mattrobs Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 I just finished watching the Macworld Keynote Address, and must admit, am pretty .. enlightened. My question refers to the history. I am unfamiliar with the Apple-MS past, so feel free to enlighten me. How did Microsoft (moreover, Windows) end up to be such a dominant operating system (arguably) in households for all these years? I'm not saying whether they should or shouldn't be dominant; basically, why do more people (in general) have a Microsoft operating system, as opposed to an Apple? That last sentence is an assumption, and I'd like to leave it like that for the purpose of this post. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudy Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 macOS wasnt as good as it is, it only got good around 10.2-10.3, before 10 it was a nightmare :x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unequivocal Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 I just finished watching the Macworld Keynote Address, and must admit, am pretty .. enlightened. My question refers to the history. I am unfamiliar with the Apple-MS past, so feel free to enlighten me. How did Microsoft (moreover, Windows) end up to be such a dominant operating system (arguably) in households for all these years? I'm not saying whether they should or shouldn't be dominant; basically, why do more people (in general) have a Microsoft operating system, as opposed to an Apple? That last sentence is an assumption, and I'd like to leave it like that for the purpose of this post. Thanks. Mosly because you had to buy special hardware; people were already running DOS on IBM clones, so it only seemed natural to get Windows and put it on the hardware they already had rather than buying new Apple hardware. It really didn't have much to do with the OS (if you used Windows 3.1/95 and the equivalent Mac system you'll see there was little difference...) as much as economics at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yert* Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 I assume Windows is more popular because Apple stuff is more expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigapixels Veteran Posted January 12, 2006 Veteran Share Posted January 12, 2006 macOS wasnt as good as it is, it only got good around 10.2-10.3, before 10 it was a nightmare :x I would have to disagree... I liked OS9 a lot personally. And a lot of my friends that had Macs did as well. So that's a very subjective statement right there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icecaveman Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Sorry, this isn't trolling or anything I just think I should try to answer this. Basicly it is as follows. At least that's what I like to believe - Price was the most important factor and it really started to drop when the IBM clones appeared. - Better development tools, resaulting in far more software, although the software was not always better. - Backwards compatibility, a very important factor in Microsoft's success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
semaja2.net Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 - Backwards compatibility, a very important factor in Microsoft's success. thats actualy correct but macosx has that anyway but its also the reason windows is failing and crashes cuz theres no option to choose if you want it or not PS. you cant compare apple and microsoft try to compare microsoft and os/2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ambiance Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 The same could be said for Windows. As far as I am concerned Windows was beta until they nixed the 9x and added an XP. Some could even still argue that it is still in beta phase. Windows is for the herd and Apple the pastor. I will also add that I have never owned an Apple with exception to my iPod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueFiberOptics Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 OS 9 crashed a lot. I had to fix lots of Mac computers in my day and anything below OS X just plain hated people. That and Apple was more expensive. That's why it is not #1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ambiance Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Sorry connectivity caused a second post... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacGod Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 The quick version... closed architecture. Apple has a closed architecture - only Apple can create the hardware. No one else can do so. That is a major reason why. This changed briefly in like 96-97 - sometime around there when Power Computing, and UMAX and some other vendors licensed the Macintosh Hardware platform and created there own competing 'clones'. This wasn't good - the Macintosh clone was gaining market share, but Apple was losing its bread and butter - so they closed it down again. (I know, I have a PowerTower Pro 180 still with Mac OS 9.1 - runs good still). Some other reasons: Basically Same Operating System for 10 years No early support by Microsoft for Applications That is a very short list... but you get the idea - Mac OS X came out about 5-6 years ago - til that point you were stuck on an Operating System that shared RAM, had no crash protection, was generally slower than the comprable IBM machine... During the early years - the Macintosh Office (for productivity) was misguided and basically the ****** child of Microsoft - MS was really developing Windows 95/98 during these times - 32 bit operating system with Crash Protection (For the most part) and multitasking like nothing we had ever seen before in the mainstream (besides OS/2). I like the Mac OS platform and until recently preferred to use a iBook or PowerBook - but recently have started using a PC laptop - but I think the MacBook's look awesome... Anywhere - that is my two cents - I think Jobs has definately put them on the right track and this move to Intel (which I hated to hear about 1 year ago) is going to be good for the masses. my two cents. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the evn show Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 I wasn't interested in the debate but I'm really confused about you're saying here: This wasn't good - the Macintosh clone was gaining market share, but Apple was losing its bread and butter - so they closed it down again. (I know, I have a PowerTower Pro 180 still with Mac OS 9.1 - runs good still). Overall the number of mac users didn't increase any faster than the rest of the market. For the last year Apple's been making buku bucks on the mac lines and yet it's just as closed as it's ever been. Some other reasons: Basically Same Operating System for 10 years Which 10 years are you refering to exactly? No early support by Microsoft for Applications Excel existed on the Mac before it was even called Excel. Microsoft Office first appeared on the mac, and Word has been pretty much lock-step on both platforms - mostly similar but different features on different platforms let nerds argue about which is truely superior. Filemaker and Access were mostly interchangeable. Internet Explorer on Mac OS wasn't worthless until well after Windows was dominant? So I've got to ask, which applications are you talking about? Mac OS X came out about 5-6 years ago - til that point you were stuck on an Operating System that shared RAM, had no crash protection, was generally slower than the comprable IBM machine... Apple offered a premeptive multitasking, protected memory, "certified honest to goodness UNIX" in the late 80s-early 90s and nobody was interested. 6 years ago Windows 9x wasn't all roses either, it's as if people didn't really care about that sort of thing 'way back when' During the early years - the Macintosh Office (for productivity) was misguided and basically the ****** child of Microsoft - MS was really developing Windows 95/98 during these times The early years ended when Jobs was ousted, and good times returned with him in the late 90s. personal thoughtsb> Windows 3.0 was "good enough" and it was cheaper (initial purchase) to run a PC. The IBM-compatible types had enough mind share by then that it was a given that Apple wasn't going to be the microsoft of today. Windows 95 was the kiss of death because that operating system was demonstrably as good as Mac OS 7.x in almost every way that mattered to consumers. I figure the Macs weak position was sewn in the early 80s when Apple failed to transition their Apple I/II users to Mac users. Starting well behind the established competitors is painfully difficult. The same thing is happening in the MP3 player market: First there were lots of scattered competition with servicable products, Apple comes along with something that was good enough (though not nesseciarly leaps and bounds better than everything else) and people bought it. Once they cracked 30% market share it became a pretty one sided market and all of the competitors (many have more products that are argubably as good or better than the ipod) haven't had much luck bringing apple down. John Grubber's "The art of Parlay" is roughly covers my ideas on the topic. To hell with proof reading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leddy Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Windows is cheaper, works on cheaply and easily acquirable hardware, has a large user base, as an unimaginably large world of developers built around it, and is so easy to use that people can use it for 5+ years and still not know what the "Control Panel" is for. Apple was closed-architecture, incompatible with Windows programs, different, expensive to buy, relatively expensive to maintain, and only now is it beginning to get the software library that it sorely needs to maintain the fight. ...Not to mention that prior to Mac OS X macs didn't look all that good either. The machine looked ugly; and the OS looked even uglier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silverity Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Windows [...] is so easy to use that people can use it for 5+ years and still not know what the "Control Panel" is for. That's exactly what OS X is :) Let me say, that the very first app windows users install on mac is... norton antivirus :ninja: And, yes, macs were (are still) expensive, closed architecture and lacked software developers support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppleDave Veteran Posted January 12, 2006 Veteran Share Posted January 12, 2006 I just switched over from a PC to a Mac, the transition was VERY easy. OS X is the best OS IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XIII Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Cost of investment (buy speciffic hardware to run Mac) and cost of ownership (pay more for the same software and pay for almost for everything due to less alternative freeware) of a MacOS is much more than a windows system. Inflexibility is also a cons as well, shop around for hardware upgrade for a PC and then compare to a Mac, you will see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leddy Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 That's exactly what OS X is :) Let me say, that the very first app windows users install on mac is... norton antivirus :ninja: And, yes, macs were (are still) expensive, closed architecture and lacked software developers support. Macs don't need a virus scanner because viral coders don't give a damn about Macs. Not enough damage would be generated to warrant making one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silverity Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Macs don't need a virus scanner because viral coders don't give a damn about Macs. Not enough damage would be generated to warrant making one. Don't you feel a bit of sarcasm in my post? :) I just tried to say, that windows users have to know about virus scanners, defragmenters and a whole bunch of other system utilities. Do you really need any on mac? Simple OS is that one, where you don't care about OS by yourself at all, instead having your work done, making fun with your photos/videos/games etc. Try that on windows somehow connected to the external world and soon you'll have to learn about tech stuff, or have someone who does. Sorry for off-topic, and please don't start a flame war on it. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leddy Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Don't you feel a bit of sarcasm in my post? :) I just tried to say, that windows users have to know about virus scanners, defragmenters and a whole bunch of other system utilities. Do you really need any on mac? Simple OS is that one, where you don't care about OS by yourself at all, instead having your work done, making fun with your photos/videos/games etc. Try that on windows somehow connected to the external world and soon you'll have to learn about tech stuff, or have someone who does. Sorry for off-topic, and please don't start a flame war on it. :laugh: It's dangerous to use something without really knowing how to operate it. It's better to learn something while you do something- ask the Linux guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 OS 9 crashed a lot. I had to fix lots of Mac computers in my day and anything below OS X just plain hated people. That and Apple was more expensive. That's why it is not #1. True. I have had one of the first iMac's with OS 8 and it was a nightmare, showing many times the "crash" (a dialog box with a little bomb icon) message. Even after updating to OS 8.6 (and later to OS 9), it remain the same. Probably, it was the equivalent to Win98 and WinMe BSOD's, lol... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
semaja2.net Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 well all i can read in this topic is misinformed people that dont know all the facts, number one its not the poularity of the os that decides about viruses its the way it was built macosx is unix really unix is very very secure from the core up, theres viruses for unix for sure but they only effect that user to actually do harm they would need to give the root password second the reason windows seems easy is that its been beaten into peoples heads for years, macosx is very very simple indeed i reckon my baby niece could run it, but it also has its advanced side which is unix and no noob even needs to go there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcw Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 It's a pretty good thing to watch the movie "Pirates of silicon valley" to get another perspective on this as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leddy Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 well all i can read in this topic is misinformed people that dont know all the facts, number one its not the poularity of the os that decides about viruses its the way it was built macosx is unix really unix is very very secure from the core up, theres viruses for unix for sure but they only effect that user to actually do harm they would need to give the root password second the reason windows seems easy is that its been beaten into peoples heads for years, macosx is very very simple indeed i reckon my baby niece could run it, but it also has its advanced side which is unix and no noob even needs to go there You might be correct on small-scale operations, but on software as large and complex as Mac OS X/Windows and developed by such large corporations, a lot of effort and time has been put into the security side of things. Windows can be secure if the user makes it so. Mac OS X seems secure at the moment, but no one's actually targeting it as a platform for virus distribution. Windows, on the other hand, gets hit with a few hundred different ones each day, with varying impact. I know for one thing, that in all my years of Windows usage- over ten- I've never gotten a SINGLE virus, a SINGLE piece of adware, or a SINGLE trojan, etc etc etc. The only times when my computer dies is when something stupid happens, like... a power failure during a PartitionMagic session. Or a hard disk burning out. There's no comparison here. Windows is undoubtly more popular by far, and used by many more users- making it a larger, slower moving target. The security of a platform IS, to a certain extent, and in this case, to a large extent, based on the popularity of a platform, and the education regarding that platform that the users have received. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vice Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Macs don't need a virus scanner because viral coders don't give a damn about Macs. Not enough damage would be generated to warrant making one. You couldn't be more wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apex. Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Theres a great movie you should see, its called "Pirates of Silicon Valley" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts