Note to Apple: Be more like Microsoft Despite challenges from Google Android, the Apple train continues to roar forward at an incredible pace. The Cupertino company smashed analyst estimates in its most recent quarter, with revenue up 82 per cent to $28.57bn and profits up 125 per cent. Apple is minting money. It's just too bad that Apple isn't sharing that money …
but this is because MS Software is crap, not because MS shares it's income with me.
I just installed Win7 pro on some 50 PCs which came with Win7 home which is not compatible to an enterprise Windows network. The other day I downgraded a new Server to Win 2008 Server because Exchange isn't that good on Windows 2008 R2.
On the other hand, I still maintain a SCO OpenServer 5 with Informix 7 running a warehouse system since 1996, for very small values of maintenance, usually once in two years I have to clean out the syslog.
"I just installed Win7 pro on some 50 PCs which came with Win7 home which is not compatible to an enterprise Windows network."
Note the HOME in it's name. Kinda gives the game away.
So that's not the fault of Windows or Microsoft, that is a purchasing problem. Windows 7 Home was behaving exactly as documented.... what happened is someone didn't spec out their purchases correctly...
Bring on the down thumbs!
How is this not a Windows problem?
If you bought a bunch of Macs for your business would you have to reinstall a different type of OS X? No, because it only comes in one version that everyone can use: consumers, students, small businesses, enterprises, developing countries, and geeks (and how ever many other artificial segments MS has invented).
So, totally an MS problem.
Probably because Apple isn't big in the corporate market. Windows comes in various versions at various prices - hardly anyone needs to connect to a Windows domain, so why not knock out a cheaper version that doesn't incorporate this functionality. By your reckoning, it's not fair that a Ford Mondeo doesn't work well as a panel van.
i.e. good enough for typing, spreadsheets and a chart or two every quarter. Not the usual gamer rig one finds in most basements.
For whatever reason they come preinstalled with the cheapest Windows license and then you have to upgrade them. Or buy the i5/i7 4-8GB, NVidia/ATI rendering engine ..., with Win7 Ultimate for three times the money. In this case it were Compaq SG3 boxes.
The processing power is in the server room, HP Proliant DL370.
... your employer hasn't caught on to the fact you haven't a clue how to administrate a Windows network environment. I also get the idea you purchased 50 under-spec E-Machines, a new 'custom' server from Tiger-Direct, then bragged about the money you 'saved' the company.
Your best hope is that your employer doesn't get a CTO or outside contractor that knows their stuff.
Or it could be like my last job.
Boss: spec some laptops for sales.
Done.
Boss: there was an HP in todays newspaper flyer that had bigger numbers then the one you came up with and cost $50 less! I ordered a bunch of them and handed them out already just pop around and set everyone up when you have a second.
Yes, crap home units with one year depot warranty (I just love doing the Dead Parrot Skit with HP support), and loads of shit-ware.
Can Apple (and its stock price) survive when Steve Jobs leaves?
Not a knock against his health, but simply put he has to give up the position at some point and we all saw what happened the first time he left.
Alexander forged the greatest Empire of all time and on his death, his Generals fought each other trying to replace him. The Empire fell.
Alexander did pretty well for his time, but I'll point out that the British Empire was rather larger in its heyday. Hell, the Persians before him and the Romans afterwards were both larger too, and a fair bit longer lasting.
He did a pretty good job creating an empire out of almost nothing, mind you... not something many other people manage in their lifetime. One of the Napoleons had a pretty good go though...
This article title is funny at first read, be more like Microsoft, really? Should Apple be more like a convicted monopolist? Of course the article is a bit off and ignores a lot.
You can't find a group like Windows has, for one big reason:
Apple Mac marketshare: 7.40% (source Wikipedia, based on web client estimates, which no doubt are high Windows will have lots more because many windows boxes - servers, etc - won't ever run a web browser on the open web)
Windows marketshare: 80.73%
There is a lot more to go around. Apple doesn't even have a relevant server sector anymore, so of course there will be more Windows jobs.
In mobile space, there's the app developers (whom Apple just transferred over $2 billion in just 2 1/2 years), there's the accessories makers - not just cases, but stuff like batteries, storage, docks and Airplay (Denon,B&W, etc) - and there's the mobile networks who who suddenly saw their profits surge on the back of the smartphones. Plenty of partners getting enriched there.
If I want to set up a specialist application store for iPhone users, how do I do that? I can't. Apple control the market for iOS application delivery, and won't allow another party to compete.
If I want to allow my customers to my existing catalogue of binary applications on their OS, how do I do that? I can't, because Apple prohibit virtual runtimes on their platform, because it would allow another party to compete with them via the back door.
If I want to allow my customers to buy content from me without Apple adding a 40% margin on top, how do I do that? I can't. Apple control the market for in-app content, and won't allow another party to compete.
If I want to provide Apple laptop customers with a power supply for their laptops that won''t risk burning their house down, how do I do that? I can't. Apple (justifiably) patent the MagSafe adaptor but (unjustifiably) will not license it to third parties.
All of these are are monopolies: One party excluding its competitors from a market. The number of people who run Windows on desktops is pretty irrelevant to this. And why is it that Microsoft will let me run Windows on a Mac, but Apple won't let me run MacOS X on a Non-Apple PC?
For mobile products you'll need to compare iOS and Microsoft's offer in Windows Mobile 7 (WM7).
You also can't run an alternative application store on WM7 and also can't have other virtual runtimes there either.
So saying that Apple should be like Microsoft for those purposes is useless.
PS: Apple's margin on content is 30%
Yes, Apple's margin is 30%. But I did say markup, not margin. Summary: we're both correct.
Margin = how much of the selling price is gross profit. (Price = 100, margin=30, cost=70, 30 is 30% of 100)
Markup = how much of the cost price is added to it to arrive at the selling price. (cost=70, markup=30, price=100, 30 is 42% of 70).
As a producer, it's more convenient to deal with this figure expressed as a markup on your price than a margin on your reseller's price, but the quantity is the same.
Btw, Windows Phone 7 will have a second application store when Nokia launch their devices - there's a shared backend, but Nokia's front end will offer greater operator billing opportunities.
WP7 is a counter-example: that's Microsoft trying to be more like Apple - a walled-garden platform with a restricted distribution for apps, and restricted sync options. That's not the business model MS's partners are used to. Maybe this is the reason for its lukewarm reception (apart from the lack of decent hardware, or people's distrust of Microsoft)
Their product = their choice.
You don't like it, go elsewhere/develop your ownhatEhat they have is control over what goes on in their platform environment, meaning that their platform offers a controlled level of quality control that more open platforms struggle to match. To do this, their compromise (and consequently the buyers too) is sacrificing choice and flexibility - but that's their choice.
Quote:
If I want to provide Apple laptop customers with a power supply for their laptops that won''t risk burning their house down, how do I do that? I can't. Apple (justifiably) patent the MagSafe adaptor but (unjustifiably) will not license it to third parties.
Solution:
3rd party MagSage adaptor.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Replacement-MagSafe-magnetic-Macbook-Compatible/dp/B0036BGK2M/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1311715206&sr=8-3
Works great (there's one plugged into my MacBook right now).
Just one of a few...
"Apple has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Media Solutions Holdings, a company that has allegedly been producing and distributing knockoff MagSafe power adapters. The Apple patent, No. D478,310, was initially issued in 2003. The defendant sells the AC adapters, ..."
http://www.macnn.com/articles/09/11/25/knockoffs.selling.for.almost.half.of.apples.price
There are several specialist sectors that use Apple App Stores specific to that sector. It's just that they make it attractive for Apple to make such specialist App Stores available to those sectors, and they still get their 30% cut.
Just because you're not important enough doesn't mean that others aren't. :-)
Because Apple sells hardware, Microsoft sells software. Duh. Microsoft doesn't care what the heck you run Windows on as long as you buy a copy of Windows; Apple obviously cares if you don't buy Apple kit, because they make money from selling hardware. Certainly they don't make any money from selling operating systems for $30.
If Apple has got so much money stored up, wouldn't it make sense now to flood the market with subsidised macs - MacMinis for $200, MacBooks for $500, Mac Pros for $1000.
They would, in effect, be buying marketshare.
This surely would not be sustainable in the medium term, but as long as people were made aware of that, the impact would be so hard when it came to getting a new computer in 5-7 years' time. It might cost $30 billion but I believe that it would be a good medium term strategy for Apple to have a mac as the default computer inside the home, on the go and possibly even inside the office.
Apple is a hardware company, Microsoft is a software company. Microsoft does't make anything that is of any use without it's partners products. Without Dell & HP Windows 7 is just a shiny piece of polymer. Without HTC Windows Phone is, well, nothing. XBox could be considered a standalone product but it doesn't really do much until you take advantage of Microsoft's partners.
If you eliminate all of the Apple partners that consumers know by name tomorrow Apple would carry on just fine. If you do the same on the MS side Windows would cease to exists. Fortunately for MS Office it runs on Macs.
Chips from Intel, SSD's from Samsung (I think, correct me if I'm wrong), RAM/hard disks/other standard components from whomever will offer the best price. Manufactured by whomever best meets their manufacturing needs. Then slap an Apple sticker on it and ship it to any given Apple store/partner where a smug tw*t with a goatee will do everything bar have sex with you to get a sale.
Apple are a marketing and distribution company.
Is that the companies quoted that fab parts for Apple are price takers not price makers (like Apple). Price takers seldom see the increases that price makers get - compare this situation with that of China (the maker) and Australia (the taker). Both are getting richer, but one at a considerably greater rate than the other. An example of when this probably didn't apply is when Hynix et al had the memory/flash market sewn up. Up until they were convicted of course.
"Chips from Intel, SSD's from Samsung (I think, correct me if I'm wrong), RAM/hard disks/other standard components from whomever will offer the best price. Manufactured by whomever best meets their manufacturing needs."
As is the case with Dell, Acer, Alienware etc. Name me one PC company that manufactures every component in their machines?
You may as well moan that Vauxhall isn't a car company because a glass company makes their windscreens and a tyre company makes their tyres. Sheesh!
I'm not moaning. I'm just making a counterpoint, and fairly reasonably I thought, that apple doesn't make it's own hardware, or very little of it. So it's hard to call it a hardware company. Yes, I agree Dell HP etc are the same.
Apple is a technology company in the same way vauxhall is a vehicle company (cars and commercials etc) but where they both add value to a greater or lesser extent is in the sales marketing and distribution of their goods. They both go for the most cost effective solutions of making their 'goods', which means 90% of the time buying and manufacturing (ok vauxhall at least assembles it's own vehicles, but the economics are different), via 3rd parties.
So, to sum up here: Not moaning, trying to make a reasoned point.
If you were "trying to make a reasoned point", why say "Then slap an Apple sticker on it and ship it to any given Apple store/partner where a smug tw*t with a goatee will do everything bar have sex with you to get a sale."? Because you weren't in fact being reasoned. The only smug twats here are the smug twats that regurgitate the same old tired bullshit day in, day out.
"If you eliminate all of the Apple partners that consumers know by name tomorrow Apple would carry on just fine" - Apple has virtually none
"If you do the same on the MS side Windows would cease to exists" - Doubtful, as a Jobsian fanboi you're probably oblivious to the fact you can build a system from invdividual components, tailored exactly to you, setting you apart from the sheeple"
If all partners of both companies did manage to unanimously dissapear overnight, Apple probably would be the victor, but that's because Apple are already being Microsoft by shafting it's own content developers.
Apple just own a platform, were the massive community of App Store devs to up and leave, they'd have nothing.
Okay, so you've established that Apple makes a lot of money, and you've established that companies besides Microsoft make money off of Windows, while dismissing out of hand all money made off Apple products that doesn't go to Cupertino...
Got any reason why Apple should be more like Microsoft? You didn't make a case as to why Apple should for Apple's sake, or why they should for their customers' sake. You just put out some vague assertion that it's nice to share. Everything you needed to know, you learned in kindergarten, eh?
The post itself I don't really agree with.
Apple would not be the same company at all if it just sold hardware - the software is a key component, the branding is another as is the design (in a style sense).
Hardware innovation is not where Apple's genius is - user interfaces, product styling and brand building are what makes it superior to other PC / phone builders.
So all those admins you need to baby-sit exchange.
Needing two people to do an office job because they spend half their time rebooting windows.
All those people writing add-in utils to get around Windows deficiencies
Those are all part of a benevolent MSFT plan for full employment?
Lemme guess you're running all manner of intricate *nix based solutions that you proclaim take less to maintain than Exchange but that no-one other than you stands a hope in hell of restoring back to order if it all burns down?
Question: How much time in the last week did you spend on day-to-day maintenance of your email server?
I haven't even RDP'd onto my Exchange box this week and it's running just as well as when we built it 4 years ago.
Just stop it
"*nix based solutions that you proclaim take less to maintain than Exchange but that no-one other than you stands a hope in hell of restoring back to order if it all burns down?"
Somehow I think copying a backup of /etc/postfix after a reinstall (which is no more complex than apt-get install postfix) is a hell of a lot simpler than rebuilding Exchange. Any *nix beginner could manage that.
If you honestly think *nix mail daemons take a lot of maintenance then I seriously question your knowledge of them !
"Going further, IDC pegged Windows 7–related employment at 19 percent of total IT employment by the end of 2010, adding 300,000 new jobs to the workforce."
That would be because it's WIndows and needs to be reinstalled, anti-virused etc. on a regular basis.
Supporting Windows is the IT equivalent of burger flipping, it's something you do while waiting for a real job. And if that has resulted in 300000 extra jobs the implication is that Windows 7 takes more effort to support than its predecessors (although given the Vista train-wreck that is hard to believe).
What other kind of jobs (other than training) would a new OS release generate?
it's funny when the author writes that it is a pity that apple isn't sharing the money with anyone ?
Are we talking about charity or is this just another excuse to bash a successful company ?
Quite frankly, readers like me in here do demand some respect. We know where you stand when it comes to apple but please, stay objective and classy guys.
