Much of what Shayaan says is true, and all of it worth consideration.

I concede that everybody "steals" in order to innovate. It is an ugly, partisan choice of a word. However, the point does remain that Apple are far better at this activity than Microsoft. Hence, one can say that Apple leads, and microsoft follows.

I differ on the point that the difference between the graphic and sound editing performance is not related to the OS. Here is why: My own rage against microsoft stems from losing work. That's it. There were simply too many times when I sat down at a PC and did several hours work, and then lost the lot, because the system froze. If your time is valuable, this matters. I suspect this is a common reason for the ill feeling towards microsoft. Now, again, this probably only affect people who get paid for performance, and not by the hour.

Regarding the non-friendly development environment, I agree completely, and believe that this area of Apple's public relations is a matter of serious concern. If you want to see where Apple is going bad, look here. I put this down to the unholy alliances that Apple has formed with communications companies, which are not much better than tax farming operations. Much as I admire folk at Apple, I could put some heads on pikes for the way I have been treated by the development crowd in that company. How serious this is for the longer term, I leave for others to comment. I simply don't know.

Regarding the extension of the OS towards enterprise, and away from stand alone personal computers, this point must also be conceded. HOWEVER, Apple are working on it. They are targeting "enterprise for the rest of us". Whether they will succeed is an open question. Again, here we strike the unfortunate precedent set by the people at Apple who are handling the development community. If that is the quality of the leadership in the Enterprise initiative, it may very well be that Apple have goals beyond their capacity. A brilliant design team can't magically conjure an Enterprise framework; it is going to take business knowledge. I think we need to see change in leadership here, or there are problems ahead. If these problems are solved, however, there is huge room to grow. That is one thing Microsoft does not have.

So, yeah, there are serious challenges for Apple. Most crucially, they risk becoming blind to their weaknesses through hubris.

Most of them are outright stolen from other places. Microsoft does the same thing. I don't see why it's fine for one company to do it under the guise of 'innovation', and then another does it and it's stealing.

That said, I think Apple has a limited market share because of a few reasons. First and foremost, it's a limited tool. You can't do everything on it you can do on a Windows machine, but conversely you can do EVERYTHING on a Windows machine you can do on a Mac. In terms of graphics editing or sound editing, Apple is better but not because of the OS — because of the software that's available.

Which brings me to point #2, that Apple does not have a friendly development environment, especially for the iPhone/iPod Touch. Microsoft focuses almost all of their resources on easy development, and to that part they have largely succeeded.

Lastly, Apple has no supporting products other than an iPod or iPhone that tie into the OS. Microsoft has built a community of software, first starting with the OS, then adding business tools like BizTalk, then database components like SQL Server, then productivity applications like Office, which ALL tie into other products like System Center for monitoring and application deployment, and further into Sharepoint for document collaboration and storage, and it goes on and on. With Apple, you have simply a pretty OS which doesn't extend at ALL. Apple has shown no innovation in the area of moving to make the computer part of something 'larger' than itself, be it a business, a network, a community or anything else. And that's it's biggest killer.

Microsoft will continue to do well, but Apple must continually 'innovate' (or steal) in order to maintain any positive market share. And when it comes long enough that people simply don't buy Steve Jobs coming out and introducing a product like the Macbook Air (which is total garbage), Apple will be in for a very tumultuous fall. They need to spread their wings outwardly, not try to go faster straight ahead as their limited product offering will prevent them from making the 'long haul' that Microsoft is fully committed to doing.

For the record, I do like Apple, and my iPhone is great — I just can't buy into the marketing and hype like other folks can. An OS is a TOOL, it is a means to an end — and if somebody can offer you a tool that is just as good but cheaper — then there's no benefit for Apple to stay in the market at all.

BUT… it is not an Apple rip off, because it is on a desktop, NOT on a phone. Sure, the pinch gesture is exactly the same idea, but hey! This is a DESKTOP. Completely different.

The most hysterical thing is, of course, that it doesn't work. The guy tries to show the feature and for the first six times he tries the pinch gesture, nothing happens. He says "Oh well, you get the idea."

Yeah,. We get the idea, alright. Microsoft are so devoid of ideas that they steal something useful on a phone, and put it on a desktop. Then it doesn't work.

Apple, on the other hand, has already received payments for 13 million iPhones sold over the last 15 months and has so far only booked about 20 % of those payments. So Apple’s deferred revenue (at least as far as they broke it out in last week) is real money in the bank, Microsoft’s is not.

I would like to hear some accountant comment on that."

If I'm correct we're talking about revenue and not cash. When to recognize revenue. Aren't all Iphones subsidized by Att, so apple has to receive money from att? how do you guys know that att doenst pay over a 2 year period to apple for each iphone sold? so att could withhold money from apple?

The problem Apple is addressing is the TRANSITION time when GAAP does not approximate non-GAAP. This occurs in the period when you go from no deferred sales, to having deferred sales. After, the transition, in about 8 quarters, the GAAP numbers will look alot like the non-GAAP ones. The difference is the GAAP numbers apply a smoothing effect on sales, as they average over 2 years.

Even if MS uses GAAP and has subscription revenues, they have already gotten past the transition period. There's no significant difference between MS's GAAP and non-GAAP numbers.

So, the comparison is valid.

That being said I'd like to see how Apple's growth charts now compare to Microsoft's growth charts in the past. Then we'd actually have a good comparison.

http://sciencedefeated.wordpress.com/

The key word here is "probably". Because even if you look up what constitutes a monopoly, and while you are at it look up what constitutes abusing a monopoly, you are going to have look it up again tomorrow.

Because, as this poster implied, monopoly laws are written in the sand.

The EU has shone a huge white light on the subject, and the result is that everyone is now blind. Essentially, whether you have a monopoly depends on how you (or rather 'they') define the market. And whether you abuse that monopoly depends on whether you are defined as having a monopoly, simply because precisely the behaviour that is required of directors in small companies is declared illegal in large companies. So if you are competitive, secretive, you don't share technology, you work to build commercial advantages etc etc.

All these behaviours are required by law for the directors of small companies, and they are illegal for monopolies.

So it becomes crucial to know how the market is defined. Is an Ipod a computer, or a portable music player? Is an operating system software, or is it an operating system on personal computers?

As with all feudal systems of market control, the whole game comes down to having friends on the board of wise men who define the rules as the game is being played.