How iMac Washed My Windows
News Commentary. I celebrate iMac's 10th anniversary by remembering how the Apple computer stole my heart. |
The bondi blue iMac went on sale 10 years ago today. Apple CEO Steve Jobs had announced the product in May 1998 at the Macworld trade show. Nobody had quite seen a computer like it, a translucent case enclosing CRT display and CPU. Apple promoted the original iMac as a way of getting on the Internet—in just 10 minutes from unboxing.
Over the years, people have debated what the "i" stands for, with the Internet being labeled as it. "'I' also means some other things to us," Steve said a decade ago during his Macworld keynote. "We are a personal computer company." He showed a slide broadening what the "i" stood for, in a personal context:
- Internet
- Individual
- Instruct
- Inform
- Inspire
"I" also stands for me, which is the real marketing magnetism of that lowercase letter coming before so many Apple products. You may read iMac, iPod or iPhone. But you say IMac, IPod or IPhone. The connotations are loaded toward capital I and all the personal stuff associated with it. It's IMac, as in mine, or my Mac. People see the lowercase letter but hear the capital letter. It's simply brilliant marketing: The "I" people hear puts the "personal" in the personal computer company Steve talked about.
Making Fun of Mac Users
The iMac launch meant little to me, because I was a DOS/Windows bigot during most of the 1990s. I frequently persecuted my wife and her graphic designer coworkers about their Macs. They seemed to be always having trouble, like crashes that wiped out hours of page layout work in QuarkXPress or photo editing done in Photoshop. I had Windows 95, the operating system of the future, while they languished with kludgy Macintosh System 7.
Besides, Apple had been in its death throws for years. The Mac was rotten to the core. Everyone knew that. But Steve's unexpected return to Apple revitalized the tree and brought from it new fruit. Software would differentiate the Mac, even though people raved about the hardware design. Avie Tevanian, who like me is a Mainer, led a team that would transform Mac OS and bring to market new Apple software products. Avie's big Apple claim to fame is Mac OS X, which shipped in March 2001.
About six weeks ago, the New York Times asked Avie if Microsoft could make the kind of drastic operating system migration Apple did from Mac OS 9 to X. "Perhaps, but I don't know if it has the intestinal fortitude," he responded. "At Apple, we had to. It was a matter of survival." Oh? Back home in Maine they taught me that women had intestinal fortitude and men had guts.
Avie's team would work wonders even before Mac OS X. That's where my Mac story begins. On a brisk December day in 1998, I bought an iMac from the CompUSA in Rockville, Md., where today there is a Micro Center. I got a free 13-inch Samsung TV as holiday promotion. For months, I had read about the iMac or seen its TV commercials. I wondered about the fuss and put down $1,299 plus 5 percent tax to find out what it was all about.
A Promise Fulfilled
For me, Apple fulfilled its promise of 10 minutes from opening the box to surfing the Internet—and that was with complications. Most people buying an iMac connected to the Internet using a phone line and the computer's built-in 56K-bps modem. I had a network connected to a 128K-bps ISDN line (yes, there was broadband before DSL and cable). My connection to the modem was by Ethernet, which meant figuring out the network settings for TCP/IP. Surprisingly, I easily found the network settings and was on the Internet in just a couple minutes. By comparison, the process had taken much longer for Windows 98 or NT. For clarification: I had never before used a Mac. Everything was new to me.
I bought the iMac because its unique design wooed me. But it was Apple's operating system that won me over. There were some mighty improvements in Mac OS 8.5 compared with System 7, or so said my wife. I believed her.
Something else mattered, too: At the time, Microsoft offered wobbly Windows 98 for consumers and the hardy Windows NT to businesses. Windows 98 supported all the newest hardware and software, but quaked under the weight of too many applications running at one time. Windows NT, by contrast, offered industrial-strength stability. By the way, I loved Windows NT, but it didn't love me. Too many devices or software applications wouldn't work with the operating system.
By contrast, Mac OS 8.5 offered a nice middle ground. Stability fell in between the two major versions of Windows, and Mac OS 8.5 supported devices and applications galore. I soon found working on the Mac boosted productivity, and I enjoyed using the computer more than a Windows PC.
The productivity gains largely came from simplicity. How I would describe Apple's design approach: Think of the simplest way to do something and design that way. In my experience and watching others, struggles using Mac OS often come when trying a complicated approach to something (usually based on what was learned before using another operating system).
While media and marketing attention focused on the iMac's curvy exterior, I found the real gem—the operating system—to be within.
My Mac 'Wow' Moment
By February 1999, I was ready for an upgrade. I ordered a refurbished PowerBook G3, with a 266MHz PowerPC processor and DVD drive, from PC Connection. In a February 2004 post on my personal blog I wrote: "The PowerBook served up a wow experience I had never believed possible from any portable." I call this out because Microsoft's first Windows Vista marketing campaign was all about "wow," and people having that kind of experience with the operating system. "Wow" is exactly the kind of reaction a good product should elicit.
