poor keyboard support (users are unable to assign hot keys they want, generally limited to a pre-defined list), many functions aren't available for keyboard users (cut/paste files, resize/move windows and many more). Hey, I can't even get to a specific top-level menu item from a keyboard. That's something even Windows 3.0 could easily do. Fuck, even most confirmation dialogs on OSX have keyboard disabled: you're forced to use the mouse to pick Yes/No/Cancel. Jesus...
- Poor window/application management. The concept of "every app can be switched to and everybody shares a menu" doesn't work, and stop pretending that it does. On my Mac I have only Safari running yet my "Alt-Tab" list is HUGE: it includes background-running Audim, Skype, Performance Monitor and Finder - 6 apps total with only one (!) visible window.
- Mandatory iTunes for everything. Probably the worst application I ever had to deal with on a daily basis.
I could go on and on forever. For instance I've failed to find a working solution that allows me to use Spotlight to pull up links I saved on del.icio.us. Gnome has it built-in.
The main reason I use my Mac is Safari and multi-touch: super-fast browser coupled with finger gestures for zoom, scroll and page flipping is awesome: worth tolerating general dumbness and poor usability of Leopard and apps that are bundled with it.
For prolonged coding sessions I fire up Ubuntu: everything is a keystroke away there. The only drawbacks are slow&buggy Firefox and the pathetic LCD on my Thinkpad.
I think Gnome have got it right - your correct, they are just lacking the pretties.
But I think Ubuntu (and other distro) teams haven't made use of the Window managers well at all. Menu's, applications and other bits and pieces are just too confusing for the average Joe user.
UI extends even beyond the windows themselves.
As someone commented I think Linux devs are waking up to how important UI and user interaction is. But
- It's a mess, and a hell of a job to fix
- No one with the proper expertise is involved in the projects
- It's not a glamorous thing to be doing (compare to "cutting edge" stuff
- There seems to be this ingrained anti-M$ vibe that means no one can take influence from them. ?? UI is one thing M$ tend to do really well in Windows. They spend a LOT of money researching it.....
Well... nobody is perfect and Gnome guys have lots of room for improvement too.
But again... Quality of your UI software isn't everything. Sometimes a game-changing feature appears out of nowhere. Apple's multi-touch has changed how I use computer dramatically. And it has almost nothing to do with the software itself: it's a driver+hardware combination that I personally find impossible to live without. OSX allows me to do a lot with just one hand, so I can hold a cup of coffee in another: flip pages, zoom in/out, scroll up/down, etc. This was enough for me to stick to OSX for my daily non-programming computing needs. I even started reading books in PDF format, something I previously could believe I could do.
Yeh - killer features are a big bonus. Thing is they are cool to work on - and so quite a few seem to work appear, pulling people in. With OSX and Windows that's fine because IMO they have that extra level of ease and Usability that a consumer OS needs. Linux doesn't have that left - I bet a lot of people drawn in with a gimmick are left struggling with it after a few weeks...
I still maintain that Linux is lacking a simple UI to pull it into the mainstream (ALL Linux not just Ubuntu).
I think that some of these things are a matter of personal preference. And I agree with you on some things and I can see why you think others, but I'd still like to put in an argument about some of the things that you mention, as a member of the Loyal Opposition.
Non-resizeable windows (only one corner)
This is something that I found myself really liking: it makes the windows feel more stable to me. I know that I can move a window by clicking the chrome in an app, and that that's ALL clicking the chrome does, and I know what corner I need to use to resize. Going back to Windows, the windows seemed much clunkier and much less focused for precisely that reason.
Non-maximizale windows
This one seems odd at first, but it fits in with the aesthetic that the window scheme tries to use, namely: the windows are not the entire experience of the computer. It encourages more focus on actually manipulating items between windows when there's no option to stick the window to the sides of the screens. Frankly, I think that Apple ought to ditch the + button entirely, since I don't see a point in maximizing at all. I think that a full screen keyboard shortcut across applications would work much better for when you only need one application at a time. A few apps have it already; I think Apple ought to standardize that.
File open dialog doesn't have a edit field for me to type a file name, so I can't quickly open /etc/whaterver when I need to.
That's related to Finder, which I think is absolutely the worst part of the OS. Rumor has it Finder's being replaced in 10.6; we can only hope.
