Who is more monopolistic Microsoft or Apple? - Page 6 - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums
Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

post #76 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-23, 01:39 PM
Member #1
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 47,716
Quote:
The difference is that Adobe created a product that people wanted, filled niche and won market share on it's own merits.
Exactly how is that different from Apple?



hugh is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #77 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-23, 02:52 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Dandelion City
Posts: 7,131
If Apple can convince billions of people to buy their products on merit, I wish them well. When they achieve 80%-90% market share and tell Verizon, AT&T, Bell and Rogers to stop selling competing products or they will pull their iPhones, they have become a second Microsoft.

The Silverlight vs Flash war is all about royalties. They give them away to consumers but businesses must license the technology. At the end of the day, whoever wins majority market share gets more money in licensing royalties. That's why MS wants Silverlight on every Windows desktop. The company who owns the technology used on most devices makes the most money. The IE vs Netscape war was not just about getting consumers to use IE. It was about getting market share for Microsoft technologies in businesses such as web servers, phones and third party desktop applications. MS was losing web technology market share to Unix/Linux and companies like Sun, IBM and Netscape until they pushed IE onto every Windows desktop.

At 20 I had a good mind. At 40 I had money. At 60 I've lost my mind and my money. Oh, to be 20 again. --Scary
ScaryBob is offline  
post #78 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-23, 03:16 PM
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kitchener, Ontario
Posts: 597
"If Apple can convince billions of people to buy their products on merit, I wish them well. When they achieve 80%-90% market share and tell Verizon, AT&T, Bell and Rogers to stop selling competing products or they will pull their iPhones, they have become a second Microsoft."

That about sums it up completely for me.

Fortunately for consumers after losing the iPod MP3 market, Apple now faces some pretty good competition - Google and the MS & Wintel PC makers that don't want to lose the smart phone/tablet market to Apple. Competition is good - keeps innovation going.

Best DYI TV antenna plans - I use the Bi-Quad Indoor TV Antenna
hkaye is offline  
 
post #79 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-23, 06:06 PM
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Dent View Post
Windows is much better than you think (reading most of the complaints here just makes me laugh), and Linux is for servers.
Base on your response so far, I don't see you understand the point at all so no analogy is too many. Or like I said you just argue for the sake of argument. Despite what you think, I'm not a hater or freedom fighter. I feel no pain and there's no perception. Linux is not my favorite cause and last time I checked I'm older than Linus Torvalds. I see all the basic facts (and more). The world has always moved on and you still don't understand that that's not the point. I don't know what makes me laugh more... "Windows is much better than you think"? Or " Linux is for servers"?

Quote:
Oh, the pain. All right, guilty as charged - I have never seen this problem, because I just don't have the uncontrolable urge to look for alternatives of IE
See, this is your problem. You refuse to learn facts about the outside world and wonder why people on the outside world think differently?

Quote:
But I guess, you are too young, and still imagine a perfect world, where everything goes exactly according to the ideas of justice inside your head, and have the energy to fight for it.
Don't cross the line to personal attack.
CHrisCHu is offline  
post #80 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-23, 10:45 PM
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Ville Emard, Montreal, Qc
Posts: 214
I love the way people continue to think that HTML5 is the solution to all their problems. Don't you realize that H.264 is the reason that Apple is pushing HTML5 in the first place because they, along with other companies, own the licensing rights to that technology? Do you actually think Apple would be doing this if they didn't have a financial stake in it?

I've always used whatever I've felt comfortable using and what got the job done at the most comfortable price point. And I'll continue to do so in the future. If Apple ever come up with something that is cost effective and open to all developers, whether they choose to make their products cross platform or not, and free of Steve Job's absolute and total control, I might actually try it.

Until that day comes, if it ever does, I'm quite happy to continue running my i7 PC that cost me less that a third what I would have had to spend to get anything close to it's performance in an aluminum Mac shell.

Oh yeah...I've been running Microsoft operating systems on my computers since I built my first 286 system and in all those years I have had exactly ONE virus, about 15 years ago on a Win 95 system ,which I got from an infected driver diskette - remember those? - that I received along with a demo printer for evaluation purposes.
barcham is offline  
post #81 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-24, 11:20 AM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Calgary
Posts: 2,771
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHrisCHu View Post
See, this is your problem. You refuse to learn facts about the outside world and wonder why people on the outside world think differently?
Seeing you like analogies (slanted, but nevertheless), let me try this. The Internet browser is the glass. The Internet content displayed in it is the wine. While I see a lot of people seeing value in upgrading the glass for whatever reasons, some other people just can't figure out such reasons, since it would cost you time and effort, and the best you can hope to get as a reward is the same result.
Well, if you have a grudge with the glass maker, everything makes perfect sense.
Arthur Dent is offline  
post #82 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-24, 12:35 PM
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kitchener, Ontario
Posts: 597
Quote:
Don't you realize that H.264 is the reason that Apple is pushing HTML5 in the first place because they, along with other companies, own the licensing rights to that technology?
It's a popular standard already in use (including Blu Ray) -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/M...mplementations

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...264/MPEG-4_AVC

Best DYI TV antenna plans - I use the Bi-Quad Indoor TV Antenna
hkaye is offline  
post #83 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-24, 01:36 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Dandelion City
Posts: 7,131
HTML5 and H.264 are standards that can be used by anyone. The purpose of these standards is, in part, to reduce the use of proprietary protocols that are owned by individual companies. While a company may own the implementation of the standard, such as a hardware chip or software program, no one commercial entity owns the standard.

This brings us back to the Apple vs MS debate. Despite having closed systems, Apple has a long history of using standards when they exist. QuickTime is probably the most notable exception. Microsoft has a long history of ignoring standards and of trying to force their own proprietary solutions on the industry and end users, particularly Windows users. Examples are WMA, WMV, non-standard HTML extensions, non-standard Java implementations and Java-like scripting languages, proprietary document formats and even products using proprietary music formats that they sold to consumers and then abandoned, leaving them stranded. That's just off the top of my head so there are quite likely many more examples. MS also has a history of keeping it's proprietary formats secret and using them in ways to stifle competition in an attempt to gain or maintain a monopolistic market share.

Microsoft's practices have also caused disruption and confusion in the marketplace (to their own advantage) as well. For example, there are many examples of web sites that didn't or don't work with non-MS browsers due to incompatible Microsoft web servers or extensions. Microsoft also gave their own software products and software developers an advantage by keeping proprietary software interfaces secret.

At 20 I had a good mind. At 40 I had money. At 60 I've lost my mind and my money. Oh, to be 20 again. --Scary
ScaryBob is offline  
post #84 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-24, 01:54 PM
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kitchener, Ontario
Posts: 597
Here is a list of companies that have patents in the H.264 standard -

Apple Inc.
DAEWOO Electronics Corporation
Dolby Laboratories Licensing Corporation
Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute
France Télécom, société anonyme*
Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Foerderung der angewandten Forschung e.V.
Fujitsu Limited
Hitachi, Ltd.
Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V.
LG Electronics Inc.
Microsoft Corporation
Mitsubishi Electric Corporation
NTT DOCOMO, INC.
Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corporation
Panasonic Corporation
Robert Bosch GmbH*
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
Scientific-Atlanta Vancouver Company
Sedna Patent Services, LLC
Sharp Corporation
Siemens AG
Sony Corporation
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson

These patents are pooled together and administered by MPEG LA, LLC. a privately held company.

A list of the actual patent numbers in this pool can be found here -

http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/...s/avc-att1.pdf

Best DYI TV antenna plans - I use the Bi-Quad Indoor TV Antenna
hkaye is offline  
post #85 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-24, 08:30 PM
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Victoria
Posts: 366
The really scary part this is FAT patents.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScaryBob View Post
MS also has a history of keeping it's proprietary formats secret and using them in ways to stifle competition in an attempt to gain or maintain a monopolistic market share.
The judicial system in Germany has recently been co-opted into upholding the FAT patents. Consider the implications of this. Your camera or whatever usb storage medium might just become not usable if Microsoft forces the Linux kernel fat stack out of the kernel by demanding royalties as they threatened to do a few years back.

Show me a consumer device that does not have fat storage (with the fortunate exception of Motorola and other stbs ).. My BlueRay Linux based LG dvd deck does... SO do many other Linux based consumer devices.. Heck even Android cell phones do, but at least Android if it loses fat capability can still read and write ext4...which is essentially meaningless to the average cell phone user. So essentially Microsoft can have Google and many manufactures that use fat storage under the Linux kernel by the shorts if it chooses to sue for royalties from the fat stack.

If this is not coercion through monopolistic practices then I do not know how to define illegal business practices!
EricReesor is offline  
post #86 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-24, 08:48 PM
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Dent View Post
Seeing you like analogies (slanted, but nevertheless), let me try this. The Internet browser is the glass. The Internet content displayed in it is the wine. While I see a lot of people seeing value in upgrading the glass for whatever reasons, some other people just can't figure out such reasons, since it would cost you time and effort, and the best you can hope to get as a reward is the same result.
Base on your as-long-as-A-works-why-bother-to-know-anything-about-B attitude, how do you know my analogies about A-vs-B are slanted than your wine glass analogy? And more importantly how do you know your wine glass is not actually a leaky paper cup that you can still drink your fine wine in?
CHrisCHu is offline  
post #87 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-24, 11:55 PM
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by barcham View Post
If Apple ever come up with something that is cost effective and open to all developers, whether they choose to make their products cross platform or not, and free of Steve Job's absolute and total control, I might actually try it.
I love it when I read stuff like this. You do realize that comparing the 'cost effectiveness' and 'openness' of Apple to Microsoft is a losing proposition for Microsoft don't you?
  • Every Mac OS X system ships with media management system (iTunes), image management system (iPhoto), video editor (iMovie), DVD authoring software (iDVD), web site authoring (iWeb), music authoring (GarageBand), rich text editor (TextEdit), back-up system (Time Machine), graphing calculator (Grapher), built-in ZIP compressor/decompressor, disk management tools including the ability to burn CD and DVD media and create virtual disk images (Disk Utility), New Oxford American Dictionary and Oxford American Writer's Thesaurus (Dictionary)
  • Every Mac OS X system ships with a built-in spelling and grammar checking system
  • Every Mac OS X system ships with support for Microsoft Exchange. No need for an MS Office licence
  • Every Mac OS X system ships with the Adobe Flash player pre-installed
  • Every Mac OS X system ships with the ability to read and write the PDF file format (print to PDF/Preview)
  • Every Mac OS X system ships with the Java pre-installed
  • Every Mac OS X system ships with the ability to network with Windows based systems
  • Every Mac OS X system ships with the ability to share network based resources with Windows based systems
  • Every Mac OS X system ships with BootCamp, everything necessary to run a Windows environment on Mac hardware including all the necessary hardware drivers for Windows to access Mac hardware.
  • Every Mac OS X system ships with the ability to read and write to Windows formatted disks
  • Every Mac OS system ships with the complete Xcode development environment with support for Objective-C, C, C++ and Java programming languages. Anyone can develop and distribute applications for Mac OS X. Anyone can sign up for a free Mac OS developer account and gain access to developer documentation and developer tool updates.
  • Anyone can access and download the open source core of Mac OS X, Darwin, the base of the Mac OS as well as many parts of the developer tools and iPhone OS.
  • Apple is a major initiator of and contributor to many open source projects. I'll let you do the research, there are just too many to list here.
  • Mac OS X also supports many open standards right out of the box but again there are too many to list here. You can do the research if you're really interested.
In addition, because of the Mac OS's certified Unix underpinnings and POSIX compliance, many free and open source projects easily compile on Mac OS X using Apple's built-in developer tools.

Apple also distributes free of charge, iTunes for Windows, QuickTime for Windows, Bonjour (ZeroConf) networking for Windows, Safari for Windows, Apple Software Update for Windows, AirPort Utility for Windows, MobileMe Control Panel for Windows.

Now if you can demonstrate to us how Microsoft is more 'open' or 'cost effective' or how Windows supports open industry standards I'm sure we'd all like to hear it.
Gino Cerullo is offline  
post #88 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-25, 10:31 AM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Calgary
Posts: 2,771
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHrisCHu View Post
Base on your as-long-as-A-works-why-bother-to-know-anything-about-B attitude, how do you know my analogies about A-vs-B are slanted than your wine glass analogy? And more importantly how do you know your wine glass is not actually a leaky paper cup that you can still drink your fine wine in?
Both analogies are slanted, it's just that one of us thinks that one of them is not.
As for the leaks, good luck with the "Try our non-leaking glass, in which can you can pour up to 90% of your favourite wines!" campaign. Google didn't think that would work either, so they gain market share by attaching their glass for free on every wine bottle, the producer of which agrees to put it on.
I seriously think that you have two great misconceptions - that I really haven't tried Chrome, and that Chrome is anything other than a tool for further establishing Google's monopoly on world wide online advertising.
Arthur Dent is offline  
post #89 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-25, 08:55 PM
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oakville Ontario - 8th Line and Upper Middle Road
Posts: 532
Wayne - I gotta say - this is almost a troll type thread starter - and you know I love ya from our OTA/HTPC discussions!

Seriously?

MS stole Apple UI tech and created Windows (I can link if you dispute this). They stole Netscape tech and created IE (well known - no need to link). They then bundled IE with Windows and blackmailed PC makers to use IE or lose Windows (this ended badly for them in court). This is all illegal.

Apple has created a closed ecosystem of hardware and software. You buy in - you get the stuff. This is in NO WAY monopolistic.

It is only "muddied" because Apple decided to develop iTunes for Windows - allowing PC users to also use iPods, iPhones, iPads etc... and tap the larger market hoping for the halo effect to get converts/customers. So now we equate Apple with MS? Nope - no way.

Software Sells Systems - an old Apple motto.

They control the software and hardaware - just like every other cell phone maker and even MP3 player maker. Who cares? We only compare Apple to MS because we somehow think they compete - or are using the same business model. They do not - on either counts.

I applaud Apple for having a supervised App Store. It means stability for me as an end user and successful evolution of the platform.

However, the DEVELOPERS are all independent business people with access to the store. Build a good APP - you are in - you make money if the market agrees.

This is in NO WAY monopolistic or illegal.

It is SMART.

OTA CM4228-CM4221 Combined DTVPal DVR AppleTV 40GB Harmony 659 / 880
Unibody MBP 15 c2d 2.66 Mac Mini 2009 iPad 32
iPhone 3GS 2 Apple TV 40GB
tenstu is offline  
post #90 of 127 (permalink) Old 2010-04-25, 11:03 PM Thread Starter
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Scarboro
Posts: 6,331
I am not denying that some of MS' activities are illegal. I am just saying that the things that Apple is doing these days are also very much in the vein of a monopolist.

It is hard to deny that Apple has a monopoly for the sale of applications on iDevices.

I am not saying that I hate either company - after all I was an early adopter of the iPad, at least for Canadians - 2 weeks ago, and I also was a very early adopter for the iPod as I bought one as soon as it was released for Windows( which is before they had a version of iTunes for Windows - they used Musicmatch in early incarnations).

I use Windows on about a half-dozen computers in my home and also a laptop and destop PC at work. But I hate the direction that MS has taken with Windows Media Center, especitally from a Canadian perspective, and I badmouth them on this issue all the time.

I also own, but never use, a Dell Axim x51v PocketPC that runs Windows Mobile 5. That device was not the same as an iPod Touch but it was much more open and would, with the addition of third party players, play a variety of video and audio files and it had an open browsable file system just like your PC.

I TOTALLY LOVE my iPad. I am a gadget freak and it may be the best gadget I have ever owned. But I hate the fact that it won't play 99.9% of the video files that I own - Apple appears to not want the iPad (or other iDevices) to be able to play files like AVIs, MPEGs, TSs and MKVs (generally recorded from TV via my SageTV server) and it appears that Apple will not approve video players for the iPad (other than their own). Sure I can convert my existing video files to Apple friendly formats like .MP4 or .M4V but that takes a lot of time and is a pain in the butt.

I hate the fact that you cannot easily just transfer any file to the device. I hate the fact that from a Windows PC that you cannot just copy a photo file over to the iPad - you have to sync a folder. I don't trust that Apple will ever approve a video player like VLC (which plays pretty much every video format) for use on iDevices. I can understand Apple's perspective on this but it doesn't smell right to me and in the long run and (IANAL) but they are going to run in to legal problems. The current feud with Adobe over Flash highlights this whole issue.

My Netbook (an Acer Aspire One) cost 50 % of what my iPad cost and is much more flexible than my iPad running either WinXP or Linux Mint. But the iPad is much more of a joy to use and the battery lasts a lot longer. I have hardly touched this netbook since I got my iPad.

Many folks may disagree, but that is the way that I see it. Both companies put out some excellent products but they also do things that are disconcerting and that are not in consumers' best interests.
Wayne is offline  
Closed Thread

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome