Paul Thurrott's SuperSite for Windows
Home > Type > News > 18 Features Windows Should Have (but Doesn't) ... Or Does It?

18 Features Windows Should Have (but Doesn't) ... Or Does It?

Apr. 29, 2008 Paul Thurrott | Paul Thurrott's Supersite for Windows

Sometimes life hands you a gimme. This horrible article--18 Features Windows Should Have (but Doesn't)--is such a gimme. The reason? The guy who wrote it apparently knows absolutely nothing about Windows, doesn't realize that virtually everything listed here can be downloaded for free, and/or feels free to list Mac OS X features that shipped since the most recent Windows version.

Yep, it's a disaster.

Here's the full list, with just a few comments.

1. Expose

Expose is just next-generation window switching. Yawn.

2. Virtual Workspaces

Actually, this has been built into Windows forever, it's just that Microsoft never felt the need to build a UI to access it. With Windows XP, you can download a free PowerToy to expose this feature.

3. Back to My Mac

Even the Mac doesn't support this feature ... Unless you pay Apple $99 a year for .Mac.

4. Screen Sharing

You mean something like this free Microsoft utility?

5. Time Machine

Actually, this was copied from a Windows feature called "Volume Shadow Copy" that debuted in 2003. Apple just put a pretty UI on it.

6. ISO Burning

There are so many free ISO utilities out there, this one isn't even worth discussing. That said, how many normal human beings ever run into ISOs? Really?

7. Stickies
8. Podcast Capture

Yes, he just said Windows needed "stickies" and "podcast capture." You know, for those 17 guys that would use either feature.

9. Software Repositories

I guess I'd argue that Microsoft's Windows Marketplace pretty much covers this, especially the amazing (and under-reported) Digital Locker feature.

10. Desktop Cube

Dude. You did not just list a single graphical effect as a feature Windows lacks. Oh yes you did.

11. Application Dock

The most horrible feature ever foisted on Mac OS X users. Look: It holds permanent shortcuts and links to currently running programs and some other stuff. It's a UI disaster. And please, Dear God, someone please bring up the fact that Windows users click a Start button to shutdown their computer. Please.

12. Automated Screen Shots

Again, spare me. We can take screenshots of the screen and of particular windows. There's a Snipping Tool in Vista. and a million free utilities. Moving on.

13. Multitouch Trackpad Gestures

Only the very newest Mac notebooks support this and only in a very limited fashion. Moving on.

14. Cover Flow

Because the file browser doesn't move slowly enough already.

15. Pre-Installed Web Server

It's been there for over a decade. Microsoft stopped installing it by default because of security reasons. Maybe Apple should follow suit.

16. POSIX Compliance

In NT from day one. Dropped due to lack of interest and shipping separately.

17. Standardized Menu Ribbon

No offense, but this is an age-old debate between Windows and Mac UIs. No one cares anymore. They're just different.

18. Single-File Applications

Actually, this would be cool. And actually, it's happening already. In fact, Microsoft SoftGrid basically delivers pre-packaged applications in exactly this fashion, currently only to desktop PCs in businesses, but I could see its use broadening in Windows 7 and beyond to meet compatibility needs as Windows drops more and more legacy technologies. By the way, SoftGrid also gets rid of DLL Hell: You can do things like run multiple versions of Word (97, 2000, XP, 2003, 2007) simultaneous on the same desktop.

So... That's right. He's made a list of his favorite Mac OS X Leopard features. All 300, excuse me, 18 of them.

Spare me.

Thanks Lee.

Discuss this Article 93

Waethorn
on May 1, 2008
"Clearly, he feels his white-box PC business is under threat from the Apple store, since he's admitted to trolling there for clients." nope, just that if Apple can't satisfy their own clientele, who the hell are you to presume that I can't turn them into my own?! "Why else have such an infantile, black-and-white view of a legitimate innovator in technology? Why else would you have so much hate for a product that you don't use? Why else would you have the arrogance to claim that other people's reasons for like it are wrong?" oh riiiiiight....you mean like this....: http://www.apple.com/getamac/ads/ pot meet kettle.
Waethorn
on May 1, 2008
"Windows should use Bonjour to replace its complex and unreliable printer-sharing" I recommend OneCare as a complete security solution, and printer sharing is one thing that it handles with ease.
Dipsh t Admin
on May 1, 2008
John, not a knock against you, but: "Why else would you have the arrogance to claim that other people's reasons for like it are wrong?" Compare to fivepoint's rebuttal to another poster in this very thread: "Hahahahahahaha.... LOL! You've GOT to be kidding me! Anyone who would say that has either never tried expose', or is in severe denial." So I'm not calling you out John, but if you ever wonder why some of us on the *evil* side (their words, not mine) get so involved and have seemingly little tolerance for things like this, it is because of people like fivepoint and *THEIR* insistence that one is superior over the other. Meaning, that if you are going to call out Waethorn, you have to call out the likes of fivepoint too. Same problem, just different ideas. "XP or Vista Home Premium here for about the same price as a Wii game" Well, unless that is one expensive Wii game, no , we can not get them for those prices. The only way you can purchase a Windows license for real cheap is if you use the OEM versions of Windows. However, if you are not a system builder, you are breaking the license agreement, and therefore not entitled to use it. The BSA would agree with me 100%. And while I can see that many Mac users may actually buy software, I doubt that the majority of those installing Windows have enough respect for MS to actually legitimately purchase Windows. There is about as much of chance of that as seeing "a cup of ice water in h*ll." Ok, I"m not sure about the last part ;), but certainly what I have seen, most are not purchasing a license.
johnpapola
on May 1, 2008
Dipsht, I understand, believe me. Nobody knows more about being insulted and assaulted by ignorant and judgmental jerks than long-time Mac users. For most of the last 10 years, using a mac meant having some IT or machine-room dork snort and laugh and call your computer a toy. That's not geeks on the internet (which is inherently the most vocal minority of any userbase). That's people in your office, in your face, calling you out for what you use. Many of us are still recovering from the "beleaguered" era where the media was expecting Apple to die or exit the computer market any day now. In fairness to fivepoint, that quote of yours is a response to this BS: "I wouldn't call it peerless.  It's just as useless as Flip 3D on Vista." - jono1 Fivepoint is responding to a dig. As some that relying on expose hundreds of times a day, I can attest to the value of the feature. People that sh1t on features in OSX or Vista without using them are ignorant. Take note of how many times I've unloaded about Vista or it's features. Almost never. I just don't use it enough to call something "useless". We are in a mature age with desktop OS's and it's the little innovations that make the most difference. I find .mac sync of app preferences to be one of the greatest things ever. Same with back to my mac. Yet I know people that would call that "useless". Fivepoint isn't saying that jono is an idiot for choosing Windows. That's allot different than Waethorn saying that Macs suck and anyone that gets one is an idiot to pay so much for it. Waethorn is a one-note hater with pithy, hypocritical punch lines like "pot meet kettle" in place of real argument. Or pointing to their highly effective advertising as if it's a personal attack. Yeah, advertising highlights competitor's weaknesses. That's, um... the point. Make your product look better than the competitor. And when you've got a competitor with 95% marketshare, it's worth attacking that competitor head-on. That's not the same as Waethorn's blind, one-sided sludge. ps - It's pretty sad if you need to order extra security software or services just to get PRINTER SHARING to work well. Jeez, Vista hasn't improved that yet? That can't be right.
Dipsh t Admin
on May 1, 2008
John, I still stand by what I said about fivepoint. I believe, that just like Waethorn, he is just as much of a troll. However, if you notice the difference, and I know you did, you actually explain why you feel that way, not just talk drivel and rhetoric. And we all know that two wrongs don't make a right. I will say that juno's original talk dissed both Vista and OS X for a feature that has some similarities. However, fivepoint took it to another level calling in to question the intelligence of the poster, rather than the merits of the feature. That's a big difference. BTW, printer sharing is really not that hard even in XP. Since I speak from the networked side of things, I can easily browse the network and find attached printers, and attach to them. The biggest issue for most is going to be making sure that the permissions and passwords are correct. A printer needs to be locked down just like any computer resource. However, a little pet peeve of mine is that I like to shun printing in general. I may use my printer at home maybe 6 times a year.
gorath
on May 1, 2008
@avro - that article overstates the complexity somewhat, I can assure you that it is in fact a pretty simple process. Anyway, as for the expose thing, it is in my mind clearly superior to flip3D. you can see more of each window, which makes it easier (faster?) to select which one you want. I've got switcher installed on my vista machines, and use it far more than the built in flip3D - however it has one major drawback over the proper OSX Expose - a program's child windows don't get presented properly. But, Flip3D isn;t as bad as some would have you believe, I mean the window at the front of the stack is clearly visible, and being able to scroll through them with the mouse wheel is handy - but i do prefer Expose, or it's clones. However, my favourite method of window management is to use virtual desktops (viewports in Linux, Spaces on a mac), and basically have one app per viewport. When I started using Beryl(/Compiz-fusion) I thought the desktop cube and unfold effects were cute, but silly. However the more I used them the more useful I found them, especially on a small laptop screen!
Waethorn
on May 1, 2008
"printer sharing is really not that hard even in XP." It usually isn't if you know how, it's just that OneCare automatically asks you if you want to share printers, and other computers in your OneCare Circle automatically pick up those printers through your subscription and the OneCare installed on those computers will ask you if you want to connect to them. The process is completely idiot-proof (even pappy John would know how to do it....maybe). "That's allot different than Waethorn saying that Macs suck and anyone that gets one is an idiot to pay so much for it." Never called a Mac user an idiot, sorry, but you seem to fit the bill pretty well by claiming that I somehow did. "People that sh1t on features in OSX or Vista without using them are ignorant." "Take note of how many times I've unloaded about Vista or it's features. Almost never. I just don't use it enough to call something "useless"." "you need to order extra security software or services just to get PRINTER SHARING to work well. Jeez, Vista hasn't improved that yet?" By your own definition, you sir, ARE IGNORANT! "Or pointing to their highly effective advertising as if it's a personal attack. Yeah, advertising highlights competitor's weaknesses. That's, um... the point." And yet Microsoft doesn't do that against Apple....There is no love for Microsoft in Poopertino....except maybe this one time....: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY
Avro
on May 1, 2008
@Dipsh A Mac owner adding Windows to his system would come under the terms "System Builder" under European Law. In contrast to what you are try to put forward many tech journalists have mentioned that Mac Users are probably the biggest market for shop sales of legal Windows OS software. There is a big difference between not liking certain aspects of Microsoft and pirating the software. Just yesterday I bought a full version of Office 2008 for my Mac from Microsoft. Price £17.31 (under $35) You can buy expensive versions of Microsoft software, but you would be foolish to do so. Note too that Mac BU at MS always is full of praise for its Mac customers and Mac purchases of Office for Mac contribute 20% of the overall profits for Office. Looks like we pay for our MS software too!!!! :-)) As for setting up the network. I was posting about setting up a home network and having looked at the set-up process on XP it is more difficult than OS X. permissions, password - sorry you are on the same network, why are these necessary and hard to setup??? @gorath The comments in the articles and podcasts said that one could setup a home network in Windows, but the setup was orientated towards an IT Pro rather than a home user. Why not just present the user with a list of check boxes (OS X) rather than talk about extra hardware dongles, complicated instructions and wizards. Personally I don't like wizards as they are time consuming and mask what you are doing. We had some comparison tests done here by consumer researchers. They took 5 tech journalists from Windows mags and had them set to work on getting a Windows computer on the Internet. On the other side was a 9 year old boy with a new Mac. The Mac got setup in 90 seconds, the Windows guys were still reading the instructions. We also had a consumer show face off a new Mac User with OS X with an experienced Windows User with Vista. They were given various tasks to do (WP, photo editing, video editing). Again the new Mac User finished his tasks quicker than the Windows User. Both had comparable machines, but the Windows User was hampered by functions being buried in submenus and she actually lost her video files. http://www.switchingtomac.com/wp/the-gadget-show-mac-vs-pc-who-is-the-wi... @Waethorn I certainly wouldn't dispute that you could build a good computer at a lower cost than one could buy a Mac off the shelf. If the chappie did not like Windows he could always load something like Ubuntu on to it. While that maybe so there are a lot of builders around who don't have the foggiest notion about what they are building and you end up getting a load of junk. Pay your money and take your chances. When you are buying off the shelf, it is different. The price differential between a Mac, a Dell and an HP is not great and a sale can make the difference as to which is better value. You mention MS OneCare. That is an extra charge subscription service (about the same price as Windows itself). Very different from a no cost menu with check boxes which are included with the OS. This would be like me adding all the features of .Mac and say these are standard with a Mac. Not without a subscription.
gorath
on May 1, 2008
Hehe, I remember the Gadget show show, and as entertaining as it was, it was rather biased. The female presenter's tv persona hardly comes across as the sharpest tool in the box, and you have to love the fact they had to use photoshop on the pc, due to a lack of built in equivalent to iphoto! But the fact that they concluded that iphoto was "better" than photoshop is, frankly retarded! Also, it was in reference to Photoshop that they mentioned the "functions being hidden in submenus" which would be the same regardless of what OS it's running on.
Avro
on May 2, 2008
I think your comments on the presenter are a bit harsh - and she is rather cute. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzi_Perry Yes on the point of hidden submenus in Photoshop (just finished a University course in digi photography using PE for the Mac) you are right, but this seems to be a certain trait of many Windows apps. iPhoto is not better than photoshop but it is easier to use. Mac Users complain constantly that The Gadget Show is biased against the Mac.
Dipsh t Admin
on May 2, 2008
"many tech journalists" Well, I don't trust what they say for the most part. Give me real statistics that show that please. In any case, I was going on what *I* have seen, and I made that clear. In regards to the licensing, I was speaking of the US, but I believe that the terms of the license apply. Read this document: http://oem.microsoft.com/downloads/Public/sblicense/2007_SB_Licenses/FY0... The terms clearly state that the software must be installed on a hardware unit using the OPK (OEM Preinstallation Kit). You must also attach a COA label to the computer. Under a Boot Camp situation using an OEM license, you are not in compliance with the licensing terms. End of story. "permissions, password - sorry you are on the same network, why are these necessary" Because the assumption is that you are on the Internet, and therefore are at least somewhat discoverable, even if you are behind a router or firewall. And the average ISP is like the wild west. In a controlled AD environment, I can easily access this, but I am the admin (It's good to be the King). Outside of the domain, no way. In addition, if this is a mobile computer, that makes you even more susceptible when you connect to hotspots, as without permissions or passwords you are providing free access for those that are inclined. 68% of the vulnerabilities reported for OS X can be exploited from remote, making passwords and permissions VERY important. http://secunia.com/graph/?type=fro&period=all&prod=96
johnpapola
on May 2, 2008
"you need to order extra security software or services just to get PRINTER SHARING to work well.  Jeez, Vista hasn't improved that yet?" How is that sh1ting on Vista? How? It's asking a question. You're the one saying you need friggin one-care just to make printer-sharing easy. That is ridiculous. The last windows version I have any lengthy personal experience with is 2000 and networking wasn't easy on home network then, but I did get it to work. I assumed it's improved. Based on what you're saying, it sounds like the answer is no. That's a shame. "It usually isn't if you know how" This is typical dork hack talk. It is the job of the software designer to make things easy. The answer to something easy like printer sharing being hard isn't "you just need to learn". It's "the software is poorly designed". But again, I'm making no claims about how hard or easy Vista printer sharing is. I'm simply asking why additional software from the base OS is needed to make something this trivial (a single checkbox in OSX) work well. "And yet Microsoft doesn't do that against Apple" Um... because Microsoft has 95% marketshare. They'd be morons to attack the minority platform. Talk about bullying. If Microsoft needs to steal share from Apple in order to grow, they've got a BIG problem. Apple on the other hand, given the market saturation, must take Windows users and convert them to grow, and they are doing just that at a rate triple the industry's growth rate. Seriously, what is wrong with you? This isn't hard stuff to comprehend. The PC market is saturated and growing in the single digits per year. For apple to grow, they need to move people from Windows to Mac. So they make a campaign comparing Windows PC's with Macs and highlighting the things they believe work better. And you take offense at this? That is just stupid and childish. These ads are not a personal attack and only someone who incomprehensibly draws his personal worth from his computing platform would take them as such. But then again, you with your cowardly, anonymous name have resorted to making fun of my real name as part of your infantile tactics. You may recall that Microsoft did, however, put up a total lie "switcher" ad on their website back in 2002 that was written, not by an actual switcher from Mac to Windows, but someone in their PR firm. Plus, they put up a getty image to represent this fake "switcher". What a joke. Just google "fake windows switcher" if you missed that.
Waethorn
on May 2, 2008
"Based on what you're saying, it sounds like the answer is no. That's a shame." again, you presume to know what you're talking about. in fact, printer sharing in Vista is easy. the comment was about XP though, since that was the subject matter at hand. "But then again, you with your cowardly, anonymous name have resorted to making fun of my real name as part of your infantile tactics." AGAIN you presume to know what you're talking about. nobody but you claimed it was anonymous. in fact it isn't. "You may recall that Microsoft did, however, put up a total lie "switcher" ad on their website back in 2002 that was written, not by an actual switcher from Mac to Windows, but someone in their PR firm. Plus, they put up a getty image to represent this fake "switcher". What a joke." you mean like how the representative "Mac" in the TV commercials, ie. Justin Long, runs his website on Apache webserver? Oh but it's not running on a Mac though - it's on Linux!!! LOL!
Avro
on May 2, 2008
@Dipsht Let's see: David Pogue, Walt Mossberg, Dave Raven, Leo Laporte European Law is very consumer orientated. You can have hamburgers -MaccyDees sell Beefburgers here. Under EU law I would be considered a system builder. Got some parts from Apple (Mac Pro), installed some more hardware and software and Ubuntu and Windows OS = system builder As for the Home Network. OS X presents you with a menu with tick boxes. XP gives you gobbly gook and a spaghetti like wizard. I have seen it. Not good. I run encryption on my systems and don't use WiFi hotspots.
johnpapola
on May 2, 2008
"again, you presume to know what you're talking about." - um, actually, I did the precise OPPOSITE and said I don't know about Xp or Vista. Learn how to read AND comprehend. "you mean like how the representative "Mac" in the TV commercials, ie. Justin Long, runs his website on Apache webserver? Oh but it's not running on a Mac though - it's on Linux!!! LOL!" Wow. Nothing like that. Justin Long is an actor and what he does personally is irrelevant. He may love Windows. Who cares? He's playing a roll in a commercial, not personally endorsing the message. I suppose you didn't know that OSX ships with Apache and is turned on with a single checkbox, but I won't presume to know much about web hosting. Only that Apache doesn't rule out the use of OSX. Regardless, it's an idiotic point. And how is that even remotely similar to outright fraudulent advertising by Microsoft using a fake story about a switcher and a Getty image as if it's the author? It's not. hey, if Waethorn is your name, great. Doesn't change your infantile tactics with mine.
Dipsh t Admin
on May 2, 2008
Avro, by mentioning those tech journalists, you just proved my point. Pogue and Mossberg are known shills (IMHO). Show me where they say that OEM licenses can be used. If they say it, than I certainly believe they are wrong. As Paul would say, you gotta love Ed Bott. Here he talks about the Vista upgrade license loophole that isn't (that Paul previously mentioned: http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=420 Just because you physically can doesn't mean that you legally can. The license specifically says that you need to use the OPK and put a COA sticker on your computer. The license also states that if a provision of the license is against the law of a certain country, the rest of the license still stands. I'd like for you to provide me with where the EU says you can violate software license terms. In terms of printer sharing, you mean like this? http://img380.imageshack.us/my.php?image=sharedprinterxpko0.jpg "I run encryption on my systems and don't use WiFi hotspots." Hard disk encryption, or WiFi encryption? If you are talking about WiFi encryption, and you are connected to the Internet, you are susceptible to remote based attacks. Hard disk encryption is also valid. However, since you are presumably using your computer, these things run in the user space, and also are susceptible to the same attacks. Rather than make it easy, setting up simple permissions and a password give you that extra level of protection. Telling people otherwise is just bad advice. "Oh but it's not running on a Mac though - it's on Linux!!!" Certainly doesn't prove anything besides that his hosting company uses the LAMP stack, which many hosting companies do. It does provide an extremely slight chuckle, though.
johnpapola
on May 2, 2008
Dpshit, Wait... you mean that Justin Long doesn't server his website from his home computer??!??! How could that be! Clearly anyone that likes Macs must therefore be hosting their website from their home system or .mac or else they're a giant hypocrite, right? Ah, Waethorn logic. Grasping at straws one post at a time.
johnpapola
on May 2, 2008
@dipsht I thought printer sharing was pretty straight forward in windows. i remember having more trouble getting machines to see each other for file sharing in 2000, but that was so long ago. Why is Waethorn saying Onecare makes it easier?
Dipsh t Admin
on May 2, 2008
John, I really don't know. I do absolutely *zero* printer sharing at home. In my AD environment, it's a totally different ball game, so I can't reasonably compare. Either way, in 2008, the vaunted paperless office is even further away than it was in the 90's.
Waethorn
on May 2, 2008
"I did the precise OPPOSITE and said I don't know about Xp or Vista." ....and yet you still comment on it.....and yet you claim that i don't have knowledge of Mac's (which I do), and yet you slam me for the same. "Justin Long is an actor and what he does personally is irrelevant. He may love Windows. Who cares? He's playing a roll in a commercial, not personally endorsing the message." He is a spokesman and representative of the company - you can't deny that. If you are, you've just lost all belief that you are an accredited advertiser....You even slam a Microsoft PR manager for doing the same.... "I suppose you didn't know that OSX ships with Apache" Again, you're assuming here....and you know what they say about people that assume.... "I won't presume to know much about web hosting." Obviously. "Only that Apache doesn't rule out the use of OSX." Actually, OS X installations of Apache identify themselves with a Darwin tag. His server doesn't. Hence, Linux. "Wait... you mean that Justin Long doesn't server his website from his home computer??!??! How could that be! Clearly anyone that likes Macs must therefore be hosting their website from their home system or .mac or else they're a giant hypocrite, right? Ah, Waethorn logic." No, but likewise, it's not run on an OS X Server either. I'd say that given the circumstances for which you slam Microsoft, this makes perfect logic, and is a perfect example of a flawed endorsement. "Grasping at straws one post at a time." You sure are. "Why is Waethorn saying Onecare makes it easier?" Because it proactively asks you if you want to share them, and then on the other systems, asks if you want to connect to them. You don't even have to navigate to the printer properties to do that - the setup is automatic (except for clicking Yes/No).
Avro
on May 2, 2008
Dipsht Microsoft's interpretation of the law has a record of being a bit off-kilter. The licence could say anything it wanted to, unfortunately that doesn't make it stand up in law. If MS only wanted to have hardware companies have OEM software they would restrict their supplies rather than loading up Amazon and any computer warehouse in the world with them. The tech journalists I referred to spoke of Mac Users being the main buyers of boxed copies of Windows.
subzerohitman721
on May 2, 2008
Sighs..... MS is damned if it does and damned if it doesn't. They are like Barack Obama right now, in a no win situation here. Microsoft attempts to innovate and they are brought down by anti-trust. Apple innovates and they're hailed as genius, while violating the same laws and illegally bundling software. I'll be glad when the DOJ oversight is over and then we'll see what Microsoft can do. I'm sure Microsoft could do over a million different things with Windows but they can't for fear of lawsuit and reprisal. Granted, some of the tactics were illegal and Microsoft paid it dues in court. MS has been doing a lot to change that and be the source for interoptability. But for Apple to turn around and do the same thing, since the majority of its apps are first party with no 3rd party competitor is just wrong. I truly do hope that a democrat wins the Presidency, because I think Apple will be answering to a DOJ/Judiciary committee about its bundling practices that violate U.S. law.
johnpapola
on May 2, 2008
@subzero "Apple innovates and they're hailed as genius, while violating the same laws and illegally bundling software." You misunderstand the law and the history. Bundling isn't illegal. Leveraging a proven monopoly to crush competitors through bundling is illegal. Microsoft's biggest offense in my mind wasn't even IE, which they (to their credit) ultimately developed into a superior product than netscape. Their offense was in twisting the arms of OEM's to do their bidding by threatening to revoke their Windows license. They forced OEMs to pay a Windows license fee for every PC they shipped, even if it didn't include Windows... effectively destroying the market of OS alternatives. They punished OEM's for including competitor software. Go back and review the case against MS. Everyone in the entire industry hated them from HP and Gateway on down the line. They even threatened Apple to pull Office from the mac if Apple didn't switch to IE. Never mind the stunts they pulled with Quicktime. That is evil stuff. Apple is totally entitled to add whatever features they want with no threat of action or reason for it. Now, if it becomes known that Apple is bullying Music labels to abandon other services for iTunes and gains true monopoly power with iTunes... than leverages that... that's another story. But the plain fact is that the content companies hold all the cards. Look at how they've withheld DRM-free music from iTunes and given it to Amazon. But first, you have to prove that iTunes is a monopoly, which can't be done. Everything you can buy in itunes is available elsewhere.
johnpapola
on May 2, 2008
@Waethorn "He is a spokesman and representative of the company - you can't deny that.  If you are, you've just lost all belief that you are an accredited advertiser....You even slam a Microsoft PR manager for doing the same...." I most certainly can deny that. I'm a commercial director for spike. We hire actors to appear for various commercials all the time. It is paid, work-for-hire business and is absolutely different from being a personal advocate. Justin long is playing a "mac". He's an actor playing a character. He's not presenting himself as himself and giving a testimonial. He's not saying "Hi, I'm justin long, and I love Apple and use all their stuff for everything I do." That was the switcher campaign, which Microsoft attempted to copy with that fraudulent testimonial. Again, this isn't hard to understand if you have any degree of logic or intellectual honesty. Think about the insanity of this argument. You're asking us to believe that a fraudulent web ad campaign by Microsoft is ethically equivalent to an actor is Apple's ads having his personal website hosted on linux (probably by godaddy or whatever). This is dork lunacy. If you could have at least shown me that Justin Long uses a Windows machine, I'd call that irony. But it's not hypocracy. There are actors that play the opposite of what they personally believe. It's acting. It's the job. Grow up. Given this obvious and should-be-easy to grasp fact, the rest of your babbling about his website's server settings is irrelevant and a stupid waste of your time. Dude, you banter like a child with these ridiculous dork gotchas. "Yeah... well... snort... Justin Long's web server ...snort... runs LINUX... HA!" Give me a break. Go back to playing with your BIOS updates for your next client and leave the media commentary to people that have a clue.
Dipsh t Admin
on May 2, 2008
Avro, MS doesn't supply those retailers directly. They are most likely purchasing them through a reseller. And concerning the letter of the law concerning the license agreement, the EU has been very unfriendly to MS, and I'm sure they would shoot down whatever they could in the license that they didn't feel was right. I have not seen that. Anyway, your point is moot, because you are in so many words realizing you are wrong, but still willing to stick it to them to save some shillings. The truth is that purchasing an OEM license and using it in the method you describe is wrong. It may physically be allowed, but it is wrong.
Dipsh t Admin
on May 2, 2008
John, technically, using the same reasoning you are applying here, the "Windows switcher" is also not a lie, since they are free to use actors and spokespeople and ad firms to create content. In the same way that Justin Long could be playing the opposite of what they believe, so was this ad, or any ad for that matter. Apple has certainly been known to stretch the truth in their ads, so it certainly is fair game. Concerning iTunes, while you are correct that it is not a monopoly, but they do engage in what I would could call anticompetetive behavior similar to a monopoly. The truth is if you purchased a ton of content through iTunes, and then wanted to buy a non-Apple device, your choices are limited. You can either download some hack software that will certainly be against the "law", tediously burn them to CD's and then back again on another device, abandon your collection, or go and buy a new iPod to replace your broken one. Now I know that some Apple supporters will chime in and say that most of the users would want a new iPod anyway, since they are "superior" to the competition and work "FLAWLESSLY" (their words, not mine). But, you are not left with many good choices. Since Apple was forced in to using DRM, they could have chose the MS route, and licensed the technology so that others could use the iTunes software to interface with other devices and use their proprietary formats on competing players. Remember, we're talking about music here, not software. A person could have just continued buying CD's. And I don't think that anyone will deny that if MS had the 70% marketshare in a similar iTunes fashion, and were locking in users to devices from them with no easy way out, the outcry would be huge, and the DOJ and EU would have already clamped down on it a while ago.
johnpapola
on May 2, 2008
Dipsht, "John, technically, using the same reasoning you are applying here, the "Windows switcher" is also not a lie, since they are free to use actors and spokespeople and ad firms to create content" I respect you, DA, but lets have some honesty here. That switcher ad was a lie. It was being presented as a user generated story in the vein of Apple's switcher ads when in fact it was concocted by Microsoft's PR firm. That's not acting. That's lying. There's a difference. Justin is playing a personification of the Mac itself. He's not there as a mac user. And regardless, Waethorn isn't even claiming that Long is anything but a mac user. Long may be a hard-core mac fanatic. Waethorn is calling Apple hypocritical because LONG'S WEBSITE IS HOSTED ON APACHE. WTF! This is idiocy! At least show me that Long is a die-hard windows or linux fan. That still wouldn't be the same as Microsoft's lie, but it'd be ironic. This whole argument is ridiculous. Even if we were to entertain this stupidity as if it had some remote logic... not one Apple ad talks about the value of Macs as a web server platform. SO THERE. Jesus. Don't defend stupid thinking just to be a "team player", DA in a platform debate. You know I'll admit when you catch me on something. This is not it. As for the iTunes issue... this is really a DRM and studio issue. As for the "MS route". Playsforsure failed, so I don't know why anyone would or should expect Apple to try a similar effort. If MS couldn't make licensed DRM work, why could Apple? The real truth is that Apple's iTunes + iPod business model is no different than gaming consoles, subscription services, cellular carriers or... the zune. Sony had close to 70% share with the PS2. Did that make them a monopoly? Of course not. And iTunes DRM for music is easily and legally circumvented by burning CDs. iTunes CD's even keep your track ID tags on import from it's burns, so it's really super easy. You're making out to be a hassle when in fact burning CD's is a smart and necessary way of backing up your purchases. And, again, it's very easy. I mean, to criticize Apple for itunes when Microsoft just screwed it's MSN Music buyers is pretty bizarre. At least Apple provides a cross-platform store. And Jobs has always been against DRM for music. None of the WM-DRM stores ever came to the mac. That wreaks of windows-monopoly maintenance to me (because that was always the point of it). Video DRM is another matter... but how is this different from Xbox Live, Hulu, Cable, Satelite or any other service offering the exact same content? It's not. So the iTunes as monopoly doesn't have a leg to stand on. The market iTunes is playing in is the media content market, and there's a whole world of totally identical substitutes. And that is the benchmark for Monopoly. No disrespect.
Dipsh t Admin
on May 2, 2008
This whole switcher ad thing is certainly blown out of proportion, but I will give you some leeway and say that it was a lie. This happens often with advertising, and MS later apologized for it. http://www.news.com/2100-1001-961994.html John, don't you realize I was agreeing with you? Justin Long is an actor (not a great one IMHO), and he's doing what he is paid to do. SO THERE! "I mean, to criticize Apple for itunes when Microsoft just screwed it's MSN Music buyers is pretty bizarre." Why? Did I defend MS in their treatment of MSN Music customers, or with their abandoning their own platform with the Zune? No. I also didn't say Monopoly. Rather I said anti-competitive and as an extension, anti-consumer. Notice I also said that music is not software. Software is fundamentally different, and of course has to be run on a particular platform. However, music, well, has been around since way before the computer, and has been able to be freely listened to. And it certainly has not been device specific, at least in terms of format (meaning a CD will play on any CD player, tape, 8 track, whatever). I also mentioned that DRM was forced on Apple and other manufacturers, so they didn't have much choice. Burning CD's? Are you serious? So let's say that own one of these 80 GB iPod's, and you have 10,000 songs to burn. By my calculation, that is over 750 CD's. Is that easy to burn? What if you are the "average" consumer and just purchase music and want to switch to another player. How long will this 750 CD's take to burn, and wouldn't that be a deterrent to switching to another player? Might as well just have bought the CD in the first place and avoided the issue. And while these are still DRM infested songs, at least if Apple did license the software, the user would be able to make that switch. You mention bullying of OEM's as something to dislike. Isn't this a bullying of the consumer, which I would say is worse? And yes, I know, extreme example. And yes, I also know that other DRM players will have the same issues, so don't take this as letting them slide. We got off on this iTunes thing, so I'm addressing that. "None of the WM-DRM stores ever came to the mac. That wreaks of windows-monopoly maintenance " Marketshare and the path of least resistance, my friend. Just wasn't worth it. And if I was in the marketing department, I would certainly say that the Mac market would be very tough to crack, since they are certainly very loyal. It would be a waste of time, and would most likely garner ill regard. Hey, MS offered the license, but I certainly wouldn't be one to take that bait. Anyway, this does become more and more irrelevant with the Amazon MP3 store in play. I really hope that they become hugely successful, and the RIAA can go back under the rock they came from. In the meantime, I'll be using my phone as an MP3 player and listen to Sirius in the car and continue to burn MP3 CD's, even though I did at one time get a free iPod and could have gotten an iPod Integration Kit. Anywho, I'm done with this topic. I'll let you have the last word if you like, but I'm "Audi". PS, I've been noticing a trend with these trackbacks, and these spam blogs seem to just troll blogs for keywords and automatically add them.
johnpapola
on May 2, 2008
Dipsht, Don't mistake my long reply for offense. I know you get the difference between dishonest marketing and Waethorn's non-issue web-host BS. This is a good back and forth. Far more interesting than "pot meet ket" style garbage that comes from Waethorn. My "SO THERE" was directed more at him. "Rather I said anti-competitive and as an extension, anti-consumer." Is it anti-consumer that Xbox 360 games can only play on the 360? Apple's not out to DRM content. They don't care. They have been the sole tech giant to stand up to the RIAA and fight for lower prices for consumers, better terms and ultimately no DRM. The RIAA is the real illegal cartel, and Apple has been on the side of consumers against their gouging hysteria. Microsoft, on the other hand, was happily allowing any level of DRM restrictions they wanted and rolling over to give them a cut of the hardware sales to boot. But that's the difference between Apple and Microsoft. Apple is a consumer company. Microsoft is a company that sells to businesses. Microsoft's instinct is to please businesses like the RIAA. Apple has always had a direct relationship with consumers. "So let's say that own one of these 80 GB iPod's, and you have 10,000 songs to burn." Let's say we stick to actual reality instead of theory and fantasy. 4 billion songs divided by 130 million ipods is an average of 30 songs per ipod. Let's triple that to 90, assuming the userbase is one third of the total sales. That's 5 or 6 CDs. And you'd be doing that as you buy them over time. This is, after all, what Paul recommended doing and why he claimed that MSN screwing it's customers was no big deal. "And as I so often advised people to do at the time, I always burned those purchased tracks to CD and then ripped them back in an unprotected MP3 format" - Paul on 4-24 "Marketshare and the path of least resistance, my friend.  Just wasn't worth it" That's plain wrong. Music downloads is a purely consumer market and Apple has 10 to 20% of the US consumer market. Mac users also buy more music and software that PC users. This is facts that any reasonable market research would have revealed instantly. But windows media was always about propping up the Windows monopoly. It was more of the same "moat" strategy, which is to build a wider and deeper moat around the castle that is the windows monopoly cash cow. Except that it failed because it sucked. Sync problems. Poor integration. Bad players. Failure. Now Microsoft has copied Apple's business model with the Zune, which hasn't taken a point from iPod marketshare, but instead has feasted on the corpse of former partners like iRiver and Creative. That's what you get when you build your business on Windows moat technology. I know you didn't defend the Zune. I'm not bashing it either. It's a nice player. Too bad it's just being allowed to whither on the vine without and real improvements or support. Competition is good. MS just can't stay focused enough to execute. Peace brother. I think we see more eye-to-eye than... meets the eye?
Waethorn
on May 3, 2008
"Even if we were to entertain this stupidity as if it had some remote logic... not one Apple ad talks about the value of Macs as a web server platform. SO THERE. Jesus." Calling me "childish" and the using terms like "SO THERE" with religious aftertones just shows that you can't argue against my statement. Arguing with you consists of this: "OH NOES! Someone is criticizing Mac." "OH NOES! My pro-Mac comment was torn apart." *backpeddle* *backpeddle* etc.
lotsamystuff
on May 3, 2008
Waethorn spewed, "Never called a Mac user an idiot, sorry". Dude, you're a troll and a liar. You've used the term several times, and once referred to me as a "queen b1tch". Don't try to take the high road. It doesn't suit you. Go back to the gutter from where you crawled.
Waethorn
on May 3, 2008
"Dude, you're a troll and a liar. You've used the term several times" go ahead and try to prove it. you are the master of the chat history here after all. i would've expected proof with a blatant comment like that.
lotsamystuff
on May 5, 2008