I watched my first DVD movie, "Armageddon," on that PowerBook. Apple was the only major computer company shipping DVD drives across its product lines in 1998 and early 1999. Most people didn't even have DVD players in their living rooms, let alone on a laptop.
My daughter inherited the iMac, the ergonomics of which were perfect for her—and more than 90 percent of her educational games worked on Mac OS 8.5 and later 9.x. My wife would later get the original iMac, when my daughter received a Flower Power iMac as a present. Years later, my daughter still asks about the computer, the motif of which she loved. Not everyone shares my daughter's sentiments. Last year, Flower Power iMac made PC World's list of the "Ugliest Tech Products in History."
Vista's Not Bad, Just Not Great
I've owned many Macs over the years, including the ill-fated G4 Cube, iMac G5 and MacBook Pro. I loved the Cube, even though I wrote scathingly about it. My September 2000 news story asked if the Cube's hair-thin lines were cracks or mold lines. Either way, they marred my Cube and many others. Later the same day, Apple issued a profit warning mainly resulting from an oversupply of Cubes. Apple had more weeks of supply than warranted by demand.
I kept buying Macs not because of their cool design but for the software. Mac OS X satisfied more than Windows XP. Apple's iLife suite made using the computer really fun. That's not to say I abandoned Windows PCs. I blog about Apple and Microsoft, and I've got more experience and expertise covering the company founded by Bill Gates. As long as I write about Microsoft, I will use Windows. Daily.
Windows Vista has a bad rap, but I don't dislike it. Vista is a very good operating system. It's just not hugely better than Windows XP, which is what Microsoft badly needed Vista to be. I use Vista and would easily recommend it. But Mac OS holds my heart; I have more of an emotional relationship with the operating system. It's personal—the "P" in PC.
The relationship started on a wintry day 10 years ago because of iMac.
[Please send your tips or rumors to watchtips at live.com]
Comments (41)
Your conclusion that Vista is not great or better comes from a lack in understanding and not using the OS enough to really see the obvious benefits out of the box. My brother upgraded to Windows XP in summer of 2002, loved it, you could say he is an earlier adopter and continued using the OS on various machines, including a Dell Inspiron he purchased in June of 2006 (XP Home).
My brother jumped on the early Windows Vista adopter bandwagon in January of 2007. He loved it! Yes, the things that 'wowed' him was Vista's visual appeal, it looks darn great. And you would be surprised Joe, a lot of people loved the richness, the transparency and realness of the OS. AERO is a bold, serious yet inviting look and many people I ask, new to Vista, previous XP or 2000 users, novices, lab techs, love Vista.
A lot of negativity about Vista has been intensified by a number of things. Things that we have been acquainted with from previous versions of Windows or any other platform...device drivers and application compatibility. It just was not there for many in early 2007, but it did improve and has reached the same level as previous versions of Windows. You would be hard pressed to find most modern hardware released in the last 2 to 3 years incompatible with the OS, not to mention applications that are probably in their second to third generation of full compatibility with Vista.
XP's reception faced many compatibility and hardware issues, I remember some clearly, like Roxio and printer and scanner hardware not being supported. But they eventually were, Roxio did update version 5 to support XP and the problems died. But because XP was released in a time where the Internet, blogging and the spotlight was not on Microsoft and Windows in a scrutinizing way like it is today. In addition to Microsoft's transparency and openness during the Longhorn project, it set a tone and perception in addition to things that happened during the project like reset and drop of features. Those are the irrelevant things that are still etched in the minds of many who covered the OS during its development.
Vista in its current form is well accepted, but some lingerings still remained and being revived and utilized by people who have never used Vista, don't use Windows and is being articulated in a way to make Windows out into a platform that is not desirable, these include the voice of Open Source, small resurgence of Apple, Justin Long vs PC and many other insignificant events in the past few years.
But it still does not hide the fact that people are accepting of Vista's improvements, whether its developer wise, business or consumer wise. Search, collaboration, ease of setup, security, Backup, organization, true hardware and application support, clean interface and just the plain likability of the OS, people see it and are proving it everyday with the millions of licenses that come pre-installed on new PC's or deployed.
Posted by Andre Da Costa | August 15, 2008 11:55 PM
@Andre:
You wrote an article there....sorry but brevity is the soul of wit. You lost me after the second paragraph of vapid justification for Vista.
@Joe:
I recently purchased my very first Mac (a Powerbook) after buying an iPhone in May. I can relate to your "Wow" moment.
Since 1995 when I purchased my first PC (an Acer Acros 486DX4) I've been a staunch Windows guy. I still develop software professionally and love Vista for it's stability and power at work. But at home, I've completely switched over to Mac for my "consumer computing". Apple's going it right.
Vista is just simply trying to be too much to too many people. If they can make Windows 7 Modular like I've been reading, that will be a step in the right direction -- people can install the basic modules out of the box and then add modules if they need them = start simple, keep it simple.
Great post today, Joe. I enjoyed reading it.
Posted by JasonBailey | August 16, 2008 9:34 AM
OK. I don't usually post here and I know I'm going to get flamed for this. It is clear you have a bias towards Apple. Nothing wrong with that. I have a bias towards Microsoft. I don't think I am the right person to comment on Apple's products or at least blog about them because of my bias and from reading some of your articles at Microsoft Watch, I think the same applies to you. You are too biased to present an unbiased report of Microsoft.
You're probably doing it for the money or, like Walt Mossberg, to get more people to switch. Either way, you come across as hypocritical when you make statements such as, "I've drunk the Microsoft kool-aid."
So, that ends my rant. Peace out!
Posted by reflections | August 16, 2008 12:48 PM
reflections wrote: "You are too biased to present an unbiased report of Microsoft."
The Mac folks have made the same accusations for years. My recent post on Mac ASPs being much higher than Windows PCs ASPs generated accusations of PC bias from many Mac fanatics.
I use both Macs and Windows PCs. My Vista criticisms are just that. I've got no bias against Microsoft. The company is successful for a reason. But Microsoft also faces its toughest competitive challenges ever, but the execution isn't wholly there. Vista and search are prime examples.
Reread my post. I was a Cube owner when I wrote a story that set off a huge controversy about hair-thin lines. The story was viewed as negative by Apple and Mac fanatics. What bias is there in that?
My most recent iPhone 3G post is quite hard on Apple for connectivity problems that people complain about. I've got no Mac or Windows bias. I've defended Vista when others wouldn't. It's a good operating system and better after Service Pack 1's release.
Joe
Posted by Joe | August 16, 2008 6:08 PM
Andre Da Costa wrote:
Vista in its current form is well accepted, but some lingerings still remained and being revived and utilized by people who have never used Vista, don't use Windows and is being articulated in a way to make Windows out into a platform that is not desirable, these include the voice of Open Source, small resurgence of Apple, Justin Long vs PC and many other insignificant events in the past few years.
Wow, this is so incredibly disingenuous, I don't know where to begin. Some lingerings revived by people who have never used Vista, and don't use Windows???
I am not alone when I say, I've used Windows for years and I am currently writing this comment on my Vista machine. Vista really isn't much better than XP. Sure, it looks prettier -- that's not hard, given how ugly XP was!
But Vista *still* has compatibility issues, in my experience. Wireless networking is also unreliable.
Not only am I not alone as a consumer, but as Joe has previously reported, most enterprises are choosing to skip Vista altogether. IT managers are not ignorant -- they know what they're doing, and they're avoiding Vista.
Your shameless evangelizing of Vista is getting to be downright embarrassing. You need to take a reality pill.
Posted by Richard | August 16, 2008 11:17 PM
@ JasonBaily:
Its interesting you say that Microsoft is trying too hard with Windows to be everything to everyone. What caused you to come to this conclusion I might ask? With Vista, its choice, with OS X, its all or nothing. Last time I checked, consumers don't like to be restricted or force fed or tied to a platform. In fact, OS X has tried to be like Windows since OS X was released, this includes supporting Windows technologies like Active Directory authentication through Kerberos. How different are both OS's when both build on the same principles of delivering consumers needs. I am sure every Mac bought comes with iLife, which to some would make it seem like its actually integrated into the OS and in many ways it is. Vista follows a similar trend, not because Apple did it first but because it was driven by customer request. Making Windows modular is not the answer and peoples misconception of modular is another problem. Modular in the words of a Windows Developer means less dependencies between low level components in the OS, so a portion of the OS for example might not need updating, reduce attack surface or no need for rebooting if a component change in the system. Vista offers this through the new Device Driver Signing, no kernel model drivers, new network stack, graphics and communication subsystem.
If you mean modular in the sense of a Windows that does not give you everything then choose the edition of Vista that suits you, Home Basic, Premium, Business or Ultimate. Microsoft gives you choice and makes it cheap, you can get a license for Home Basic at just $89. Please explain to me really, how is Windows too much to you.
@ Richard:
Which OS in this world does not have compatibility problems? You are acting like there is some secret OS out there that solves everybody's needs. Surely it can't be Linux since its still in its infancy where ease of use, familiarity and compatibility is still a major concern. If you are having a compatibility issue with Windows Vista, its one of two things and its not the OS, its most likely an application compatibility issue which means the software that manages your wireless connection/signal is not written properly or its device driver related, which means you can simply check for an update using Windows Update or go to manufacturers website and check for the latest drivers and find out if there are compatibility issues with your wireless device. You can also check Problem Reports and Solutions for recommendations on what to do.
