Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24
  1.    #1  
    Imagine if Bill Gates wrote this memo, in the spirit of Steve Jobs' attack on Adobe. How long before the Apple Jihad would be declaring war, Apple would be whining to the Justice Department and EU competition bureau, and the ****storm would commence?

    Yet Steve is rooking Adobe and its developers, full stop, by the same sort of abuse that would happen in this "theoretical memo" below.

    Thoughts On Apple

    Microsoft has a long relationship with Apple. In fact, we met the Macintosh''s founders when they were in their proverbial garage. Microsoft was their first big developer, writing the Microsoft Office suite for their new Macintosh computer. Microsoft invested in Apple and owned around 15% of the company for many years. The two companies worked closely together to pioneer integrated office suites and there were many good times. Since that golden era, the companies have grown apart. Apple went through its near death experience, and Microsoft was drawn to the corporate market with our Windows products. Today the two companies still work together to serve their joint customers--Mac users buy around five percent of Microsoft's Office products--but beyond that there are few joint interests.

    I wanted to jot down some of our thoughts on Apple's products so that customers and critics may better understand why we do not allow iTunes, iPhones, iPods, QuickTime and Macintoshes on Microsoft networks and operating systems. Apple has characterized our decision as being primarily business driven--they say we want to protect our market share--but in reality it is based on technology issues. Apple claims that we are a closed system, and that theirs is open, but in fact the opposite is true. Let me explain.

    First, there's 'open.'

    Apple's hardware and software products are 100% proprietary. They are only available from Apple, and Apple has sole authority as to their future enhancement, pricing, etc. While Apple's products are widely available, this does not mean they are open, since they are controlled entirely by Apple and available only from Apple. By almost any definition, Apple is a closed system.

    Microsoft has many proprietary products too. Though Windows is proprietary, we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open. Rather than use QuickTime, Microsoft has adopted MPEG4 and Open Video--all open standards. Microsoft's browsers and mobile device OSes all ship with high performance, low power implementations of these open standards. HTML5, the new web standard that has been adopted by Microsoft, Apple, Google, and many others, lets web developers create advanced graphics, typography, animations and transitions without relying on third party browser plug-ins (like QuickTime). HTML5 is completely open and controlled by a standards committee, of which Microsoft is a member.

    Microsoft even creates open standards for the web. For example, Microsoft began with a small open source browser project and created the IE engine, a complete open-source HTML5 rendering engine that is the heart of the IE8 web browser used in all our products. Almost every desktop web browser uses the IE engine. By making its technology open, Microsoft has set the standard for desktop web browsers.

    Second, there's the "full web."

    Apple has repeatedly said that Microsoft OSes cannot access "the full web" because 75% of video on the web is in QuickTime. What they don't say is that almost all this video is also available in a more modern format, Windows Media, and viewable on PCs, Zunes, and Windows Mobile. YouTube, with an estimated 40% of the web's video, shines in an app bundled on all Microsoft mobile devices, with the PC offering perhaps the best YouTube discovery and viewing experience ever. Add to this video from Vimeo, Netflix (NFLX), Facebook, ABC (DIS), CBS (CBS), CNN (TWX), MSNBC, Fox News (NWSA, NWS.AU), ESPN, NPR, Time, The New York Times (NYT), The Wall Street Journal, Sports Illustrated, People, National Geographic, and many, many others. Microsoft users aren't missing much video.

    Another Apple claim is that Microsoft computers cannot use iPods since we have blocked them. This is true. Fortunately, there are over 50,000 games and entertainment titles on Microsoft, WalMart, Amazon and Real music stores, and many of them are free. There are more games and entertainment titles available for the PC platform than for any other platform in the world -- including Apple's limited, closed mobile platforms.

    Third, there's reliability, security and performance.

    The Pwn2Own conference recently highlighted Apple products for having one of the worst security records in 2009. We also know first hand that the Macintosh is the number one reason Microsoft networks crash. We have been working with Apple to fix these problems, but they have persisted for several years now. We don't want to reduce the reliability and security of our Windows ecosystem by adding Apple products.

    In addition, iTunes has not performed well on Windows devices. We have routinely asked Apple to show us iTunes performing well on a Windows device, any Windows device, for a few years now. We have never seen it. Apple publicly said that iTunes would ship a reliable version in early 2009, then the second half of 2009, then the first half of 2010, and now they say the second half of 2010. We think it will eventually ship, but we're glad we didn't hold our breath. Who knows how it will perform?

    Fourth, there's battery life.

    To achieve long battery life when playing video, mobile devices must decode the video in hardware; decoding it in software uses too much power. Many of the chips used in modern mobile devices contain a decoder called Windows Media--an industry standard that is used in every Blu-ray DVD player and has been adopted by Microsoft, Dell, HP, Gateway, Acer, ASUS and many other companies.

    Although Apple has recently added support for Windows Media, the video on almost all Macintosh computers currently requires an older generation Flip4Mac decoder that is not implemented in hardware and must be run in software. The difference is striking: on a Windows PC, for example, Windows Media videos play for up to 10 hours in great quality, while videos decoded on Macintoshes play for less than 5 hours with poor performance and resolution.

    Until recently, Apple didn't offer a video API at ALL for its own systems, and only recently was Adobe able to develop a CODEC that used it for Flash. Microsoft abandoned video on Macintosh years ago, partially for the same reason.

    When websites re-encode their videos using Windows Media, they can offer them without using Apple at all. They play perfectly in browsers like Internet Explorer and Firefox without any plugins whatsoever, and look great on Windows machines.

    Fifth, there's the Cloud.

    iPod and iPhones were designed for PCs [personal computers] using hardware cables, not for net capable devices that sync over the network. For example, all iPods rely on "USB connections," which upload data and OS updates from a network-connected computer to an Apple device. Microsoft's revolutionary cloud updates for Windows, mobile devices and Zunes don't use cables. Most Apple devices will need to be redesigned to support the cloud. If developers need to rewrite their Apple applications to support the cloud, why not use modern technologies like Windows, Windows Media, and .NET?

    Even if Windows machines ran Apple iPods, iPhones and iPads, it would not solve the problem that most Apple apps need to be rewritten to support the cloud.

    Sixth, the most important reason.

    Besides the fact that Apple is closed and proprietary, has major technical drawbacks, and doesn't support the cloud, there is an even more important reason we do not allow Apple products on Windows. We have discussed the downsides of using iTunes to play audio and video, but Apple also wants developers to adopt iTunes to create media that run on our operating systems.

    We know from painful experience that letting a third party layer of software come between the platform and the developer ultimately results in sub-standard quality and hinders the enhancement and progress of the platform. If developers grow dependent on third party development libraries and tools, they can only take advantage of platform enhancements if and when the third party chooses to adopt the new features. We cannot be at the mercy of a third party deciding if and when they will make our enhancements available to our developers.

    This becomes even worse if the third party is supplying a cross platform development tool. The third party may not adopt enhancements from one platform unless they are available on all of their supported platforms. Hence developers only have access to the lowest common denominator set of features. Again, we cannot accept an outcome where developers are blocked from using our Microsoft innovations and enhancements because they are not available on our competitor's platforms.

    iTunes is a cross platform media tool. It is not Apple's goal to help developers write the best Windows content. It is their goal to help developers write cross platform content. And Apple has been painfully slow to adopt enhancements to Microsoft's platforms. For example, although Windows' Win64 stack has been shipping for almost nine years now, Apple has yet to adopt it fully. Apple is the last major third party developer to fully adopt Windows 7.

    Our motivation is simple--we want to provide the most advanced and innovative platform to our developers, and we want them to stand directly on the shoulders of this platform and create the best apps the world has ever seen. We want to continually enhance the platform so developers can create even more amazing, powerful, fun and useful applications. Everyone wins--we sell more devices because we have the best apps, developers reach a wider and wider audience and customer base, and users are continually delighted by the best and broadest selection of apps on any platform.

    Conclusions.

    Apple products were created during the PC era--for PCs and cables. iPod, iTunes, iPhone and Macintosh is a successful business for Apple, and we can understand why they want to push it beyond PCs. But the mobile era is about powerful, open devices, the cloud and high performance Microsoft standards--all areas where Apple falls short.

    The avalanche of media outlets offering their content for Microsoft's PCs demonstrates that Apple is no longer necessary to watch video or consume any kind of content. And the millions of apps on Microsoft's Windows platform proves that Apple isn't necessary for tens of thousands of developers to create graphically rich applications, including games.

    New standards created in the mobile era, such as Windows Media, will win on all devices. Perhaps Apple should focus more on creating great Windows tools for the future, and less on criticizing Microsoft for leaving the past behind.