Waethorn spews: "I'm going to guess by your grammatical errors that your IQ matches your age. I don't work for a store that unsuccessfully sells Mac's. " *chortle* A criticism of a grammatical error followed by...A GRAMMATICAL ERROR. Waethorn, you're an endless source of amusement. "go ahead and try to prove it." OK...Scroll down to the last comment on page one, Wae: http://www.windowsitsecurity.com/windowspaulthurrott/article/articleid/9... I'll be expecting my apology any day.
Waethorn
on May 5, 2008
"I'll be expecting my apology any day." I wasn't calling Mac users idiots - just you. Keep trying though.
lotsamystuff
on May 5, 2008
Wae, I know I shouldn't wrestle a muddy pig like you, but you did say you never called "a Mac user an idiot". And you did (as I just showed). You used the singular, not me. You've also hurled other invectives over time, and now you try to take the high road? It doesn't work, sorry.
Waethorn
on May 5, 2008
"It doesn't work, sorry." that's right - your argument doesn't. i accept your apology.
johnpapola
on May 5, 2008
LOL. Great work lotsamystuff. You've demonstrated Waethorn's amazing block-headedness and hypocrisy for even the most casual onlooker to enjoy. And yet he still claims "victory" in an argument he plainly and objectively lost. Waethorn, you're the worst. What a stubborn, childish buffoon. Repeating "your argument doesn't hold up" isn't actually arguing. It's sticking your fingers in your childish virtual ears and screaming "I CAN'T HEAR YOUR, I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!". You and my 3 year son could have some great debates with each other. You would claim 2 + 2 = 5, then when demonstrated the contrary with a calculator, simply insult the other person or change topic or spew some inane garbage like "pot meet kettle". Seriously. You deny actual text that's right here on the page in black and white. It's stunning. And ridiculous. But that's the mind of stubborn, know-it-all, platform zealot. Any discussion with you always heads down the same road to the gutter, regardless of who's arguing with you because you can't debate with dispassionate logic and are unable or willing to stay on topic or acknowledge when you've been proven wrong (see above "idiot" quotes).
Waethorn
on May 5, 2008
Re: losta By digging into the chat history (as I told you to) you just proved my original point that you are a troll, and an idiot. Re: pap By backing up losta, you just proved that the Mackie peanut gallery doesn't have anything better to do here.
johnpapola
on May 5, 2008
I call 'em like I see 'em. And he won that one. No contest.
Waethorn
on May 5, 2008
"I call 'em like I see 'em. And he won that one. No contest." thanks. that proves several points i've made already about Mackie's too.
johnpapola
on May 6, 2008
Here's a few more to add to that list for the Mac. Apple's support beats the best in the PC world by almost 20 points for customer service. They also took top position in most categories except the budget ones. http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/business/appleaday/blog/2008/05/macs_bea... "Overall, this year’s CR report card looks as more favorably upon the Mac than ever. That’s the sort of positive reinforcement that could encourage more potential Windows users to switch in the months ahead, maintaining the Mac’s market share growth momentum."
Waethorn
on May 6, 2008
"That’s the sort of positive reinforcement that could encourage more potential Windows users to switch in the months ahead, maintaining the Mac’s market share growth momentum." what growth momentum? Mac share DROPPED in the last couple months!!! HAHA! keep seeing rainbows in those storm clouds though.
subzerohitman721
on May 7, 2008
@John The Sherman Antitrust Act states... "Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal". The Act also provides: "Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony." I'm afraid you got the United States vs Microsoft anti-trust suit wrong. You can re-read the legal case if you wish. The core issue of the anti-trust suit was the illegal bundling of Internet Explorer to the Microsoft Windows browser. The secondary issue was what you stated, MS was twisting the arms of OEM's to do their bidding by threatening to revoke their Windows license. The original findings of fact was never overturned in court. The settlement was brokered by DOJ and Microsoft so that MS could avoid being broken up. The original Findings of Fact would have most likely unbundled I.E. from Windows and broken the company into 2 separate entities. However, the bundling issue for Apple isn't just iPod and iTunes together. Its also locking out other competing devices from accessing the iTunes Store. Also, other music stores are locked out from accessing the iPod. This makes Apple the sole source of all media for the device. Yet I can pick up any generic media playing device and access multiple stores. Now that Apple is the number one digital music store in the United States and accounts for 70 percent of the world's online digital music sales. Also, iTunes is bundled with Quicktime, which as you know is an Apple product. Therefore you have two Apple software's, an Apple Store, and an Apple device all bundled together without any true competitor. Even Microsoft's Zune player is at a severe disadvantage along with every other player on the market. It doesn't matter that other stores and devices are out there. They cannot directly compete fairly to the iPod and iTunes service. Nor can customers take their iPod to a competitor. This violates the spirit of the free market enterprise of U.S. commerce law. There are several lawsuits pending in U.S. courts based upon this interpritation of the Sherman Act. None of which has been resolved yet by a court or Apple. I n my opinion and many others, I do believe based upon the original Findings of Fact in the United States vs. Microsoft case, that Apple is in violation of the Sherman Act and the Clayton Act. Now if there was a DOJ that would handle the case properly, Apple would be in serious legal trouble. Now if Apple were to open both the iPod and the iTunes store up to competition and devices, they could avoid a costly legal case.

Please or Register to post comments.

Related Articles

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
Apr. 18, 2013
Article

What I Use: On the Road 21

Every so often, I publish an updated version of my “What I Use” document, which details the technology products and services I actually use day-to-day. Since I’m currently on my third business trip in five weeks, this is perhaps an ideal time to discuss the technology products I rely on when I travel and a few related points....More
Mar. 6, 2013
Article

What I Use: March 2013 33

Lots of changes since November, including a new PC-based home server running Windows 8, several new smart phones, new PCs and tablets, new cloud backup, Office 365 Home Premium and a nice doubling of my Internet speeds courtesy of Verizon FIOS....More
WinSuperSite.com
Related Penton Sites
Copyright © 2013 Penton Media, Inc