Spaces are dysfunctional: applications aren't isolated in their virtual desktops, all mixed up together in a giant Alt+Tab list
What do you mean? You can set applications either to stick to one desktop, or make it open-ended and move windows where you see fit. Or do you mean that Spaces lets you move applications that are "stuck" to other windows? In which case you're right, but when I used Spaces I found it much easier to deal with when I could quickly navigate around. (I don't see the point of virtual spaces whatsoever, so perhaps my perspective isn't the most useful here.)
Finder is a joke: nearly impossible to use without a mouse and its list of limitations is well known
Agreed. It's better on a laptop, since I find that multitouch makes navigation really simple when you're in the windowpane view (which, by the way, is the single best view that I've found in any OS), but it still needs a lot of fixes.
Poor keyboard support (users are unable to assign hot keys they want, generally limited to a pre-defined list), many functions aren't available for keyboard users (cut/paste files, resize/move windows and many more). Hey, I can't even get to a specific top-level menu item from a keyboard. That's something even Windows 3.0 could easily do. Fuck, even most confirmation dialogs on OSX have keyboard disabled: you're forced to use the mouse to pick Yes/No/Cancel. Jesus...
That's because OS X focuses on using a hybrid of keyboard and mouse. I get where you're coming from, and I think it would be nice to have more focus on keyboard-only out of the box, but there are plug-ins that fix those problems, and I've found the hybrid that Apple encourages to be pretty easy to use.
Poor window/application management. The concept of "every app can be switched to and everybody shares a menu" doesn't work, and stop pretending that it does. On my Mac I have only Safari running yet my "Alt-Tab" list is HUGE: it includes background-running Audim, Skype, Performance Monitor and Finder - 6 apps total with only one (!) visible window.
I'm guessing you were using a euphemism, but: what "alt-tab" list? Do you mean cmd-tab? And you're talking about a difference in window philosophy: Linux and Windows tie a single visible process to each window. Apple treats windows and applications differently: windows have their own key command to switch between. I like it a lot more that way. I like that you get a visible list of what's running in the background, and that you can quickly get to whatever process you want with the keyboard. But - as I said - a lot of that is a matter of difference.
I could go on and on forever. For instance I've failed to find a working solution that allows me to use Spotlight to pull up links I saved on del.icio.us. Gnome has it built-in.
The fact that Gnome has built-in support for a web application's functioning is indicative of the philosophy that I don't like: built-in support for external systems rather than an attempt to rely entirely on internals. I've never been a fan of del.icio.us, so take that entire opinion as-is. This looks like it works, though: http://www.ianhenderson.org/delimport.html
I can't address some of your things - the only coding I do is web-related, and Coda has the best FTP support I can think of, but I'm no expert - but there are different ways to achieve usability. For me, being able to drag a song from iTunes onto another application is an example of great usability, even though it's not a power-user sort of shortcut. It's a casual shortcut, and it makes my day-to-day life a little bit easier. And that's where the gap is between the Linux crew and the Mac crew, and it's one that I doubt will be bridged any time soon. But I think that for either side to dismiss the other as blindsightedness or stupidity is a mistake. Both sides have merits for different users.
Wow, great feedback, thanks for sharing. I largely agree with you on almost all accounts, but my point was not "OSX sucks", I was saying that "Gnome/Linux have a great UI too". For instance in Gnome there is a concept of "horizontally maximized window" or "vertically maximized window" (both have super-flexible hot key assignments), so when I am working with an application that suddenly spits out a lot of information in a window (terminal is a prime example) I can quickly maximize it vertically and quickly go back. Moreover, there is a concept of "window groups" that allow me to "merge" several windows into one and flip it when I need to: great of debugger/code windows or HTML/Browser or whatever. My point is that OSX simply won't let you do that.
When I'm talking about "virtual desktop isolation", I mean that under Linux, applications running in different desktops don't mix: Alt-Tab list (or Command/Tab in OSX) is separate for each desktop, and an application running in desktop A cannot open a prompt on desktop B (something I see happen frequently in OSX: Skype may have a contact list in desktop A, but it opens pop-ups on desktop B, same applies to safari and numerous other apps). Under Linux each "space" or "virtual desktop" feels like another computer altogether: I often run up to 5 desktops on Linux with 10-15 apps running in them, while on OSX it quickly becomes a huge mess: sometimes I hear the sound of someone having sent me a message via Skype but I can't find the goddamn window - it can be anywhere and Command-Tab list is useless.
