4 ms·
> (or does someone want to tell me that the differences between Windows 1.0 and Windows 7 hasn't impacted on any developers anywhere?) Actually I think Microso
by zmmmmm 15y ago
> (or does someone want to tell me that the differences between Windows 1.0 and Windows 7 hasn't impacted on any developers anywhere?)
Actually I think Microsoft is partly responsible for the sense of self-righteous indignation that developers have when they get displaced. They deliberately held back on introducing even basic features into Windows for a remarkably long time. Things like anti-virus, paint programs, text editors, photo management - even opening zip files - were left with token or no support for 5 to 10 years after they were no brainers in terms of expected or useful functionality. Of course, MS had (and still has, though less so) a regulatory threat to worry about that nobody else does.
- redthrowaway 15y agoGoogle's regulatory threat is probably stronger now, although Apple is looking to control more of the user's interaction with their product. I think Apple gets away with it because their spread makes sense to regulators: They make the product, make the software to make it work, and provide the services to make it useful. That makes sense to regulators in a way that integrating a browser with the operating system didn't, even though it's the exact same thing.
- zmmmmm 15y ago> Apple gets away with it because their spread makes sense to regulators I'm not sure it's that. I think it's just that their strategy of only ever targeting the top 20% most profitable customers means they never broach market shares that make them a threat to competition by the conventional measures used by regulators.
- redthrowaway 15y agoI think you're right, there. By focussing on the high end, they likely avoid any accusation of monopoly and so avoid anti-trust investigations. That they approach a monopoly on the markets they target doesn't really matter if their market share in total is <10%.
- statictype 15y agoApple steamrolls over 3rd party apps (including implementing features that they rejected another app for including), developers get angry and... this is somehow this is partly Microsoft's fault. Interesting.
- Tyrannosaurs 15y agoNo, we're saying that suggesting that this is something that only Apple do is wrong - most large software companies do it.
- statictype 15y agoWell, the poster I was replying to was kind of saying the opposite. Implying that Microsoft 'spoiled' developers by not implementing those things themselves.
- Tyrannosaurs 15y agoActually you're right, he is. That's... odd. There's sort of a point there but MS dropped that approach a good many years ago (look at security centre, movie maker and so on) so I'm not sure it's really relevant today.
- zmmmmm 15y ago> look at security centre, movie maker and so on Even still, anti-virus and movie maker are not default installs (and not even delivered on the install media) which is at least partly attributable to MS still being hesitant to cross that line.
- Tyrannosaurs 15y agoI seem to have movie maker installed and I certainly didn't download it. Possibly it came down in a Windows Update (I tend to just say "everything") but if that's the case it's surely only the finest of whiskers away from being a default install.