Whats wrong with supporting something I use everyday that works? Vista seems to do the job for me and the millions of users who enjoy the OS everyday. Evangelizing means sharing the goodness and that it is what I will continue to do, inform and educate people including you about the benefits of Vista. Oh, and you can stop using Joe's tired excuse about Vista in the Enterprise. We know how it works there already, adoption is different from consumer/retail segments. Vista is assured to pickup overtime in all segments, see its already on its way to reaching over 200 million using it since its release and that's a prediction I notice Joe has a tendency to ignore or block with the licensing of the OS.
Posted by Andre Da Costa | August 17, 2008 12:26 AM
@Andre
Vista looks "great" because Microsoft copied the Quartz look from OS X, among the other details they have copied from Apple.
By the way Andre, you are probably the worst Microsoft shill there is. Even Ed Bott and Mary Jo Foley from ZDnet look hobbyists compared to you. Are you all members of Microsoft Shill Network?
Posted by SV | August 17, 2008 4:34 AM
@SV
"By the way Andre, you are probably the worst Microsoft shill there is. Even Ed Bott and Mary Jo Foley from ZDnet look hobbyists compared to you. Are you all members of Microsoft Shill Network?"
Grow up.
Posted by MJ | August 17, 2008 9:42 AM
MJ says: "Grow up."
Amen to that. But having said that, I think Andre is wrong. I've spent years using both Macs and Windows, and bought a new machine which came with Vista. Nothing can describe my disappointment with the operating system. Yes, it looks better. Yes, it's more secure. In that sense, it's a definite step forward.
But the fact that my brand new machine wasn't capable of running some of my favourite games because Microsoft's default graphics card drivers don't support OpenGL was ridiculous. Yes, of course I could go to the web site of the graphics card maker and download beta drivers - but on a new machine, should I have to do this?
Maybe in two year's time, Vista will have grown up enough to make it a real option for me. In the meantime, I'll stick with OS X and XP - two operating systems which just do what I want.
Posted by Ian Betteridge | August 18, 2008 7:57 AM
@Ian
"But the fact that my brand new machine wasn't capable of running some of my favourite games because Microsoft's default graphics card drivers don't support OpenGL was ridiculous. Yes, of course I could go to the web site of the graphics card maker and download beta drivers - but on a new machine, should I have to do this?"
Microsoft has developed DirectX as a competitor to OpenGL. Most graphics cards ship with DirectX drivers.
If your particular graphics card does not have an appropriate Vista driver then you need to address it with the card manufacturer and not Microsoft. The expectation Vista should support every device immediately and if it doesn't it's a problem with Vista puzzles me.
Posted by MJ | August 18, 2008 9:17 AM
I will repeat a personal theme of mine that I have espoused for two decades.
Microsoft and PC manufacturers have always benefited greatly from the existence of Apple Macintosh computers. Generation after generation, the new technologies in Macs have pushed Microsoft operating systems and PC hardware to innovate and catch up, and improve themselves.
Even though Apple Macs have never offered much financial or economic competition to Windows and PCs, they have exerted tremendous influence toward innovation in design and functionality.
And on rare occasion Apple has benefited from competition from Windows, Intel and PC manufacturers--such as when they had to ditch Mac OS 9, hire Steve Jobs and NeXT, and create Mac OS X.
Competition is good for everybody. Dell computers, for instance, wouldn't be nearly as good as they are today without Apple's modest success prodding them to play catch up.
Posted by Wheat Williams | August 18, 2008 9:41 AM
@Wheat Williams
"Microsoft and PC manufacturers have always benefited greatly from the existence of Apple Macintosh computers. Generation after generation, the new technologies in Macs have pushed Microsoft operating systems and PC hardware to innovate and catch up, and improve themselves."
Can you give some solid examples?
Posted by MJ | August 18, 2008 11:27 AM
MJ said: "Grow up."
Okay. I grew up after using Windows for 20 years and ordered Mac Pro and MacBook preloaded with innovative and super-productive Apple software.
Posted by SV | August 18, 2008 11:47 AM
@MJ:
"Can you give some solid examples?"
Check here for starters.
Posted by SV | August 18, 2008 11:54 AM
SV
"Okay. I grew up after using Windows for 20 years and ordered Mac Pro and MacBook preloaded with innovative and super-productive Apple software."
Apparently you still have a way to go.
"Check here for starters."
Can you be a little bit more specific?
Posted by MJ | August 18, 2008 12:46 PM
Being more specific for MJ:
Here are a few. You'll have to look up references yourself; I don't have the time.
Apple Macintoshes were the first commercial line of computers to use a graphical user interface.
Apple Macintoshes were the first commercial line of computers to include a mouse.
Apple Macintoshes were the first commercial line of computers to support Postscript laser printers, and Apple was the first company to sell Postscript laser printers.
The Apple Macintosh was the first platform upon which Microsoft Word, Excel, and PowerPoint appeared.
The Apple Macintosh was the first platform upon which PageMaker and Quark Xpress appeared.
The Apple Macintosh was the first platform upon which Photoshop appeared.
Apple Macintoshes were the first commercial line of computers to have built-in networking hardware and software support for it (AppleTalk and LocalTalk).
Apple Macintoshes were the first commercial line of computers to come standard with graphics hardware that supported millions of colors.
Apple Macintoshes were the first commercial computers to have built-in Ethernet on the motherboard.
Apple Macintoshes were the first commercial computers to use WiFi (several months before Dell claimed "We are the first to include WiFi", meaning that they were the first WinTel PCs to include WiFi)
Apple Macintoshes were the first commercial computers to fully support USB in hardware and software, and to drop legacy printer and serial ports.
Apple Macintoshes were the first commercial computers to NOT have a floppy drive, which undoubtedly promoted the development of USB flash drives.
Posted by Wheat Williams | August 18, 2008 1:03 PM
More for MJ:
I can keep thinking of these all day long.
Apple was the first company to mass-produce consumer digital cameras (Apple QuickTake)
Apple developed the IEEE 1394 FireWire interface, which became the de facto standard for digital video cameras.
The Apple Macintosh was the first complete line of commercial computer to include built-in support for external hard disk drives (SCSI)
Apple created the software that was licensed by AOL (America On Line), and AOL was originally a Macintosh-only service.
The Apple Macintosh was among the first computer lines to support DVI video and NOT include legacy VGA ports.
Posted by Wheat Williams | August 18, 2008 1:09 PM
More for MJ:
Apple was not the first, but was the most successful at online music sales, and it was their work with iTunes and DRM that convinced all the world's major record labels to license and sell their content song-by-song in downloadable form.
This was a huge achievement that reshaped the entire music industry and re-aligned the computer industry towards music and entertainment.
Lots of companies tried, but Apple put it all together.
Posted by Wheat Williams | August 18, 2008 1:13 PM
More for MJ:
http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/microsoft/archives/144227.asp
A recent email from Steve Ballmer of Microsoft:
From: Steve Ballmer
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 4:30 PM
To: Microsoft - All Employees
Subject: FY09 Strategic Update
"Apple: In the competition between PCs and Macs, we outsell Apple 30-to-1. But there is no doubt that Apple is thriving. Why? Because they are good at providing an experience that is narrow but complete, while our commitment to choice often comes with some compromises to the end-to-end experience. Today, we're changing the way we work with hardware vendors to ensure that we can provide complete experiences with absolutely no compromises. We'll do the same with phones--providing choice as we work to create great end-to-end experiences."
This is the best example I can come up with. Microsoft says they have to do better about the integration of operating system with hardware because Apple has demonstrated superiority.
Posted by Wheat Williams | August 18, 2008 1:17 PM
Apple's Powerbook line of notebook computers were the first to include a built-in trackball centered beneath the keyboard space bar, and the first to push the keyboard towards the screen and put the other components under a wrist-rest area that included the trackball. This was a huge improvement in ergonomics, being the first to practically enable typing on your lap while sitting in coach on an airplane, for instance.
Everybody else followed suit and now almost all notebook computers are configured this way.
The Apple Newton was not commercially successful and not in production for very long, but it practically created the market for what we now know as personal digital assitants (PDAs).
As has been pointed out by several others, Apple Macintoshes were the first computers to promote the idea of viewing DVD movies on computer.
Apple Macintoshes were the first commercial line of computers to have built-in digital audio playback capability standard (8-bit mono for many years). This influenced the presence of downloadable audio on computer bulletin board services and helped launch the multimedia revolution.
Apple Macintosh was the first commercial line of computers to offer video editing software as standard and bundled with the operating system.
Apple released the first commercial notebook computer with an LCD display that supported more than 16 colors (they had a PowerBook with 256 colors).
Posted by Wheat Williams | August 18, 2008 1:28 PM
More for MJ:
This one is harder to quantify, but all those J D Powers customer satisfaction surveys throughout the 80s and 90s came back saying that Apple customers had the highest customer satisfaction, and that Apple had the best customer tech support. This no doubt pushed everybody else to improve their support and try to make their customers happier.
Posted by Wheat Williams | August 18, 2008 1:32 PM
MJ wrote: "Can you be a little bit more specific?"
How more specific? So you apparently didn't read the article, so don't ask me to be more specific. Grow up.
Posted by SV | August 18, 2008 1:37 PM
More for MJ:
Apple produced HyperCard, the first commercially successful, end-user-friendly object-oriented programming language/development environment for creating end-user applications.
Microsoft Visual Basic went far beyond what HyperCard ever did, but I contend that the initial success of HyperCard was the prime motivation for Microsoft to create and develop Visual Basic.
