Apple now has more cash than Microsoft
appleinsider.com
appleinsider.com
If microsoft wanted to, it could easily raise more cash by issuing more shares (or stopping the dividend as others have pointed out). The cash comparison is thus not meaningful.
That said, the comparison of real revenues and profits is tremendously interesting - Apple is within spitting distance of Microsoft on revenue and has a similar profit margin. The profit margin is what interests me. Microsoft has always enjoyed a bigger profit margin as a software company than as a hardware company. Apple is more of a hybrid, but has still managed to come away with a high profit margin.
It doesn't mean that Apple has a brighter future or that it's a better investment. It may even (as you say) mean bad things. But it does mean some things. Another big tech being cashed up may mean that big consumer tech companies might start paying dividends. It might mean Apple start trying to buy other companies like MS have.
Apple is a big player that has overtaken another big player in cash, a player known for having a lot of it. So this can almost be considered an industry trend now. That's meaningful & newsworthy. I think that is meaningful. Maybe it means (like you say) that the industry that the companies (industry) is having a hard time finding valuable things to invest that cash in.
If Sun didn't have massive amounts of cash on hand after the dot com boom, Sun would have died or been swallowed up.
Cash is King. Especially in hard times ;)
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.
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.
Honestly, cloning the Apple interface as much as possible wouldn't be such a bad strategy.
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?
Here's a graph:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_innovation#The_theor...
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.
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.....
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.
I still maintain that Linux is lacking a simple UI to pull it into the mainstream (ALL Linux not just Ubuntu).
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.
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.
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.
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.
Cmd-Shift-G (same shortcut as in the Finder)
try using quicksilver instead of spotlight
you don't have to use itunes. i rarely use it.
i like the way cmd-tab includes things from all my spaces. but i can see that an option for your way could be a good addition.
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).
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.
Apple is a luxury brand and Microsoft isn't, so I think the current economic troubles will hit them harder.
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.
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.
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.
If you're investing in stocks, you're usually not thinking that the dividend will be your greatest return. Dividends usually indicate one of two things - 1) the company is healthy and profitable 2) the company has a massive cash pile.
In the case of Microsoft it was both, but primarily the mountain of cash they used to have (>$60bn) that got investors complaining that MS do something with the cash mountain. MS would easily have more cash than Apple if they didn't put in the effort to get rid of it over the past 5 years or so.
Also, why are we praising 'cash on hand', cash is only good when you use it.
A fundamental problem with Vista was that switching operating systems is a pain and users don't like to do it. Further, Apple and Linux now have a lot of mind share among the technical trendsetters. For Apple and Linux users, it's not enough to like Apple or Linux, you have to hate Microsoft too.
When Windows 7 comes along, the press will be exactly the same as it was for Vista: Why switch when your programs already work on the old OS? Why won't it run on X or Y type ancient hardware? Etc, etc. And the Apple and Linux fans will make Windows 7 into exactly the same sort of dirty word that Vista is.
Joe Average computer user doesn't choose his next OS based on what he likes, he does it based on what he hears, and that won't be anything good.
This is a bullshit argument, and I'd really love people to stop using it.
Mojave showed that people using Vista for short amounts of time in factory-approve conditions will think that it's "pretty neat." But Vista's always had the "neat" factor about it. Never as much as OS X, but then, not many people get a computer based on "neat" factor, despite what fanboys on both sides say about each other's products.
Where Vista sours is when you use it for a while and notice the little things. Of course, the security windows - even though you can disable them, that's the iconic one for Vista. I've had that security window crash my old computer, too: if your computer is running a lot of stuff, that window sometimes tips the entire thing over.
The little things bottle up. They build up and tip out. I just came across a post yesterday on Tumblr that mentioned one: I'd never actively thought about this feature, I wouldn't have ever thought to diss Vista for it after I got my Mac, but remembering it, it was awful in a small way.
http://tumblelog.marco.org/56149922
And when you've only used Windows, stuff like this is acceptable. It's commonplace. There is no alternative. But when you use any other OS, you realize that a lot of things are done much better. Linux has its own problems, namely drivers, but that was enough to make me hate Windows in no time at all. OS X is even worse for that, because it's better on an order of magnitude. And once a bunch of people started using OS X, and Apple started its campaign actively against Vista, people got very curious, and a lot of people starting noticing the things about Vista that pissed them off.
