Apple's culture of lies, Part 2: A different way of looking at it

One thing I've often thought with Apple is how much worse off the PC industry would be if they were ever dominant, because they're such a belligerent company. But a more level-headed way to view Apple's recent push-backs from the top of the heap is that they're suffering from exactly the same problematic mind-set that doomed Microsoft a decade/decade-and-a-half ago, back when antitrust regulators from the FTC and DOJ first accused the company of illegal anti-competitive behavior. That is, they're just a product of their history.

What I mean is, until very recently, Apple was the underdog, and they've been the underdog for almost their entire existence. This creates a certain mindset, and under Steve Jobs especially, it's created a very aggressive competitive spirit. This aggressiveness is fine when you are literally the underdog, just as was the case with Microsoft early in its career and it was trying to wrest the PC industry from IBM, Lotus, WordPerfect, and other tech dinosaurs. But once you have a dominant market position, that aggressive behavior--so important for an up-and-comer--isn't just bad, it's illegal. It's just hard to turn it off when it's been part of the corporate psyche for so long.

Microsoft got into antitrust trouble because they behaved in a manner that was illegal, but only for a company that holds monopoly power. During this time, I fielded innumerable emails from people wondering why it was OK for Apple or Linux to bundle applications in their OSes when it wasn't OK for Microsoft. (Answer: Apple and Linux didn't/doesn't have a desktop OS monopoly.) And so on. The answer was always the same: If Microsoft didn't have a monopoly, what it did in the mid-1990s would have been legal.

As I write this, Apple doesn't quite have a monopoly in any given market, but they are pretty darned close in a few, and getting closer all the time. And you can see how aggressive this company is, and how they're protecting their core products at the expense of users. The time to stop this behavior is now, not after Apple has secured the digital music market (arguably already done), the digital movie and TV show markets, and the consumer smart phone market. These are the markets that Apple is set to monopolize, and we've already arguably passed the point where that is no longer a given, a certainty. You can argue that we're not there yet, possibly. But we will be.

So. With this obvious comparison of two very similarly belligerent companies--Microsoft of the mid-1990s and Apple of today--in mind, I think the time has come to rein Apple in. To examine Apple's exclusive relationships with wireless carriers. To force it to open up iTunes to competing players, and its iPhone and iPod devices to competing software and services. If we don't do this now, it will only be more difficult in the future. All you have to do is look at Microsoft's never-ending antitrust saga--which has now stretched on for 15 years, involved regulatory bodies on three continents, and gone on far longer than its actual bad behavior--to see why it's time.

We spend too much time worrying about whether Microsoft will be the next IBM. What we should be worrying about is that Apple has already become the next Microsoft. Let's fix that. Let's nip this one in the bud. Let's do it now.

Discuss this Article 130

lehenbauer
on Aug 26, 2009
Troll much, Paul?
gfryesc1
on Aug 26, 2009
didn't Paul chastise Opera from this same loopy behavior of using the power of government against a competitor instead of competing in the marketplace? I think he said he's had it with Opera or that they jumped the shark or another of the constant cliches he uses.
EricoF3
on Aug 26, 2009
@yoshipod: I am sorry, my last post is off ... I just miss read your last sentence!! Sorry
yoshipod
on Aug 26, 2009
Still not sure what makes 10.6 an SP and Windows 7 an upgrade. Please someone define them, because I don't get it.
EricoF3
on Aug 26, 2009
@yoshipod: The reason OSX White Leopard is a SP this is because it change only near 10 things... And the majority of this changes are changes in utilities that are not rally important like the Chat client and QuickTime and so on... Microsoft don't sell upgrade only to update notepad... I am sorry... Windows 7 is a major improvement over Vista... In general people hope of Windows 7 to be a free upgrade because they pay for Vista that had been unpopular and a pseudo flaw (Although not actually)... But in fact Windows 7 is a major OS upgrade...
EricoF3
on Aug 26, 2009
@yoshipod: I mean OSX upgrade is near to 10 correction/improvement ... But Windows 7 is over 1000 correction/improvement probably much much much more...
Lindy
on Aug 26, 2009
@EricoF3 just because you say "Windows 7 is a major improvement over Vista..." does not make it so. Answer yoshipod's question. Please tell us what a user of Windows Vista SP2, plus all updates that come from Microsoft (IE8) gets when they go to 7? Please I would like to know how its a major update.
Lindy
on Aug 26, 2009
@EricoF3 just because you say "Windows 7 is a major improvement over Vista..." does not make it so. Answer yoshipod's question. Please tell us what a user of Windows Vista SP2, plus all updates that come from Microsoft (IE8) gets when they go to 7? Please I would like to know how its a major update.
notawindowsuser
on Aug 26, 2009
I paid £25 for Snow Leopard and £50 for Windows 7 Home Premium, service packs or not, £75 for the latest and greatest, I'm one happy camper :-)
yoshipod
on Aug 26, 2009
@yoshipod: The reason OSX White Leopard is a SP this is because it change only near 10 things... And the majority of this changes are changes in utilities that are not rally important like the Chat client and QuickTime and so on... Apple stated they reworked 90% of the projects that make up OS X. That is quite a bit more than 10 "correction/improvement ". Read through the Window 7 list Paul has and point out items make it an upgrade. Paul lists stuff like calculator and Windows Media 12. If those items make Windows 7 an upgrade then iChat and Quicktime make 10.6 and upgrade as well. Which of the features are big enough to warrant upgrade over SP. It sounds like so many of the things listed are " streamlined and simplified" , "revamped", "ships with" or "includes" " the latest version of ", "enhanced version". This is the same with the "refinements" that 10.6 makes.
EricoF3
on Aug 26, 2009
@ Lindy: Just go here: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/features/whats-new.aspx and see by yourself... I don't have to explain that to you just do some reading and you will see...
yoshipod
on Aug 26, 2009
EricoF3
on Aug 26, 2009
@yoshipod: It true that Apple had a lot of rework to do to become near to Windows 7... You have a point... Especially, doing a Multi core support that is available in Windows for 10 years... And a nice feature that allow you to boot in 64Bits by holding the apple key... lol... Also, it is right to tell that the major project rewriting had been done in Windows Vista on the Microsoft side... So it is hard to compare OSX White Leopard Upgrade and Windows 7 Upgrade...
lazysquirrell
on Aug 26, 2009
I think its more about the re marketing of Vista and a lot of tweeks and small ui changes that makes 7 great, its just no longer cool to rubbish MS. On the other hand people are just bored with OSX. Thats my take on it anyhow..But i will say this there seems to be a massive buzz around win 7, at least here in the UK and i will be taking advantage of that.
EricoF3
on Aug 26, 2009
@lazysquirrell: right!!
EricoF3
on Aug 26, 2009
It seem that microsoft don't specify specific changes ... I mean they will not tell in "What's new in Windows 7" that they rewrite the complete networking or that they rewrite threading of the OS to get high speed improvement ... They only tell about things that user can see, like : Much Speed or Fast internet access... Understand?
yoshipod
on Aug 26, 2009
"Especially, doing a Multi core support that is available in Windows for 10 years..." Kind of like how the taskbar is now just like the Dock.....or Aero snap is like expose. "And a nice feature that allow you to boot in 64Bits by holding the apple key... lol..." Actually that is good. One OS installation allows me to boot in either 32 bit or 64 mode. No need to wipe my entire computer if decided I want to change the mode to operate in, or have some software that works better in one mode or the other. There is no way to upgrade from 32 bit Vista to 64 Windows 7. You HAVE to do a clean install. So while you laugh at this, you don't realize that it is actually a good thing to have. "Also, it is right to tell that the major project rewriting had been done in Windows Vista on the Microsoft side... So it is hard to compare OSX White Leopard Upgrade and Windows 7 Upgrade..." Both Apple and Microsoft have done quite a bit of work in each of these upgrades. That is my point. Yet Paul, and many others, keep calling 10.6 a Service Pack and saying it should be free. But fail to call out Microsoft for charging for Windows 7. That is my point and that is why Paul is lying about 10.6
mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 26, 2009
blad You're missing a key point. The requirement for abuse of monopoly power is NOT that competing is totally 100% impossible at any level. It's also not that there is a guaranteed high profit successful business that's being blocked. You're setting the bar to the point that there would never be any antitrust violations. By your requirements, Microsoft would not have had anything ruled against it since Linux exists. That there are potential competitors to Apple being blocked from competing by Apple's own control of the market is abuse of monopoly power. That's all it takes. If that app would compete with Apple and can't be built then Apple is violating monopoly power (If they're ruled a monopoly). It doesn't require that the app would be guaranteed to be successful. Nothing is. The example I gave is a FAR worse abuse of power than any of the findings against Microsoft (Yes, I really did read all 7,000+ pages of DOJ v Microsoft) and so if the bar was set there, Apple is clearly in trouble.
Lindy
on Aug 26, 2009
@EricoF3 like I thought, you cant prove your point. I went there. Somethings that stand out in your provided link.. IE8, Windows Search, compatibility, faster, Windows Live Essentials....NONE of them are different in Vista SP2 with all updates, and most of those are in XP as well. In fact when it comes to performance.... http://crave.cnet.co.uk/software/0,39029471,49303203-7,00.htm Your link has 3 tabs with 18 items, 5-7 are in Vista today. Others like Touch are useless for 98% of computers, because they dont have a touch screen. Yet I go here.... http://www.apple.com/macosx/refinements/enhancements-refinements.html and I see more than 10 items. Please tell me where I am wrong? To call Windows 7 an major update over Vista SP2 is a joke. To say SL is a service pack is a joke.
Lindy
on Aug 26, 2009
@ Mike how do you not get it. Your words... "You're setting the bar to the point that there would never be any antitrust violations. By your requirements, Microsoft would not have had anything ruled against it since Linux exists." The real life example is not that Linux is an option for consumers to choose and Microsoft beat them. Its that Microsoft told Dell if you offer Linux as an option I will stop giving you a discounted copy of Windows and you will loose money on every PC you sell. The FORCED Dell or whomever to load Windows on any new PC. To your barber shop example. If barbershop #1 paid the city or had some leverage over them like MS has with PC makers, to do something like make it cost a ton of money for permit to cut hair for any other barbershop then that would be like MS.
EricoF3
on Aug 26, 2009
@Lindy: Ok stop talking an just try it!!! Try intensively Windows Vista and after Try intensively Windows 7... Like I do... I use Windows Vista at work 8 hours a day and I use Windows 7 at home for the rest of the time and the only thing I can tell you is that Windows 7 is a MAJOR improvement over Vista ... This is it!! I can not prove you anything because Microsoft don't publicly specify the OS internal changes ... But the only thing I can tell you is that when I use Windows 7 I feel that is a major upgrade, the experience is really improved... That's it!
chipwinter
on Aug 26, 2009
In Mike's barbershop, in which the lone barbershop is a monopoly: - If Microsoft were the owner, they would threaten their product supplier with pulling their business if they sold products to a new barbershop. - If Apple were the owner, they would not let the new barbershop put signs in Apple's windows announcing the new shop. There's nothing governing monopolies that say they have to offer a hand to another business, while there are laws saying you can't use your monopoly position to prevent competition.
EricoF3
on Aug 26, 2009
@yoshipod: "Actually that is good. One OS installation allows me to boot in either 32 bit or 64 mode. No need to wipe my entire computer if decided I want to change the mode to operate in, or have some software that works better in one mode or the other. There is no way to upgrade from 32 bit Vista to 64 Windows 7. You HAVE to do a clean install. So while you laugh at this, you don't realize that it is actually a good thing to have." D'oh! 64 bit processing only allow you to use more memory... So if you use the 64 bit version of the OS on the same machine that you run the 32 version the only thing you will get is a down boost of performances because it is more slow to work with 64 bit memory address than 32 bit memory address ...
lazysquirrell
on Aug 26, 2009
Personally i think they're both worth the upgrade. 60 quid win7...luv it.
yoshipod
on Aug 26, 2009
"I use Windows Vista at work 8 hours a day and I use Windows 7 at home for the rest of the time and the only thing I can tell you is that Windows 7 is a MAJOR improvement over Vista ... This is it!!" So your opinion make Windows 7 a Major upgrade and 10.6 a service pack. Therefore, I can claim that since 10.6 is a Major Improvement over 10.5 that it is a Major upgrade. I do not doubt that Windows 7 is a very important upgrade for Windows users. I expect that same level of respect about 10.6 for Mac Users. Calling is an SP is simply a lie.
EricoF3
on Aug 26, 2009
@yoshipod: OK if you want!! You know I just tell this because I have read the Paul article an in it it seem to me that it was not a major upgrade but I really cannot compare OSX 6.5 and 6.6 by myself so ... you are probably right If you think OSX 6.6 is a big major upgrade, even before you tried it ... OK you are probably right lol
Lindy
on Aug 26, 2009
@EricoF3 Ok let me get this straight. You send me a link from Microsoft that lists 18 new items. About 7 of which already exist in Vista SP2 with updates. Some even in XP (IE8 and Search 4.0). Fact. I post a link from Apple refuting your "SL has only 10 updates". Fact. I then ask you to clarify/prove your "Windows 7 major update" statement and you tell me it feels faster? Ok well I have been using the Windows 7 RTM as my primary Windows computer since the 7th, and it feels no faster or better than Vista SP2 or XP to me, so does prove me or you correct? Oh as for your 32bit/64bit kernel comments, they are wrong as well. Fact Check... http://www.macworld.com/article/142379/2009/08/snow_leopard_64_bit.html "Snow Leopard runs 64-bit-capable applications in 64-bit mode regardless of whether it’s booting into a 64-bit or 32-bit kernel. In fact, the only big advantage of booting into a 64-bit kernel would be the ability to use more than 32 gigabytes of RAM. There aren't any Macs that can do that now, anyway, due to hardware limitations. Applications running in Snow Leopard will have access to a full 16 exabyte virtual address space, just the same as if they were running in a 64-bit kernel. As a result, there’s very little difference between booting into the 64-bit kernel and the 32-bit kernel in current Mac systems" I guess if you need more that 32 gigs of RAM on a client OS then it could be a problem.
smoothbond
on Aug 26, 2009
@falkirk 'None of these things are illegal. All are practiced by competitors. But according to Paul they become illegal merely due to the size of a company's market share. Who knows. In the murky legal world of monopoly law, he may be right' Of course he's right, how else do you explain the fact that no other Browser maker is attacking apple for bundling Safari with OS X, yet its perfectly acceptable for every Browser and their cousin to demand Microsoft exclude IE from Windows.
yoshipod
on Aug 26, 2009
"D'oh! 64 bit processing only allow you to use more memory... So if you use the 64 bit version of the OS on the same machine that you run the 32 version the only thing you will get is a down boost of performances because it is more slow to work with 64 bit memory address than 32 bit memory address ..." 64 bit is more than just memory addressing. It also has to do with integer size, etc. Anyways, despite the speed boost from running in 32 bit mode with 32 bit apps, one may also need to use legacy hardware without 64 bit drivers. So with Windows you would not be able to easily switch mode, where as in 10.6, as I understand, you would be able to simply reboot into 32 bit mode and use older hardware.
EricoF3
on Aug 26, 2009
@yoshipod: yes interger size, which is result in a slower processing performance than in 32 bit integer....
EricoF3
on Aug 26, 2009
@yoshipod: "Anyways, despite the speed boost from running in 32 bit mode with 32 bit apps, one may also need to use legacy hardware without 64 bit drivers." This point of view is OK to me and I admit you have a point here!
lazysquirrell
on Aug 26, 2009
Although its not all relevent its still an excellent read.http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/default.aspx Surprisingly ive not seen a comprehensive whitepaper on 7, can someone direct me?
EricoF3
on Aug 26, 2009
@Lindy: "Oh as for your 32bit/64bit kernel comments, they are wrong as well. Fact Check..." Why do you told me I am wrong if you continu by telling the following: "As a result, there’s very little difference between booting into the 64-bit kernel and the 32-bit kernel in current Mac systems"!!!??? I never told that your machine will be transform in a PPC with 40Mhz when booting in 64 bit mode, I just tell it will gives you nothing, or a little down boost in performance, which you will probably not notice... Please stop listen all people and companies that tell you that 64bits is a major improvement... Its not true... 64bits only give you more memory addressing and yes larger integer... But who really need this? Near nobody... The only exception is really specialized software that need a lot of memory, that's it...
FalKirk
on Aug 26, 2009
@falkirk 'None of these things are illegal. All are practiced by competitors. But according to Paul they become illegal merely due to the size of a company's market share. Who knows. In the murky legal world of monopoly law, he may be right' "Of course he's right, how else do you explain the fact that no other Browser maker is attacking apple for bundling Safari with OS X, yet its perfectly acceptable for every Browser and their cousin to demand Microsoft exclude IE from Windows."- Smoothbond I don't think the example is germane. Microsoft was convicted of using it's monopoly position to exclude Explorer's competitors from it's OS. That could explain the additional scrutiny, no? Can you think of another example?
EricoF3
on Aug 26, 2009
@ lazysquirrell: Like I told Microsoft didn't publicly give us a White Paper for Windows 7 so it is difficult to argument with Mac Fan Boys about Windows 7 changes over Vista... Fortunatly, you can find a White Paper for OSX 6.6... Apple is willing to tell to end user that they had a comma in a specific place in the OS core that improve the core stability...
Waethorn
on Aug 26, 2009
@all: Mac OS won't have a major upgrade until version 11.
EricoF3
on Aug 26, 2009
@Lindy: See the comment of Waethorn!!
lazysquirrell
on Aug 26, 2009
@ lazysquirrell Neither will windows lol
lazysquirrell
on Aug 26, 2009
lets try that again @ Waethorn Neither will windows lol better?
fishyuk
on Aug 26, 2009
Paul is very fair on Apple products (just doesn't like the ethos like me) so getting so much stick from the mac fanatics really just proves his point. Listen to Windows weekly and he gives MS a bloody hard time in my opinion, in fact often too hard a time. Then try listening to the sycophantic MacBreak weekly. I forget the guy who runs pixel corps but every week it is something like "if apple came up with this, and it was fusion powered, and they tied everyone in, and you only needed to bang your forehead against one button, they'd rule the world and I'd LOVE IT". Completely embarrassing. Paul is right to challenge Apple's (and lingering MS) nastiness. They make great products but have a horrible attitude that smacks of the worst kind of elitism that is even disappearing from the UK. I'm typing this on a brand new MacPro in OSX. It will mainly be a Windows machine but much of the credit goes to Paul who has always been very complimentary about the hardware. I also have a Mac Mini purely dedicated to OSX as a messing about machine. To all the Windows and Mac guys who understand both sides then well done. To those who feel their "manhood" offended by a critical article then either grow up or go elsewhere....
gfryesc1
on Aug 26, 2009
loved paul's quicktake of snow leopard. It basically says snow leopard is overpriced at $29 and copies everything from Windows, and some of those things from Win7 which isn't even out yet! With these lovely adjectives and adverbs, how can anyone think that Paul is anything if not fair: hyperbolic letdown cryptic unnecessary ludicrous hypocritical inconsistency
yoshipod
on Aug 26, 2009
Paul is very fair on Apple products (just doesn't like the ethos like me) so getting so much stick from the mac fanatics really just proves his point. No he is not fair. He always puts them down whenever he has a chance. I went through all his OS X reviews and this is what I pulled from them 10.2 - "Essentially a minor upgrade to previous Mac OS X versions, Jaguar includes numerous small updates and refinements but few major new innovations." 10.3 -"Reading the various Apple-friendly reviews now available online, you might get the idea that Panther is a major OS upgrade. After spending a few weeks with the fledgling system, I can assure you that it's not." 10.4 - "Though it is marketed by Apple as a major release, Tiger is in fact a minor upgrade with few major new features for end users " 10.5 - "While the Apple hype machine and its fanatical followers would have you believe that Mac OS X 10.5 "Leopard" is a major upgrade to the company's venerable operating system, nothing could be further from the truth." 10.6 - "Had Microsoft released such an update for Windows, they would have called it a service pack and delivered it gratis." So every version of OS X is minor, except for 10.1. Well hold on there.. 10.3 -"Over the course of three minor updates—10.1 in late 2001, 10.2 in late 2002, and now 10.3—Apple has done much to strengthen Mac OS X's underpinnings with a usable fascia that's bursting with functionality." I don't get it. They are all minor updates. How can that be since they stack up well against Windows. 10.1 - "This new Mac OS offers at least as much of an advance for users of that platform as does XP on the PC" 10.4 - "Apple Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger" is the strongest OS X release yet and a worthy competitor to Windows XP" 10.5 - "Leopard is, however, equal to Vista in many ways." So despite being minor updates, Paul thinks OS X is as good as or better than similar Windows versions, all which have been MAJOR upgrades. That is fair and balanced....just like Fox News. The best thing I found was this gem... 10.3 - "That's a lot of money to pay for mostly subtle refinements that, arguably, should have been in the system to begin with. I wish Panther were more reasonably priced—perhaps in the $30 ballpark." So Paul thinks that subtle refinements are worth paying $30 for, yet thinks 10.6 should be given away free, because thats what Microsoft would have done. Paul's Culture of Lies
Waethorn
on Aug 26, 2009
"Paul's Culture of Lies" Speaking of lies, I'll leave you with this little festering tidbit to munch on: Apple suffering from foot-in-mouth disease: www.engadget.com/.../apple-enlists-david-puddy-to-take-on-the-laptop-hun... www.engadget.com/.../snow-leopard-packing-antivirus-software
Bodypaint
on Aug 26, 2009
Here's an interesting article that clearly shows that the Snow Leopard update is simply a snow job.. When most of the new functionality won't work on any machine that apple delivered prior to 08, intel or otherwise should tell you enough. Check out the graph of what systems support what. http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=1275 What's equally interesting is how this story has eluded the like of engadget, wired, and gizmodo.. hm, do you think they're pro apple?
lazysquirrell
on Aug 26, 2009
For all sides. Culture of lies. Microsoft. Min specs for Vista...oops Apple. It just works....umm no Linux. I got a girlfriend.....sorry had to do it.
Lindy
on Aug 26, 2009
@bodypaint, Snow Job how? Ed clearly states... "I was very disappointed to learn that OpenCL support and H.264 hardware acceleration wouldn’t be available on my machine. In fact, the latter feature appears to be available only on systems with Nvidia 9400M graphics. On Windows 7, I’ve compared HD playback using an Intel GMA 950 (the same graphics chip used in my Mac Mini) against the same source on a system with an Nvidia 9500 GS. It’s no contest: the discrete GPU annihilates the onboard graphics, especially with a CUDA-enabled Windows app like PowerDVD 9. I’ll need to upgrade to a more powerful Mac to make a fair comparison." So on both his PC with GMA950 and his Mac Mini with GMA950 advanced features like CUDA or Open CL wont work. They both require a faster more modern GPU to use these brand new GPU API's. Wow imagine that. Maybe I should email Ed and tell him that the GMA 950 wont even run some 3 year old PC and Mac games before he complains about that as well?
mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 26, 2009
Bodypaint Interesting. Summarizing Ed Bott's chart (which he uses by permission from the creator, Stephen Foskett) we get the following tiny list of Macintosh computers that can use all of Snow Leopard's features: MacBooks (only those made in 2009-present) Unibody MacBooks MacBook Airs (only those made from late 2008-present) Unibody MacBook Pros IMac 9400M (the only model including current produts) Mac Mini (2009 only) Mac Pro (2009 only) In short, if you bought a new Macintosh more than a year ago you will NOT get all of Snow Leopard's new features. And, in fact, even some current models and virtually ALL Macs built prior to 2009 are locked out of some features like the 64 bit kernel (that Apple's been claiming for years but which first really appears now) I thought a 3 year backward compatibility limit was bad but when products that Apple currently sells can't run their own current OS without turning off key system features that's just sad.
rr0de74@live.com
on Aug 26, 2009
@Mike, if I walk into a apple store today and buy a Mac, any Mac, can it use all of those features in SL? Yep. I might have to force some models to always boot in 64bit mode, and possibly have problems with some non-Apple software.
lotsamystuff
on Aug 26, 2009
"@ robertsgay: Shut up C*o*c*k sucker..." That's the kind of insightful commentary I expect from a WinJihadist. "You know I just tell this because I have read the Paul article an in it it seem to me that it was not a major upgrade but I really cannot compare OSX 6.5 and 6.6 by myself so ... you are probably right If you think OSX 6.6 is a big major upgrade, even before you tried it ... OK you are probably right lol" Ladies and gentlemen, please join me in welcoming "Borat" to this forum!
robertsjoe
on Aug 26, 2009
This post is so pathetic, I feel ill.

Please or Register to post comments.

IT/Dev Connections

Las Vegas
September 30th - October 4th

Paul ThurottYou'll have the opportunity to experience:
• 120 Technical
Sessions
• Networking with Peers
• Expert Speakers


Come See Paul Thurrott & Mary Jo Foley in Person!

Register Now

Office 365 InfoCenter

Get the latest insight and info from Paul

Read Now!

What I Use