After reading this PCWorld article, I think you'll have no choice but to agree that the parallels between Microsoft and Apple are striking and compelling. After that, we can have a mud-slinging contest discussion on whether that is good, bad, or capitalism at its best (or worst) ...
Yes, I dont feel Apple is any way near Microsoft. It has just got a good success in ipod and Iphone. The problem with Iphone are already showing up. I dont think apple has what it takes to be Microsoft
Gee, and I thought this post would bring out all of the Microsoft bashers :-)
I certainly agree that it wasn't bundlign IE (or anything else) that made MS great. It was the functionality and value their products provide.
I like Mike Elgan, and he's right about iTunes lock-in - it sucks. The software is awful, especially on Windows. I've tried all the alternative third party iPod manager apps though (including paying for a few commercial ones) and none of them are as seamless or have all the features. It's made especially worse by the fact Apple tries to port the "OSX" UI experience to their Windows apps.
At least the DRM is slowly disappearing from the ITMS catalog - this at least makes it much easier to back up your music, and/or shift it to another AAC compatible player that isn't an iPod.
The reason the iPod is so successful is because it's pretty much the best and most intuitive player out there. My gripe isn't with the hardware, only the software that Apple bundles.
I've already put down my money for an iPod Touch to replace my latest 2 month old iPod Nano. And I'll replace that too with an iPhone when they appear here in Europe later in the year - as long as it's fully unlocked.
I'm not buying a Mac though :)
Can anyone explain to me why I need iTunes to play Quicktime content?
A good article. Apple has always bundled their products more tightly together than Microsoft. Not only now, but starting back with their Mac OS and proprietary hardware.
I never understood why they got a "free pass" on that.