Back to del.icio.us issue: no, Gnome does not have it "built-in" but Gnome has a very rich system of plug-ins for its desktop search feqture. The community is quite active and del.icio.us plug-in is bundled as an option with Gnome itself, along with a huge list of others. This is a prime example of where a commercial body (Apple Inc) can't compete with the crowd. And no, delimport does not work: I've tried (along with 3 or 4 other apps).
I am not bashing OSX, in fact I'm typing this words in it right now, all I'm saying is that when in comes to UI, Linux is not behind at all, in fact I believe it's ahead of everybody else in some aspects of usability. It's hard to beat Apple because of their "whole banana" philosophy: MBP+OSX is a great combination of hardware/software, something that Windows/Linux simply can't do.
I love having discussions like this: I like meeting people that I can talk with without having it before a flamefest.
That "window groups" seems really interesting, as does the hor/vert maximization. I don't know if I've ever seen that before. The groups in particular seems really nice: that would almost serve to do away with apps like Coda (which I use to program on the Mac, and which advertises a one-window everything device), at least for the sake of getting things done for cheap.
The virtual desktop isolation makes a lot of sense. Thanks for the clarification! I agree: it would be really nice to have an option for completely separating the spaces from one another. Chalk that up as another thing I didn't know Gnome could do.
Sorry my del.icio.us program didn't work. What fails with it? I'm curious, since it advertises indexing directly. You could try importing your bookmarks as Safari bookmarks, then opening them up like that? Though I don't think Spotlight handles bookmarks very well. I know Google Bookmarks get indexed, but handling two bookmarks sites isn't optimal.
Sorry my del.icio.us program didn't work. What fails with it? I'm curious, since it advertises indexing directly.
I dunno. It just sits there (running) but nothing ever shows up in Spotlight. May be an issue on del.icio.us side, though: they're known for changing/breaking their APIs.
Safari bookmarks get picked up fine and I use it frequently.
I'm running Ubuntu/Gnome right now. One killer feature for me is a particular keybinding I have set up for the 'Windows' key. If I hold it down then I can left-click and drag anywhere on a window and it will move with the mouse. If I hold it and middle-click and drag it resizes the window. And if I hold it and right-click then the title-bar context menu pops up right at the mouse pointer. It eliminates seeking or overshooting the titlebar or corners for window manipulation. I love it.
>I think a lot of people are confusing "good UIs" with "pretty windows".
Very much so - although ideally you can have it all.
>When it comes to usability and general quality of the UI, Gnome has surpassed dumbed-down OSX UI long time ago, they just don't have pretty windows to win the masses.
As a daily user of both, I disagree. I don't think Gnome has surpassed - at least not in a meaningful way. OSX is very prescriptive on how apps behave and look (consistency) - Gnome is just one part of the problem, there are the millions of other little inconsistencies that bug me (but I guess they aren't really gnomes problem).
I think this requires one "Ubuntu UI czar" who has some ability to enforce uniformity. Otherwise you get tons of nice looking parts of the system that don't abide by the same intuitive rules so they don't lead to a nice combination.
Honestly, cloning the Apple interface as much as possible wouldn't be such a bad strategy.
Is there some organization of open source UI/design folks? It seems that this could also be done by some kind of approval/standards organization.
For example, can I submit my YetAnotherChatClient app to some UI approval group (say Works Well for All) and get a stamp that says I conform to their standard of goodness?
With "disruptive innovations", what the market often cares about is 'good enough', and if the improvement curve of Ubuntu puts it on track to supersede that, that's all that's needed. I don't think Ubuntu will ever be "better" than MacOS (well, except for the fact that Ubuntu does focus follows mouse like God intended [it's in the old testament, I think], but I guess I'm in the minority there). But for that matter, neither is Windows, and it seems to have a slight numerical advantage. I think we're seeing the leading edge of Ubuntu with the netbooks.
Personally, the only thing I would like more than Apple surpassing Microsoft as the giant computing behemoth is Ubuntu making good on its goal of surpassing Apple in usability/UI.