I think that Apple can do really wonderful things -- my iPhone is miles ahead of any Windows Mobile phone I've ever owned. On the other hand, the Zune software simply destroys iTunes in usability and prettiness -- the Zune itself is a very nice device.
The link that you referred to talks about Windows XP (2004 should have been a clue) and isn't quite accurate anyway. I think that Tumblr may want to concentrate on reading dialog boxes a little more carefully.
With Vista, I'm out of love the minute I see needless chrome on the windows. The same with the graphical Linux interfaces I've used. There's the first real biggie. The 1px border design from Apple is one that I absolutely love, and it makes every other design I've ever seen look stupid and outdated.
The menu bar up top and the dock makes for the second thing. Both of them are so incredibly utilitarian. You don't get menus cluttering up every window. The fact that every menu usually complies with HIG and has the exact same keyboard shortcuts is another absolute wow gee love situation. It shouldn't be, but it is. I love knowing that CMD-, opens up preferences for every single application. I love being able to find what I want easily, because the menus are so standardized. And the dock made me hate the taskbar, because it makes the taskbar seem so incredibly outdated and useless. OS X doesn't just provide visuals. It provides a visual interface. Things make logical sense with it: they attempt to simulate a real physical interaction. Like the one I mentioned before: when you have a window open, the fact that you can move whatever file that window represents just by moving the window. Or the ability to move things to and from the dock, to use the dock as a storage space. Little things that just make perfect sense.
Vista will not stop telling me to restart my computer. There is no "Fuck you, I'll install when I'm ready* option. It keeps popping up, and it keeps coming up as I'm hitting Enter for something else, and it keeps pissing me off.
The Zune looks pretty, I'll agree. I don't like its scroll mechanism. And what about the Zune software is better than iTunes? I'm not denying you: I've just never used the Zune software, and I love iTunes. I'd be curious as to what the Zune program does better.
Everyday I use OSX I become more infuriated with it. The main reason is because it's tied to _one_ hardware manufacturer which makes it kinda useless really especially when that manufacturer doesn't like to give you a whole lot of choice.
Also, here's something interesting too about your favorite OS. There are no less than 20 Application Launchers (replacements for Spotlight). It seems that the dock isn't such a great replacement for the Start menu / task bar combo. See here:
http://www.usingmac.com/2008/10/25/mac-application-launchers
Besides the fact that it's fucking impossible to find anything in the Dock if you have hundreds of programs installed, you can't easily see what's running since the only indicator is a very small blue dot.
This is why you simply can't use it to switch programs and I bet you don't. You probably use Expose. Well, I don't know about you, but when I'm mousing around a lot it takes me a second to switch back into keyboard mode, especially if the keyboard shortcut is something stupid like F10, F11 or F12. On Windows all I do is click on the taskbar item for the program I want. It's much, much quicker.
The dock is simply a marketing gimmick.
Also, if Vista continually tells you to restart, you're doing it wrong. I have a Vista box in my living room which has an uptime of about 3 months now since the last reboot. And there is nothing better than Vista Media Center, it kills Front Row in so many ways.
The point is that with Apple, I don't have to worry about themes. It's already set up for me and the experience largely revolves around it.
The main reason is because it's tied to _one_ hardware manufacturer which makes it kinda useless really especially when that manufacturer doesn't like to give you a whole lot of choice.
What aren't you given a choice about? It's possible to replace the camera, the keyboard, the mouse, and pretty much any part of the system that you don't want. You can replace any program that you don't like, too. Though it goes without saying that I like Apple's restrictive hardware, because it means that things work without fiddling.
Also, here's something interesting too about your favorite OS. There are no less than 20 Application Launchers (replacements for Spotlight). It seems that the dock isn't such a great replacement for the Start menu / task bar combo. See here:
A lot of them were created before Leopard, in which Spotlight was sped up immensely. I haven't needed anything beyond Spotlight since 10.5, which was when I began using a Mac as my main computer. The only exception to that is Quicksilver, which is more of a function fiddler than it is an app launcher.
Besides the fact that it's fucking impossible to find anything in the Dock if you have hundreds of programs installed, you can't easily see what's running since the only indicator is a very small blue dot.
That's why you don't put every app you have on the dock. It's a storage place for apps that you use often. I actually don't keep any programs on the dock: I only use it to show currently running apps. And the blue dot is pretty high contrast even when the dock is tiny.
This is why you simply can't use it to switch programs and I bet you don't. You probably use Expose. Well, I don't know about you, but when I'm mousing around a lot it takes me a second to switch back into keyboard mode, especially if the keyboard shortcut is something stupid like F10, F11 or F12. On Windows all I do is click on the taskbar item for the program I want. It's much, much quicker.
No, because using the mouse for something like app switching is slow and pointless. I use CMD-tab, followed by CMD-` to select the window. It's much, much quicker. And it's faster than alt-tab on Windows, especially when I have a ton of windows open, because selecting the app rather than the window means I can get immediately to what I want. If I've got 15 Quicktime windows open and 1 Safari window open, I can tab over quickly. I also have Exposé turned on to the bottom corner of my window, so it takes a single flick to reveal all my windows. That's another really nice built-in Mac feature: corner commands.
The dock is simply a marketing gimmick.
Hardly. The dock is the center of Apple's user experience, as I said. It's been that way since it came out with the first version of OS X. It's a storage spot, a navigation tool, and a launcher. Stacks in particular is a well-loved addition.
Also, if Vista continually tells you to restart, you're doing it wrong. I have a Vista box in my living room which has an uptime of about 3 months now since the last reboot.
Every time it installs an update, it constantly prompts a restart. That's a pain in the ass.
And there is nothing better than Vista Media Center, it kills Front Row in so many ways.
The last time you provoked an argument, I asked you what makes this the case. You never responded to me. So, tell me now?
Though I recall last time your telling me you weren't going to have this argument any more. Why not let's drop this lengthy argument before we begin? The conversations I've had with you have not been pleasant.
Gee, nothing like making personal attacks when you've got nothing else to say. Please tell me, when did I make this personal? I didn't...
Anyway, to answer you question...what does Vista Media Center have that Apple Front Row doesn't? Well for one, CableCARD. Secondly, more hardware options, as usual. For instance, a Gyration remote (the best there is, IMO).
Please see this list of many other things, this person says it better than I have time for:
http://cybernetnews.com/2008/05/12/cybernotes-apple-front-ro...
Maybe the existence of so many choices to launch apps is indicative of more then Apple doing something wrong. It could show that everyone has their own paradigm for using their computer. And it's easy for anyone to customize the OS to do what they want if its not what Apple did by default.
So much for being locked into one choice, eh?
I don't know about you, but i have the ability to hit F9 and then the arrow keys to move around to various windows open in Expose. Or hit cmd + ` to switch between windows of my currently open app. Or cmd + tab and then use the arrow keys to go to the App i need. Or alt + tab to go between various elements of the currently open window. I can go on and on about the various keyboard shortcuts that OS X has. They're not the same as the Windows shortcuts so you have to relearn some. But they are there
And if you do use an app launcher, you could try not having anything in the dock and just using said launcher to open apps. This way, everything in your dock is open. So you don't have to hunt for the easy to see (imo) blue dot under apps.
But hey, I'm just one random person. And it sounds like you have your mind made up. So have fun using windows. I'll be over here having fun with my mac. Sounds like a fair trade?
But then this is a circular argument - because it is totally dependant on individual preference & experience.
For me Linux and Vista are both not perfect and both have their (equally annoying) niggles. I use Vista for gaming and general use at home and Linux at work (& at home as servers and other uses).
Obviously, there are many people running all three. Where do you even get that idea from?
Yeah, but remember, if you didn't switch to Vista, you'll still be running XP (which was released in 2001-ish). So you'll have to switch to something soon. Sure, some people will switch to Apple, but upgrading to Win 7 will almost be the default option.
And if you did switch to Vista, then you'll probably move to Win 7 as well when it comes out. People could afford to ignore Vista because they were happy with XP, but they won't continue to be happy with XP indefinitely.
Buying back shares is a waste at this time and SJ doesn't like buybacks. Some people see Apple buying Adobe. ADBE's market cap is around $12B but to me a big negative is the amount of overlap between their software suites... lots of value will be wasted but on the other hand, Apple would have a virtual monopoly on digital content production. If I were SJ, I'd go after Yahoo. It's now around $17B and would offer Apple more room to grow and would also give Google some things to think about as they're now going after Apple's mobile slice.
If Apple buys anyone it should be Sun (or what's left of SGI).
The other thing you can see from Apple's history is that they tend to buy smaller companies only when the software those companies own matches Apple's strategy.
Great mounds of cash allow for some stability and for judicious bargain shopping and for product upgrades during downturns; for a longer horizon.
Glory days in the past
Microsoft have more competitors now but is also stronger than ever.