Jobs picture with a red mark is really unnecessary especially when you're only targeting his picture and no one else.
How many *billions* has Apple paid out to iOS App Store developers, Mac App Store developers? At WWDC, Jobs said they'd paid out $2.5 billion to iOS developers.
How much to the producers of the music, TV shows, and movies sold in iTunes?
How much money is being made by non-App Store developers, like VMWare or Adobe on Mac sales?
One reason why IT departments love Microsoft is that it keeps them employed. One reason that IT managers love Microsoft is that it it boosts their power base.
Microsoft is notoriously problematic, hard to work with and high maintenance. But it keeps a lot of trainers and IT departments going, and generates wealth. So, for that matter does crime and disease.
Microsoft PCs are a lot less trouble to deal with than Apple, in part this is because Apple products will represent a minority of the estate in most cases so benefit less from economies of scale but that's not all there is to it..
Things have improved greatly from the point where a couple of chatty AppleTalk devices could cause real problems for a network but still the Windows environment for user management, rights assignment and all the rest really is good.
It's not Apple's market; I'm not suggesting any flaw in their product, just pointing out that while I doubt many IT departments 'love' Microsoft, there are genuine business reasons why their products get used.
Apple are where they are because they focus obsessively on the user experience, above all else. To do that they have to own and control much more of the 'ecosystem' than any other company even tries to do. It makes their products rigid and very expensive but a lot of people really, really like it. I'm not one of them but I understand those who are.
When you allow other companies to own and control parts of the user experience, something has to give. Either they have lower standards than you, looking for a quick buck rather than a long term vision, or things just fall through the cracks between companies. It's very hard to co-ordinate seamless user experiences across the boundaries between different organisations.
Interesting viewpoint about Apple being a whole industry in itself. It can't be true though. In manufacturing kit, Apple must be using machines made by machine companies, made up of tools and parts from other companies, and so on. The components in the phone are likewise produced by third and fourth parties. Then there are the raw materials too. Apple are not making stuff directly from sand.
Perhaps the article is true but only on the software side ? iTunes us great, but relies heavily on internet switchgear, and thus puts demand in to that industry. Any way you look at it, Apple is affecting/enriching other companies, just not through obvious, explicit agreements like that between Microsoft and Intel.
> One (astronomically successful) company is not an ecosystem
Apple isn't an "ecosystem" it is a very stressful company, and why would they emulate Microsoft. And Microsoft isn't an ecosystem it's a virtual monopoly that has distorted the market through unethical practices directed towards the OEMs and its own partners. Where MS doesn't have such influence it's just another mediocre player. It's a shame to see Matt Asay jump on the knock Apple bandwagon ..
> Microsoft has long enriched its partners while enriching itself, with as much as 97 per cent of its own revenue coming through its partner channel ..
There's a graveyard somewhere littered with former Microsoft partners ..
> A Microsoft-sponsored IDC report suggests that for every $1 Microsoft makes from Windows 7, other companies earn $18.52.
Oh, for f**k sake ... !!!!
Apple has been the underdog for so many years, up to around the turn of the millennia.
I think this engendered a very specific culture within the company and squirrelling away cash being one of them.
It's the 'rainy day' concept.
But I think this has more to do with SJ than anyone else. Given SJ will have to move on (or up..) one day, I think come that time the culture will start to change.
The cash pile will be utilised one way or another.
Even though this is completely hilarious to watch you children post back and forth about how Apple or Microsoft is better than the other. The fact remains that you need to GET A LIFE!
Apple makes good products, to a degree, but will never crack the elusive enterprise market because they have no products nor have they shown any keen interest in entering said market. Without being in this market Apple will NEVER EVER have greater market share than it's competitors. It stands to reason (if you bother to think about it) that what you do at work will reflect predominately what you do at home.
Microsoft is not the best either but at least they dominate the market because they have provided something which the customer wants and they have delivered. It may not be the best product but at least it's a product which currently stands as being the best fit for the market - especially the enterprise market.
So when it comes down to Apple being the best, they're not. Get over it, end of story.
Seriously... shut up! I can hear you from here and you sound pathetic.
Same goes with Microsoft.
Yours truly,
A person who has been round long enough to know what's what.
I'm sure the Apple executives are taking this article to heart while lounging around in their olympic-sized swimming pool full of $1K notes, hookers and blow.
Apple will change its business practices when it suits Apple. Face it, Apple's current business practices suit them just fine.
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
Are you suggesting Apple should get out of the hugely profitable hardware business and instead licence their OS to 3rd parties so that others may enjoy those margins or that we should suspend belief for the purposes of your article?
Just a tip, but if you should ever meet Steve Jobs in the flesh, remember not to cross your reality distortion fields.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
