It's Official: Apple Is the New Microsoft
The most vociferous Microsoft haters slammed the company for being a greedy industry bully that used its monopolistic, clunky, copycat operating system to force software on users and coerce partners into unfair licensing deals. Don't look now, but the role of the industry's biggest bully is increasingly played by Apple, not Microsoft. Here's a look at how Apple has shoved Microsoft aside as the company with the WORST REPUTATION AS A MONOPOLIST, COPYCAT AND BULLY.
1:17 PM * PERMALINK * 21 comments
Comments:
I guess if you can't beat 'em join 'em.
Media Monkey.
Finally, people are opening up their eyes!!! (No pun intended)
Nice analysis, Mike.
Thank you!
- Media Monkey Mike
But don't forget, that is why Apple products just plain work. I have MS Office on my computer with MS XP, and the suite freezes and crashes at least twice a week. Especially when importing big graphics. By I think in the past six months my Apple has only crashed once, and that was when I had too many programs (I had like 10 opened at once.) My iPod even stopped freezing up when I used my Mac to update it, versus when I use my windows machine, my iPod froze so many times, drove me nuts when I was driving listening to my music or Cranky Geeks!
I have to say, the author of the article is missing a critical point. Apple's use of ITunes is not the same as Microsoft's monopolistic tactics because there are thousands of other portable music players and cell phones out there. Yes, Apple makes the most popular one that has become the standard by which all others are measured, but that is not the same as when an average consumer goes to buy a PC, and has virtually no choice but to get it installed with Microsoft's OS and IE.
***** Apple's use of ITunes is not the same as Microsoft's monopolistic tactics because there are thousands of other portable music players and cell phones out there. *****
On the contrary, the existence of alternative choices is *exactly* what makes the two comparable.
There have always been many alternative operating systems for enterprises, consumers, embedded applications and others. Here's the list.
Getting rid of Windows and installing linux takes an hour, and can be free.
What do you do if you want to get rid of the software inside iPods, or iTunes? What are the alternatives?
Mike Elgan
I am so happy the music industry is getting what it deserves. For many years it was the only game in town, they controlled the distribution of their product and with their deep (financial) pockets they were untouchable. They ran a quiet monopoly. Just look over the years and see the broken lives of artist that came in the industry with the love of music but ended up with nothing raped and taken advantage of. The record companies could do what ever they wanted to do contractually.
Now Jobs comes along and has vision that the greedy industry didn't have. I'm glad the independents and major artist have a choice to get their music distributed. I hope more outlets become available. This will keep the music industry honest.
Ummm... The music industry loves iTunes otherwise they wouldn't authorize it.
I hate iPods and have another brand, but every remote control system is based on the iPod which, I'm guessing, Apple won't even license to other vendors to avoid competition. That means I won't have an integrated way to skip songs or see what's playing while I'm driving, I wonder if I can sue Apple if I crash because they wouldn't open up their control interface. ;)
Mike, defend your logic all you want, but Apple's position is radically different than Microsoft's. It is easy in a comment and editorial to dismiss the dominance of Windows on the PC industry (ie, the OEMs, not the consumers). The "Microsoft tax" was and continues to be real for most consumers because Microsoft has been very good at becoming the only option for OEMs. This situation is finally changing, but it does not change the facts of history.
There is no analogue for Apple. Apple wins through competing for consumer's choices, offering product that have numerous alternatives. Apple is not in the business of removing or eliminating competition with any tool other than being a better competitor. That is not a monopolist. Just because iPod has a major share does not mean that Apple has a monopoly. Get a better dictionary.
Microsoft does not and hasn't for many years/decades competed in the open marketplace. Microsoft has historically used its controlling leverage to eliminate options and alternatives in the marketplace. You are deluded by your own "insight" to believe that Linux or Mac or any other alternative OS has been an available alternative. During the late 80's, entire 90's and early '00s, Microsoft was the only game in town for 90+% of the computer-buying public. Linux is still trying to make something that can be consider an "alternative". The Mac is not available to any OEM.
Most, if not all, of Microsoft's attempts to compete in the open marketplace have resulted in fantastic failure. I can't even remember the number of OS releases that Microsoft promises with big fanfare and sheepishly forgets since the late 80's through to Vista's quaking release. The Xbox has been a total ruin, losing billions (BILLIONS!) with the continuous promise that "next year" will break even. The Zune is too easy an example. To call it an alternative would be too complimentary.
But, again, the bottom-line, is that you simply do not understand and/or use accurately the term monopolist. Great for headlines and page hits, though.
Mike - I said, the "average" consumer. Of course I am aware that there alternative operating systems out there. Buy your average consumer either doesn't know about them or doesn't feel they have the skills to install them.
Heck if you are going to use Linux as an example, then you DO have iPod software alternatives dude.
http://www.gtkpod.org/about.html
You complain that you can't use an Apple iPod to listen to TV sound that gyms broadcast over FM radio.
Just need to buy the iPod radio remote if it's that important to you.
$49 at the apple store I believe.
And IMO, Microsofts bad rep is and was deserved.
mike -
how many Zunes did you get from Steve Ballmer for writing this?
also, i love how you have written an opinion piece & started it by saying "It's official!" what is? your opinion? it's been "officially" sanctioned & authorized? licensed, bonded & insured?
your comparisons are so far off the mark they're not even worth disputing.
I love Mike's opinions. That is why I read his newsletter. However, I don't always agree with him. Why do people have to be critical? If you don't like this site and Mike's use of the English language, write your own bloggg.
Wow - say something bad about apple and everyone comes out of the woodworks to post how you can't possibly be right and how Microsoft is evil.
Gotta love the fanboys.
You are way off in your announcement that Apple is the new Microsoft. Apple have gained their large majority in the music download market by the simple fact of they have produced the best all round solution to using digital music. It works plain and simple. Thats why people have bought into the system.
If you recall when the iPod was first launched it was dismissed as just another MP3 player for use by Mac users only. I bought the first 5Gb version. It was great then and the iPod range has just improved with time.
Look what happened when iTunes was released to Window users. Sales took off as people wanted to use iPods. Apple or not.
I can't agree with your "Sorry Dad" scenario. I can import existing CD's that I have. I can import MP3 tracks from the web. I could import pirated tracks if I wanted or was so inclined. The tracks I buy from the iTunes store I can burn to disc to use in CD players, in the car or anywhere else and import to any MP3 player. All video's can be exported to QT format for use on other systems! How is this closed?
End of the day "you pays your money, you make your choice" No one forces anybody to buy Macs, iPods & iPhones. I did because they work better for me than other comparable equipment and I don't seem to spend as much time making them do the things I bought them for, as some of my family and friends seem to spend with their equipment.
I think that overall Microsoft do an amazing job with their software, making all the hundreds of different computers, running thousands of different applications outputting to numerous types of media. No wonder their are problems.
It is much easier for Apple. Thats why I don't ever want Apple to become as big as Microsoft.
I have used most of the systems around and can speak from experience. Each has its own merits and downsides, and I don't knock someone for their choice. What depresses me is the many who criticise other products when they have never used the kit and just rely on other people's opinions.
I believe you really should remove the "It's Official" and replace it with "My Opinon". There is absolutely nothing "Official" about your weak argument beyond that it is filled with poorly thought out (and unlikely researched) views and opinions.
As well, perhaps you willl want to see where your article has several points that are either inaccurate or outright wrong.
A rebuttal argument to your very article is HERE
No Windows is much better its much more compataable with software and stuff
There's an obvious issue in play that drives the distinction between Apple and Microsoft, and I'm embarrassed that your article failed to mention it.
The difference that gives Apple cover here is the DMCA and the DRM protections that Apple is arguably obliged to cover the assets of its business partners with. Please note that I am as far from an Apple fanboy as it is possible to be -- I have still stubbornly resisted the call of the Ipod, and have never owned any other Apple product -- their closed system doesn't appeal to me. That said, it is impossible at this point to determine the extent to which Apple is itself the "evil empire" that Microsoft was. It can plausibly claim merely to be complicit in the machinations of the RIAA, and we'll never know as long as the Digital Millenium Copyright Act is in existence.
I would expect Apple to claim that their sweet and advantageous ITunes setup is significantly a security measure for its business partners, providing them with a closed system that assuages their concerns that their digital rights are less likely to be violated. Apple's scheme is merely the most inventive exploitation of the DMCA, which demolishes any concept of fair use of content in favor of allowing the media companies to sell a host of niggling, narrow usage rights to the same content -- to an extent that completely sets to shame the idea of a movie theater drawing the distinction between "inside soda" and "outside soda".
It's still as fun to take a swing at the abusive monopolist as it was back when the internet was afire with hate for Microsoft, but I'm fairly sure that you'll have to chew through the DMCA before you can get to Apple on this one.
It's amazing how the apple fanboys would complain about the "microsoft tax", but completely ignore the fact that the market is wide open. Nobody is forcing any consumer to avoid a mac machine and live with a wintel machine. Personally, I hate the ms tax too, as I would just take a plain box and install ubuntu on it, but we should keep things in perspective, that an average user may not be able to use linux yet, but that user can definitely switch to mac. Howeveer, have you seen the price tags on machines with windows vis-a-vis macs? There is the difference. Go figure, it's economics 101, fanboys!
Post a Comment
<< Home