    -----

    How long before the weeping and gnashing of teeth would commence?
  2. i_maq's Avatar
    Posts
    383 Posts
    Global Posts
    397 Global Posts
    #2  
    Haha nice reversal
  3. #3  
    Good lord, how long did it take you to do this?
  4. #4  
    Somebody needs a hobby
  5. #5  
    Despite others wanting to disregrard this post, I have to agree on the dubious stance of Apple's. They get a free pass for locking down and micro-controlling everything and forcing everyone to go their way or no way. While other companies would get blasted for doing the same things. And Microsoft seems at the top of the list for anti-trust accusations.


    P.S. Read this for thought.

    http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...r-on-flash.ars
    HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

    And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!
  6. #6  
    haha thats pretty awesome. I think it goes to show that really any company can spin events to their favor with some clever wording.
  7.    #7  
    For the Apple trolls wanting to know how long it took me to do it, it was about two minutes, using the powerful search-and-replace functionality that Microsoft tools provide on the original Steve Jobs memo. (Not all of us use watered-down, overpriced Apple products).

    As for "getting a life" and "spending too much time," people who troll other companies' message boards to promote their favorite brand are ones to talk!

    As for the primary selling point, yes, it is indeed a double-standard by Apple, and one that is unlikely to succeed, long term.
  8. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by The Phone Diva View Post
    Despite others wanting to disregrard this post, I have to agree on the dubious stance of Apple's. They get a free pass for locking down and micro-controlling everything and forcing everyone to go their way or no way. While other companies would get blasted for doing the same things. And Microsoft seems at the top of the list for anti-trust accusations.


    P.S. Read this for thought.

    Pot, meet kettle: a response to Steve Jobs' letter on Flash
    agreed. They have very anti-competitive policies.


    Most people who hate on adobe, are people who have never used their creation tools. I haven't really used flash (well i've made some horrible flash movies, but i haven't really used it), but i've used Photoshop, indesign, and Dreamweaver to know how amazing adobe softwares are. And a bunch of my friends use premier, and from what i've heard it doesn't disappoint. Does flash have it's issues ? Yea it does, but it's the best current platform. And apple not letting flash on their platform is one thing, but saying you can't use adobes tools to port them is plain out horrible.


    and to all those saying aww, well in a few years html 5 is going to do this, and do that. Well, that may happen, but why are we comparing what html 5 will be to what flash is now. Lets compare it to what flash will look like 1-2 years from now.

    Anyone who takes photography seriously uses Photoshop. Maybe not for every shot, but will use it at one time, or another, and theres a reason for that. Alot of people use indesign, and theres a reason for that. People use dreamweaver, adobe premier, illustrator, and others for a reason. And theres a reason why so many websites use flash. And not flash does not = advertisement, cause on mobile platforms it will only be used when you click on a flash box. And it will only be used for that flash box.
  9.    #9  
    HTML5 also doesn't fix the fact that there's lots of content out there that is Flash now and will NEVER be HTML5 due to age or whatever.

    Why should I be forced to dump legacy tech like Flash and access to my older media just to do things Apple's way? The choice should be the user's, not Apple.

    Steve's little jihad on Adobe (which also extends to Java, BTW -- Java is banned in i-devices) is like him announcing that GIF, JPEG and MP3 are all banned as well, and everyone should wait for web sites to migrate to PNG and MPEG4. What about all the content produced in GIF and JPEG that will never be migrated?

    I want the whole web -- warts and all.
  10. #10  
    Wow, this is really awesome. Very clever. There is another thread on this topic, and I encourage you to post this over there...

    Even though I agree that HTML5 will eventually reduce the importance of flash, I think the king-making behavior of Steve Jobs is really stupid. Sending the storm troopers to raid the Gizmodo editor's house was even worse.

    I think this letter does a great job of taking Jobs' words and showing how bad it would sound if written by anyone else...

    Well done. Too bad I can only thank you once!

    +1,000
  11. #11  
    One of the things that I am very upset about is that everyone seems to think flash does 1 thing and that is stream media. Flash does a hell of a lot more than that.

    1) Streams media -- Youtube, etc
    2) Flash Animations -- Newgrounds, StickPage, etc
    3) Flash Games -- Newgrounds, Miniclip, etc
    4) Website Navigation and interactive experience

    HTML 5 only allows for 2 of those 4 right now. And the fact is that if Jobs worked with Adobe they could probably make flash much more efficient on OSX. I hope Adobe extends is withdrawal of flash production not only from Apple's mobile line up, but also from their laptops and desktops and turn their effort to the good linux people out there.

    HTML 5 may well replace Flash in the future, but right now it doesn't because there isn't a standard yet. When the standard gets resolved we can make things work. Personally I think after Google fully integrates Flash into Chrome and Android, Flash is going to become even more popular and there will be a huge backlash at Apple. Hopefully Adobe doesn't go back to Apple and just lets them be.
    Master Pants, Lord of the Universe, Groupie of Blaize

    Need help with your webOS device? PM me for help!
  12.    #12  
    Dear Steve Jobs:

    How do I watch ***** Duck in HTML5 on an iPad?

    http://www.sho.com/*****duck

    There are hundreds of thousands of sites like this -- culturally relevant content from the last decade that will NEVER work on an Apple device. Steve Jobs' control freakery is literally deleting important cultural and artistic work, communicated over the internet, from our collective consciousness.
  13.    #13  
    Oh boy... seriously, the site censors the word "q.u.e.e.r."?!?
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by brmiller1976 View Post
    Oh boy... seriously, the site censors the word "q.u.e.e.r."?!?
    it sensors Hit ler, and fan boy.

    Which I hate cause i love making references to hit ler, and i hate having to pause to realize the person is saying fan boy...
  15. #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by brmiller1976 View Post
    Dear Steve Jobs:

    How do I watch ***** Duck in HTML5 on an iPad?

    http://www.sho.com/*****duck

    There are hundreds of thousands of sites like this -- culturally relevant content from the last decade that will NEVER work on an Apple device. Steve Jobs' control freakery is literally deleting important cultural and artistic work, communicated over the internet, from our collective consciousness.

    He wants you to use only major sites that bent over backwards to create iPad/iPhone/iPod Touch compatible apps and sites for him. That's what he meant when he said "Adobe has repeatedly said that Apple mobile devices cannot access “the full web” because 75% of video on the web is in Flash. What they don’t say is that almost all this video is also available in a more modern format, H.264, and viewable on iPhones, iPods and iPads. YouTube, with an estimated 40% of the web’s video, shines in an app bundled on all Apple mobile devices, with the iPad offering perhaps the best YouTube discovery and viewing experience ever. Add to this video from Vimeo, Netflix, Facebook, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, ESPN, NPR, Time, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Sports Illustrated, People, National Geographic, and many, many others. iPhone, iPod and iPad users aren’t missing much video."


    Either that or he thinks the entire web consists only of major sites that cater to him. Adobe is right in that respect, you do not get access to the true full web.
    HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

    And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!
  16.    #16  
    Yep. And there's NO value to site developers or users to have site developers redevelop existing content for Apple devices rather than invest their energies in creating NEW content.
  17. #17  
    Sounds like the justice department might agree that Jobs should be held to the same standard as Gates...

    Apple Could Face Antitrust Inquiry Over Flash Ban [REPORT]
  18. #18  
    Nice spin on the article. Made me laugh, but the message has got a good point.
  19. #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by nimer55 View Post
    agreed. They have very anti-competitive policies.


    Most people who hate on adobe, are people who have never used their creation tools. I haven't really used flash (well i've made some horrible flash movies, but i haven't really used it), but i've used Photoshop, indesign, and Dreamweaver to know how amazing adobe softwares are. And a bunch of my friends use premier, and from what i've heard it doesn't disappoint. Does flash have it's issues ? Yea it does, but it's the best current platform. And apple not letting flash on their platform is one thing, but saying you can't use adobes tools to port them is plain out horrible.


    and to all those saying aww, well in a few years html 5 is going to do this, and do that. Well, that may happen, but why are we comparing what html 5 will be to what flash is now. Lets compare it to what flash will look like 1-2 years from now.

    Anyone who takes photography seriously uses Photoshop. Maybe not for every shot, but will use it at one time, or another, and theres a reason for that. Alot of people use indesign, and theres a reason for that. People use dreamweaver, adobe premier, illustrator, and others for a reason. And theres a reason why so many websites use flash. And not flash does not = advertisement, cause on mobile platforms it will only be used when you click on a flash box. And it will only be used for that flash box.
    I use Photoshop and like it very much. However that does not excuse the mess that is Flash on both OSX and Linux. For the Adobe CEO to blame Flash performance issues on Apple is incredible. It was just a few months ago where the same guy admitted there were Flash issues on OSX and they were hard at work fixing them. In addition, this does not explain why Flash is also terrible on Linux machines.

    I can honestly say that I do not ever miss flash on my iPhone, iPad, Pre Plus, or Nexus 1. I will never load Flash on any mobile device I own unless there is a clicktoflash version also made available.

    Adobe has failed for years to fix Flash for the Mac, why should Apple allow it on the iPhone?
  20. #20  
    Notice that no one here is defending Adobe Air? I guess every company has to have one really bad product. Just sayin'
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions