Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > News > Mac News > Analysis: A tale of two companies

Analysis: A tale of two companies
Thread Tools
NewsPoster
MacNN Staff
Join Date: Jul 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 20, 2015, 09:00 AM
 
Microsoft, always that great predictor of the future, seems to have decided that mobile and desktop devices should, must, and will converge into one Windows-shaped thing at some point in the future. Apple, particularly its CEO Tim Cook, is so far denying any such seismic shift will happen with its mobile and desktop OSes, and all the company is looking for is love for Apple devices. This may seem like one of the bigger philosophical arguments of our unenlightened age -- but there is another way to look at the debate.

Currently, Apple is the only company in the world whose desktop computers are beating the declining industry trend. At the same time, it has millions of mobile apps being bought billions of times. Microsoft, on the other hand, has comparatively no mobile success, yet does have a massive base of software applications - which all runs on the Windows desktop. Microsoft is not predicting the future well; it never does. It was right about tablet computing, but its early ham-fisted approach was pretty profoundly rejected by the marketplace. All it's doing is what it always does: it is hoping to fashion a future in which the company's own strengths matter once again. Apple's pronouncements may often seem like it, but it isn't really predicting the future either -- it's just saying its own approach to progress is fine as it is. Right now, Apple is on the money in every sense. Microsoft thought it could move its users over to a new single operating system, but then something that had never happened before happened: they resisted. Maybe a revolt is inevitably and always what you would always eventually get with such a gigantic number of users, but Microsoft also just did it wrong. Windows 8 was not one new system for all, it was at best a patch-up job and some bolt-ons over Windows 7. Microsoft always thinks that's fine: Windows started as a DOS overlay, and that mostly worked out great, and thus that technique has guided the company's thinking ever since. To that end, it has opted to try create a fusion of the desktop and mobile experiences into one grand unification OS to rule them all as quickly as it can (Windows Phone, for the moment, has been spared the full brunt of this amalgamation, but the seeds are clearly there as well). It has bravely tried -- four times now -- to shake off the shadow of Windows XP and move into the mobile age. While millions just kind of lie down and take it, the base as a whole has become increasingly bold in rejecting this idea. In comparison, Apple in 2001 released an OS that was much more of a clean break; at first, it wouldn't run old apps at all. It quickly gained backward compatibility with the most recent pre-OS X incarnation, but that was very clearly a stopgap measure to avoid alienation, and dropped as quickly as it could be. Apart from the Mac OS 9 emulation, OS X represented a massive and total overhaul of nearly everything we thought we knew about Macs and Apple -- and though it was rough going at first, Apple poured its all into it deliberately, publicly, and with more confidence. This obsession with looking forward and rarely, if ever, back was one of Jobs' great gifts to the company, but it also rubs some users the wrong way. On the whole, however, it appears in hindsight to have been the right approach; it was Apple or nothing, at least as far as Apple users were concerned, so they made a leap of faith and went with it. It made that kind of massive overhaul in OS X that Windows should have done once it finally decided to break free of its DOS roots -- but Apple did it at an opportune moment, and did so over a decade ago. The full brilliance of Apple's move from an endlessly-rewritten homebrew OS to the mature, powerful, and most importantly portable codebase of UNIX cannot be understated or under-appreciated. It is why you are reading this now, regardless of what device you're reading it on. This is what allowed Apple to pull off the second full miracle of the 21st century with its user base almost entirely in tow for the ride: it was able to port OS X from the PowerPC chip to the Intel chip (and seemingly had a few skunkworks projects to port it over to other chip platforms as well, just in case), and again thanks to some (this time purchased) clever backwards compatibility emulation, it lost almost nobody in the process -- and gained millions who were irrationally afraid of even trying anything that didn't have "Intel Inside." Apple was still nowhere near to eating Microsoft's lunch, but at least now it was dining in the same café. But then came the coup d'grace: when Microsoft wasn't looking, Apple took that amazingly portable codebase, made it work on ARM chips, and put OS X onto mobile devices. They don't call it that now, but they did at the time. At the launch of the iPhone, Steve Jobs spoke at length how its software was based on OS X and all the advantages that gave. They were all under the hood, of course: they were tools Apple and others would use to make new software for users. It wasn't about making the iPhone look like your Mac, though it did share some of the same "philosophy" and feeling. Microsoft is seemingly focused on looking new and modern, rather than being it. Apple genuinely believes it is making the best systems for desktop and mobile, and right now it has no reason to change that pursuit. It also seems to want you -- the consumer, not the shareholder -- to want OS X and iOS. Whereas Microsoft is trying to turn Windows into something of its past self, and seems to long for the time when you had to have it. Microsoft wants us all to converge on Windows. Apple wants us to choose its devices because we believe they are the best for what we need. We are in a place where things are changing, and we are in a place where there will be convergence -- just not as either firm hopes. It isn't going to be so much about which OS will win, because that changes with time; it's more about what we will use computers for. Our uses will converge over the next however-many years, and most of us will surely end up carrying and using just one device each, at some point. We just don't know if that will be because one device, one OS finally does in fact fit all, or because we each pick the one that suits us. We'd be fine if OS X were in iPads and iPhones. We'd be less fine if iOS became the OS for Macs. Right now, today, we like them both where they are: colleagues, swapping ideas, working together to make users' lives better. We like that a lot. -- William Gallagher, Charles Martin, Mike Wuerthele
     
Makosuke
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 20, 2015, 02:41 PM
 
"...most of us will surely end up carrying and using just one device each, at some point."

I'm fairly skeptical of this assumption. What's almost unarguable is that the average person in the future will, and depending on the region and demographic already does, carry a pocketable computing device with them a lot of the time. It's possible that this will in the more distant future become a wearable--watch, glasses, integrated into clothes, whatever--but outside of cyberpunk fantasies those all seem more likely to be supplements than the thing you watch videos and take photos and look at kitten pictures with. There's also the fundamental issue that while voice recognition could handle all typing needs, people don't want to always be saying out loud what they're typing--sexting on the bus would get *really* weird, and the world quite noisy.

So assuming that, at least for the foreseeable future, people will carry something roughly pocket-sized with which to take photos, and communicate, and look up things, and do "wherever I am" computing, the question becomes whether people want to spend *all* their time using a hand-sized screen. They *could*, and some definitely will, but whether, on average, people are going to want some kind of second, larger display on which to do things.

If so, then at best you're "docking" your portable device to a larger display of some kind, versus the alternative of having a second device with that larger screen.

So basically, I only see a "single device per person" becoming a thing if you assume that the future of mainstream computing is a pocket-sized device that can be converted into a larger-screen device by linking it to a larger display, and maybe an additional input mechanism that works better with that larger display. Given the cloud, and how it's becoming ever-easier to sling settings and environments between devices, I'm not convinced that's a given. It seems perfectly possible that there will be a bunch of devices that synchronize really smoothly scattered around, which people use indiscriminately, depending on context and mood.

(None of this, of course, has anything to do with people with special-purpose professional needs, who will almost certainly always use special-purpose products.)
     
Charles Martin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Maitland, FL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 20, 2015, 05:27 PM
 
I can't speak for others, but I think what was meant there (at least how I meant it) was that we'd have one "master" device we carried around, and other things (like the Watch) are a "slave" to it. That appears to already be happening ... saw a guy yesterday with full-size BT keyboard typing to his iPhone 6 Plus in a coffee shop.
Charles Martin
MacNN Editor
     
Steve Wilkinson
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Prince George, BC, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 20, 2015, 06:29 PM
 
Very well said, Makosuke!
------
Steve Wilkinson
Web designer | Christian apologist
cgWerks | TilledSoil.org
     
Steve Wilkinson
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Prince George, BC, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 20, 2015, 06:30 PM
 
re: "All it's doing is what it always does: it is hoping to fashion a future in which the company's own strengths matter once again."

I strongly agree! Microsoft is still hanging (and always has been... consider the DoJ case) to the stronghold it achieved early on in the computer industry. Just about every move since has been a desperate effort to maintain that hold.

Everything else I've seen from them has been a sci-fi stab geeky stuff which is of little real-world application, or something no one but total geeks would use or care about.

re: "to shake off the shadow of Windows XP"

Here's some advice Microsoft. Corporate IT, in some cases, are still using mainframes (and just rigging on modern front-ends). They invested in building 'web' stuff rather recently (in corporate timescales) with your horrible tools, just like you spent tons of time and money convincing them to. Corporate IT is lazy... insanely lazy. They've been given budgets to their own little world, with nearly zero accountability to UX (user experience). So long as stuff keeps running, and they don't get the company hacked or sued, they aren't going to do anything different. My gosh, a lot of big companies use Lotus Notes! Have I made my point?

The upshot of this, for you Microsoft, is that you're going to have a heck of a time moving them off of XP. Sorry, that's the bed you made! It's going to haunt you for a long, long time... and aside from feeling really sorry to corporate employees and their customers who have to put up with the junk, I say it's good for you. Payback is a .....!

re: "The full brilliance of Apple's move from an endlessly-rewritten homebrew OS to the mature, powerful, and most importantly portable codebase of UNIX cannot be understated or under-appreciated." ... "But then came the coup d'grace: when Microsoft wasn't looking, Apple took that amazingly portable codebase, made it work on ARM chips, and put OS X onto mobile devices."

Totally agree... too bad they've given up on that now. While it was a brilliant *addition* the move towards iOS alone isn't as revolutionary, it's closer to what Microsoft is doing (and failing at).

re: "It wasn't about making the iPhone look like your Mac, though it did share some of the same "philosophy" and feeling."

And then, they forgot what that was:
http://www.fastcodesign.com/3053406/how-apple-is-giving-design-a-bad-name

re: "Microsoft is seemingly focused on looking new and modern, rather than being it."

Unfortunately, as is Apple, now. They are just a bigger more powerful company in the lead at the moment.

re: "Apple wants us to choose its devices because we believe they are the best for what we need."

Yet... but they wish you'd give up and just go with iOS already.

re: "Our uses will converge over the next however-many years, and most of us will surely end up carrying and using just one device each, at some point."

I don't think so. IMO, there is a distinct UI/UX difference between mobile use and desktop use. I don't care if there were a Macbook Pro power iPad running and iOS I couldn't tell from OS X in usability. I'm not going to sit there with a pencil or finger trying to select and manipulate stuff. Likewise, I'm not going to try to achieve major content production feats on a couch with my finger/pencil on an iPad.

The technology capabilities might merge, how humans use it won't.
------
Steve Wilkinson
Web designer | Christian apologist
cgWerks | TilledSoil.org
     
Steve Wilkinson
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Prince George, BC, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 20, 2015, 06:36 PM
 
Charles, I think Makosuke was onto it. An increasingly large group of non-power-users will probably get by with a mobile device... possibly, connected to a bigger display and better input when at home/office, etc. if they are kind of in-between (many will just use the mobile device alone).

The power-users will always have both, at least. Because, even when your average smart-phone becomes as powerful as a laptop, laptops, and especially desktops, will become even that much more powerful. They'll never match each other (at least in potential)... that's just physics.

And, unless I'm insanely short-sighted, I can't conceive of a user/interface that's going to overall replace keyboard/mouse (generically) type interaction. Even when you can talk to computers like in Star Trek, you'll still often not want to, as Makosuke points out... at least until there is some kind of direct brain input, where you can do the exact same things as keyboard/mouse with your mind, more efficiently. Until then, input isn't going to change. Finger/stylus input is more efficient for a limited amount of mobile situations, but it won't be overall... ever.
------
Steve Wilkinson
Web designer | Christian apologist
cgWerks | TilledSoil.org
     
amiller77
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jun 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 20, 2015, 10:55 PM
 
We're an all Mac & iOS family for 25+ years (except work Windows requirements). My twin daughters (both in medical field Grad school programs, where drawing can be a big part of lecture note taking) used their iPads to type (keyboard-case) and draw (with finger tip, with impressive pinch-zoom-in, draw, zoom-out speed) class lecture notes the past several years, usually leaving their 2009 MacBooks behind for after-class library or at dorm/apartment computing. Last Spring, feeling sorry for them for the amount of weight they carry in their book bags, I bought them the new 12" MacBooks, which they LOVE. Since getting the 12" MacBooks, they've both been using their iPads less and less, but also wish they could draw on the MacBooks for note taking. They're seeing an increasing number of fellow students with hybrid Windows tablet/laptops, and wish they could do what they do with them. They seem to see them as an "all in one solution" (except for the phone aspect). I'd hate to see Apple loose significant ground with this demographic (students, especially those who need to draw on their notes), where Apple has increasingly dominated the past 5+ years. I don't see any reason why Apple can't expand their offerings by making a "touch enabled" OS X 12" MacBook. A small tweak to OS X, a touch enabled screen, a few OS X Apps that support typing and drawing on, and they have the best of both worlds in one full-featured device, perfect for students. The iPad Pro could possibly meet this demand - a single device that does everything - but I'm somewhat dubious, especially at it's price point. Time will tell.
     
Steve Wilkinson
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Prince George, BC, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 22, 2015, 06:01 PM
 
@amiller77 - I think maybe the iPad Pro would be a perfect fit, as soon as we get a few slightly more advanced apps for it. For what many students *need* it has plenty of power... now of course, many students might also be gamers, so there's the end of that idea.

I suppose adding a touch-screen to a laptop would help that problem (taking notes and drawing), but a laptop is just ergonomically horrible to do that with unless you have a rotating screen. (Drawing on a screen, low and in front of you, is about the worst possible position.)

Also, I wonder what percentage of students, workers, etc. really need to be able to draw and type notes? I've had hat need a few times here and there over the years, but tend to just keep a small paper note-pad in my backpack or case for such times (then I just find a way to transcribe that later on or scan it, etc.) But, for someone who draws a lot with notes, that wouldn't be too efficient.
------
Steve Wilkinson
Web designer | Christian apologist
cgWerks | TilledSoil.org
     
crispincorky
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Nov 2015
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2015, 12:07 PM
 
I think Apple's arrogance is making them blind. They will enjoy another year or two of increasing sales then it will begin to drop.

The Surface Book/Pro etc are the way forward for me. I used to spend all my money with Apple and haven't bought anything Apple for about 3 years! Surface 2 and 3 has had my money and a soon to be Surface book.

Win 10 is 90% of what OSX is now and they're updating it continuously. I can see in a couple of years a big shift in what people are buying. Apple will never shrink massively but they will be sharing more of the premium device market with Microsoft at the minimum.

Apple are following the wrong path now and although it's serving them well now, it will be there undoing in the coming years.
     
Steve Wilkinson
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Prince George, BC, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 25, 2015, 12:58 AM
 
@ crispincorky - I think it will be a bit longer than that, but generally agree with what you are saying. I heard one of the top business podcasts talk about Steve Job's secret to success being a 'product first' mentality instead of a 'profit first.' Well, that pretty much nails the current situation. Apple has been transitioning to a profit first model. Once that is complete, it's all downhill from there.

I'm sure hoping someone wakes up at Apple before that happens, but I'm seeing little hope right now.
------
Steve Wilkinson
Web designer | Christian apologist
cgWerks | TilledSoil.org
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:55 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,