HyperCard also popularized and advanced the concept of hypertext, bringing it to the masses. This had a big influence on Tim Berners-Lee and the World Wide Web protocol, although it wasn't his sole inspiration in that regard.
Posted by Wheat Williams | August 18, 2008 1:39 PM
More for MJ:
In 1984, Apple was the first company to provide commercial computers with 2-1/4-inch hard-plastic floppy disks.
Everybody else was using 5-1/2 inch floppy floppy disks at the time. They disappeared from the entire computer market quite quickly, when IBM developed their own format and controller chips for 2-1/4 inch hard plastic floppies, following Apple's lead.
Posted by Wheat Williams | August 18, 2008 1:41 PM
MJ:
Apple Macintosh in 1984 was the first commercially available operating system with the Trash Can, which Windows 95 referred to as the Recycle Bin. No version of Windows or DOS had anything like this before 1995. Nine-year gap.
Apple Macintosh was the first commercial computer with an operating system that made use of the principal we call "plug and play" where there was no need for an AUTOEXEC.BAT file to configure peripherals. This appeared about 1987. Apple used the term "plug and play" but neglected to trademark it. Windows came out with what they called "plug and play" with Windows '95, but it didn't work very well initially. Nine-year gap.
Apple's auto-update system for delivering bug-fixes to the OS over the Internet has always been praised as being better than anything Microsoft had. There's a recently-published famous email from Bill Gates circa the late 1990s where he castigates the Windows team for making system software updates so difficult to find and install. Apple's ease of use and reliability set a standard that Microsoft sought to emulate.
The Macintosh Cube and Mac mini, which has been out for several years, are obviously the inspiration for the new Dell Studio Hybrid
http://www.dell.com/content/products/category.aspx/desktops?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs&redirect=1
and several ultra-compact bare-bones build-it-yourself kits and motherboards.
Posted by Wheat Williams | August 18, 2008 1:51 PM
MJ:
Apple's QuickTime technology first appeared in the Macintosh operating system in 1991, was made available for Windows soon after, and was licensed by all the Mac and Windows software developers in the nascent field of multimedia and educational software.
QuickTime has undoubtedly pushed the development of Windows Media Player, Real Player, Adobe Flash, and similar technologies. QuickTime keeps innovating and advancing, and the other guys have to keep up and/or try to leapfrog Apple at every turn. Of course they occasionally succeed; this is just another example of how Apple's presence in the marketplace pushes everybody to excellence in competition.
Posted by Wheat Williams | August 18, 2008 1:59 PM
MJ:
I've alluded to this earlier, but the Desktop Publishing revolution, in all its dimensions, got started on the Apple Macintosh platform through the encouragement of Apple with third-party developers. Similar tools on Windows didn't appear until later.
The popularity of WYSIWYG text editing and typography on the Mac pushed Microsoft and others to expand on their own GUI tools.
Another result was that Adobe created Adobe Type Manager (ATM) and Microsoft created TrueType to enable better display of fonts on computer screens and better printing on a variety of output devices.
Posted by Wheat Williams | August 18, 2008 2:04 PM
MJ:
Somebody else is going to have to check into this for me, but I recall reading that Apple was the first if not among the first consumer computer companies to register an Internet domain--many years before the World Wide Web, and many years before Microsoft.
Posted by Wheat Williams | August 18, 2008 2:06 PM
MJ:
With the Mac II, Apple wanted to create the first commercial computer system with color raster-based bitmap graphics in thousands of colors, to be displayed on an external CRT monitor.
There was no industry standard or third-party technology suitable for this, so Apple developed their own custom graphics hardware and interfaces in-house, including a custom Apple monitor cable.
The industry eventually came around years later with VESA VGA, which, through successive improvements, became superior to the Apple standard, and Apple capitulated and stopped using their own standard and switched to VGA instead. But Apple led the way in 1986-87 and the rest of the industry had to scramble to keep up. I think VGA did not surpass Apple video as a spec until around 1995. Somebody clarify this for me.
In 1987 and for several years later, IBM and Compaq PCs didn't even come with any graphics capabilities as standard equipment. Everybody just used text terminals. You had to add a special "Hercules" bitmap graphics card to get graphics. Apple put bitmap graphics (black and white or color) on all their computers.
Posted by Wheat Williams | August 18, 2008 2:13 PM
MJ:
Cut, copy, and paste, system-wide throughout the operating system and available to all applications.
Command-X, Command-C, Command-V, Command-Z, working the same in all applications.
Apple Macintosh first.
Microsoft had to follow suit (with Control-X, etc.)
Screen fonts handled by the operating system, not a different bitmap font scheme for every separate application (eg Word Perfect on DOS). Apple Macintosh first.
Posted by Wheat Williams | August 18, 2008 2:19 PM
MJ:
Apple Macintosh OS X Dashboard Widgets, followed a couple of year later by Microsoft Windows Vista Sideboard Gadgets.
Yahoo had some technology for this sort of thing first, but Microsoft felt compelled to copy Apple's implementation.
David Pogue posted a hilarious video about this at the New York Times. Look it up.
Posted by Wheat Williams | August 18, 2008 2:33 PM
@Wheat Williams
Thanks for the list (you have way too much time on your hands :-) )
However I don't consider many of these innovative let alone Apple innovative. For example:
"The Apple Macintosh was the first platform upon which Microsoft Word, Excel, and PowerPoint appeared.
The Apple Macintosh was the first platform upon which PageMaker and Quark Xpress appeared.
The Apple Macintosh was the first platform upon which Photoshop appeared."
How were these Apple innovations?
Posted by MJ | August 18, 2008 2:45 PM
In summary:
I wish I had the time to order all these specific examples in a timeline, but I had to post them as they came to me throughout my workday.
Of course there are plenty of examples where the IBM/PC/Intel/Microsoft world did things better than Apple and the Macintosh. My point is that there has been a constant back-and-forth cycle of innovation, I'm-going-to-leapfrog-you, falling behind, catching up, and more innovation. I think you can see that Apple has consistently lead much more than it followed.
The relationship between Apple's integrated Macintosh hardware and operating system, and the Windows/PC world of separate developers making broadly compatible hardware and software systems, is what has made innovation so breathtakingly fast and efficient.
Everybody who uses a computer has benefitted from this, whether they are aware of it or not.
I've been using Macs since 1987, Microsoft-based systems for almost that long, and I've worked with both a Mac and a Windows computer on my desk every day since about 1996. I'm not the only one who appreciates both, am I?
Posted by Wheat Williams | August 18, 2008 2:56 PM
MJ wrote "How were these Apple innovations?"
They're not SOLELY Apple innovations, but if it were not for the Apple Macintosh operating system, these innovations would have come to market much, much later if at all.
At the time (1984-1989), there was no operating system other than the Apple Macintosh System Software that could support the code necessary to create and run Microsoft Excel, Word, PowerPoint, Aldus PageMaker, Photoshop, etc.
Microsoft only had MS DOS and the earliest versions of Windows (before Windows 3.1 circa 1990) which could not handle the fonts, graphics, the windows, or, initially, the mouse.
This is why Microsoft, Aldus and others developed these new programs specifically for the Apple Macintosh OS.
There were some lame also-ran graphical programs for the Atari, Commodore Amiga, and Acorn systems (remember those?) but they were not professional-level programs and they did not catch on.
These companies, working closely with Apple, developed these revolutionary new software programs for the Macintosh. Some years later, Microsoft came out with versions of Windows which were up to the task, and then the companies ported their Mac software to run on Windows.
Later industry-changing programs and software-hardware systems that were originally Mac-only include:
* Illustrator, for technical diagrams and art
* Avid, for television and film video editing,
* Pro Tools, for recording and editing audio and making record albums,
* Finale, for typesetting and arranging sheet music
The point was that at the time these programs were invented, it was much easier to write Macintosh code to do the job than Windows code, and the Mac supported the third-party hardware that was needed while the PC platform did not.
Again, in every case, eventually the same programs were made available for Windows. But it took years later.
Posted by Wheat Williams | August 18, 2008 3:50 PM
I'm sure that I must have made an error or two in some of my many examples, but I think I've established my point pretty well.
And in some cases there may have been one small, obscure computer company or so that came to market with one of the aforementioned innovations before Apple, but in each case Apple did it very well and on a sufficiently large scale that it had a clear influence.
Sure, Xerox designed the Alto first, but how many of them did they sell? (commercially, zero) How many people, consumers or software developers, got to play with their first GUI on a Xerox Alto, let alone to write software on one? No, it was the Macintosh that was out there in the computer stores.
Apple invented a lot of original stuff, and then Apple popularized many cutting-edge third-party technologies and gave them a big push toward the mainstream. And they have a better track record of this, I think, than anybody else.
Of course IBM, HP, Dell, Microsoft, and others have made much more money than Apple on personal computers and the technology that came with them. AOL made a fortune with an online community, where Apple lost money with their early attempt. But that's not the point of this long winding thread of mine.
Enjoy your computing experience!
Posted by Wheat Williams | August 18, 2008 4:19 PM
"At the time (1984-1989), there was no operating system other than the Apple Macintosh System Software that could support the code necessary to create and run Microsoft Excel, Word, PowerPoint, Aldus PageMaker, Photoshop, etc."
This is simply not true. Sun Microsystems hosted FrameMaker in 1986, with a Mac version in 1990. I remember using FrameMaker on SCO ODT (Open Desktop) 2.0 Unix in or around 1991. It was rather more complex than I wanted to deal with on a regular basis, and "Ami Pro" handled frames just fine -- better, in fact, than anything else I have used.
