And the first Microsoft iPhone app is .. Windows Live? Hotmail? Office? umm… Not quite

"It's ridiculous to compare the philosophy on software between a general purpose computer (the iMac) to a "less general" computing device (iPhone)" Well, they both use OS X, now don't they? (....or are you withdrawing from that argument?)

aaaah Mikey..trying to change the subject again when you finally realize how wrong you are. However, I've had enough of this. You're so wrong that you need to change the subject. You claim I say things I haven't. I provide links showing that MS has / is documenting functions due to an anti trust agreement, you deny it. A LOT of those functions are SHELL FUNCTIONS, yet you claim that didn't give MS an unfair advantage. Then you go on to claim that I say "everybody else does it too" when all I want is you to stop being such a damn hypocrite, calling out Apple for doing something MS does, and then defending MS's use of it, but not Apple's. The courts have most definitely stated that MS needs to document it's APIs to third parties so that their software interacts better with Windows...I dont' know how much more clear that can be to anyone who can see even SLIGHTLY without the blinders that you have on....it's pathetic! Then you say that I have condemned the practice of MS doing but not Apple, which is clearly false...I haven't condemned ANYONE. You are just truly a sad, sad man

Waethorn. Please...give me a break! That's like saying Windows XP and Windows Mobile are the same. The DEVICES that run OS X Leopard and the devices that run IPhone OS are so completely different. The ipod touch / iphone is clearly a more limited device from a hardware perspective.... or do you not agree? Do you think the Pocket PC was as versatile as a PC? Please, don't be a jackass...you are so capable of well thought out ideas and responses, and then you insinuate that an iMac and iPhone are the same because they both run OS X... that's like saying the .NET Compact Framework is the same as the full .NET Framework found on PCs.

aaah, ok Mike...if this is what you want, I'll give it to you. Yes, I condemn *ANY* OS maker from keeping APIs hidden so that their applications can do things that others cannot.....without needing to reverse engineer or jump through other hoops. Whether it be MS, Apple, or any other entity, I do not feel it is right.

waethorn, Why do you think they don't? Do you have some sort of proof that they don't? Are you suggesting that Apple claims that the iPod touch / iphone run the *same* full version of Leopard that is sold on the iMac?

panache Actually, it was Steve Jobs that said iPhone runs the same OS X operating system. Now, it may have been very carefully worded but that was the claim.

>>Their competitors ARE complaining. Read any of the articles about Firefox and multitouch.<< Small potatoes. Read the Time article.

Its nice to see that Microsoft can play in Apple's backyard and create a quality product. However, this tit for tat over secret API's merely proves a couple of things. @tayme, CEO's cannot make decisions that causes harm or interference with a competitors ability to compete fairly. With Apple introducing Kernel panics or restrictive code into OS-X and restrict exactly what goes on the iPhone via the App Store, Apple is risking an anti-trust suit. Not necessarily for a monopoly, but restriction of competition and conspiracy to leverage that advantage to the hindrance of fair competition. If Mozilla can prove that Apple is harming Firefox's ability to compete with Safari web browser, I think Mozilla could win a lawsuit. Besides, what does any competitor wants to hold back code? Its more trouble. If Safari is as good as Apple claims (and we know its not), then it doesn't need to hold back code to give its browser a temporary advantage. If Microsoft cannot use specialized code to give Windows an advantage vs third parties, then Apple must be held to the same rules. As for Silverlight and Flash being used on the iPhone, I don't see the harm. It would be up to Microsoft and Adobe to keep the security up to date. As someone who has actually used Silverlight, I think its an incredibly awesome plugin that was not only awesome during the Beijing Olympics, it was even better during the DNCC.

Wae, Can you please show me where "dear leader" said what you say he said? Also..why do you just immediately start calling him "dear leader". It's like an illness for you.

In other news: Leo in one of his "DUH!" moments: http://www.youtube.com/v/Z-3YVQjEMbU Anyway, it's amusing.

Waethorn But, it just works...

@mikegalos: Honest CEOs certainly don't reside at Microsoft. That's exactly the reason why Microsoft is known as Evil. Why they are convicted monopolists. Do you think they got that way and that reputation because they are honest? Nope. You're a hypocrite talking about "secret APIs" when Microsoft has done the same thing. Opening something to be a free for all and you end up with the dog's breakfast that is Windows and its ecosystem. You end up with a tarnished brand like Vista and Windows in general. End up blaming third parties for your mistakes, your wrong decisions over the years. You end up with terrible mobile operating systems like Windows Mobile. A horrible mistake trying to cram the same things you see in a desktop OS on a mobile device. It takes someone with balls to show someone that just copied, like Apple did for Microsoft, to show them to think outside the nerd square they reside in. Look at the horrors of Linux trying to get on the desktop? Apple even did that right. Took Unix and added the best OS UI in the world. Microsoft is the new Xerox. Just a copier company.

@mikegalos: "The subject was, and still is, Apple's anti-competitive use of Secret APIs to give their own Application developers an unfair advantage over their competitors." Do you know what the word hypocrite means? Anti-competitive? Microsoft was charged for that. Remember? Convicted of that. When you charge Apple with something like that, don't forget to mention that Microsoft has been charged and convicted of it. Remember to do that, okay?

"When you charge Apple with something like that, don't forget to mention that Microsoft has been charged and convicted of it. Remember to do that, okay?" Not necessary. It's irrelevant information and not useful in this context. Microsoft's past behavior doesn't justify Apple's current practice.

Nope. It would *probably* be hypocritical if Microsoft itself made those comments. I don't think Mike represents Microsoft. He doesn't have to add a disclaimer at the end of each one of his comments. Everytime someone criticizes Apple, someone here has to bring up Microsoft. I noticed panache and johnpapola doing that today. It would probably be fair if Mike was Microsoft's official spokesman or even an employee, maybe. But he isn't. He speaks for himself, not for the company.