The AT&T 3B2 Unix desktop computer used the Motorola 68000 series CPU as did the Macintosh so codesharing between Unix and MacIntosh was obvious. MacIntosh OS 7 hard memory partitions mimic IBM mainframe and Apple stuck with that unfriendly method for YEARS after Microsoft utilized on-demand memory allocation, and later, virtual memory; Unix has *always* used dynamic memory allocation if I remember right. I remember a friend trying to view a digital photograph on his MacIntosh and he could not until he had "increased the memory partition" -- he had plenty of memory, but the program was not permitted to use it until he went to the control panel and increased the allocation of memory to the photo viewer program, which of course meant that while he was viewing photos, he could not use that memory for any other purpose even if the photo did not need so much as he had allocated. These cumbersome aspects tend to be forgotten in the rush to compare operating systems.
Posted by Michael Gordon | September 2, 2008 8:15 PM
@Wheat Williams
"I'm sure that I must have made an error or two in some of my many examples, but I think I've established my point pretty well."
Not really. A list of category mistakes i'd say. Almost every "innovation" noted (I didn't have time to read them all) would be better described as a marketing ploy. For instance how is "built-in Ethernet on the motherboard" an innovation?
If you are interested in true technical innovation rather than marketing advantage a better measure would be the answer to a question such as: How many Nobel laureates work for Apple? Answer: Al Gore ??
If the same question is posed for IBM say (to make the an unflattering comparison), the answer is: a lot more (http://www.research.ibm.com/resources/awards.shtml).
Posted by Neil McLachlan | September 12, 2008 12:24 PM
"...would be better described as a marketing ploy"
Seems like you are confusing the actual marketing ploys from another company that always tries to obfuscate their technical incompetence with P.R. spin.
Anyway, to answer your question of ethernet ports built into the motherboard:
Much in the same way Apple made standard equipment of 3.5 Floppie drives, CD and later DVD ROMs, etc in their computers and the PC industry followed, so too was the inclusion of ethernet ports.
The latest example of this drive is the inclusion of webcams in Apple laptops. Other companies such as a few Sony Vaios tried it first in some models, but no growth came out of it. Apple's approach to this is two-pronged and successful:
1) iSight camera built into every Apple laptop
2) PhotoBooth camera software that is fun and easy to use --that at the same time serves as a technology demonstrator for what the combination of well-written software tightly integrated with hardware can do.
Now more and more makers are following and adding cameras in their laptops.
Posted by Kenji | September 13, 2008 4:57 PM
As they say put your money where your mouth is...
Back over 20 years ago I used a Mac Plus to write my student thesis. then switch to windows 3.1 on a Mitac 286 and quite happily stayed with Windows machines till 2002 (at home). Work is all PC based. I went back to Mac for simple purpose back in 2002. OSX (Unix kernel) and ability to finally use my extensive photo library (had a 1.2 mega pixel camera in 1997 but all my pics were dormant as files on my PC hardrive). Plus I was dying to get an ipod of 5GB when my RIo player could only hold 256 KB of music !
Well ever since 2002 I had the choice to buy a PC or a MAC (more pricey of course) for home, and I have chozen Mac (so went from the first 'Lamp' Imac, to a 19 inch lamp, and now a Imac 20inch last Xmas). I gave my 2002 Imac to a 5 years old and she still uses it for internet surfing and gaming. I never reboot the Imac I have unless a security patch requires it and sleep/wake are under 1 sec (sleepmode on my PC laptop for work takes 30 sec to a minute). the 19inch lampis still working at my vacation home (mostly used for World of Warcraft and surfing !)
Bottom line, yes Mac is better for me and this is why I am willing to spend the money. Not that I hate windows, but time is a precious commodity for me and things for me just get down faster on a MAC (and before I get flamed, I graduated in 2 computer science degrees and develop code in over 10 language including assembly programming so know it is not I cant figure out windows !).
PS: If I could not afford it, of course I would have to go for PC and still be reasonably happy. But like cars, it is like the guy driving a mustang trying to argue it is better than a Corvette.. Well envy can be ugly ! :-)
Posted by Larry | September 29, 2008 11:42 AM
The real issue with Vista?
Not many folks are out there making the tools that have been homegrown for XP.
Vista is by far more resistant to hacks, but yet, is also far more difficult to support. Many more clicks to do the same things that XP does quickly and easily.
Try attaching your old hard drive either internally or externally to copy data from....
I have been in the industry since DOS 1.1 and work on both platforms, MAC and DOS/WIN and started on a TRS-80, Model III.
Posted by DeBunkTheMtyhs | September 29, 2008 1:02 PM
PS: I was also one of the only people on a help desk that supported over 10,000 users who could cover the MAC side or the PC side.
Posted by DeBunkTheMtyhs | September 29, 2008 1:03 PM