Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
I've been an active Mac user since 1995, due to my profession of being in the graphics industry. Macs were the de facto standard after the industry started moving away from analog procedures (stat cameras, film/development chemistry, and 'burning' of printing plates) and from proprietary computer systems. Now, in my industry, software is king, and it's being developed for both platforms. The software looks and feels identical, minus a few keyboard shortcuts. So, the platform wars are moot from that perspective. So, with that experience driving my perspective, I see Apple as the Porsche, and PC's as the 'kit cars'. One cannot deny that Porsche has some of the best industrial design around. Everything fits, everything looks fantastic, and the whole 'package' looks and feels like it was created with an integrated purpose and aesthetic, from concept to completion. In contrast, you can't deny the 'wow' factor of a 500+ horsepower 'kit car', with a supercharged V8, purple metal-flake paintjob (with flames, of course), and custom machined aluminum steering wheel! They both have their place, I guess, and will win the hearts of some while alienating others. Rich On 10/9/11 9:46 AM, "Mark Hamburg" <mark@grubmah.com> wrote: > On Oct 7, 2011, at 4:13 PM, Rick Walker wrote: > >> On 7/22/64 11:59 AM, todd reynolds wrote: >>> I hope, when Bill Gates dies, and he most certainly will, that he'll be >>> memorialized for all the money he's used to make the life a little >>> better >>> for those who struggle. It is indeed in ways that Steve Jobs did not >>> point >>> his efforts to. Bill Gates has done some pretty fantastic things and >>> changed the world in similar ways even. I do hope he gets his due, and >>> before he's unable to enjoy it. good thing to think about, Jean-Paul, >>> thanks. >> Bill Gates has also had an enormous impact on the world (and I, too, >> applaud >> his amazingly generous >> humanitarian aid and global consciousness raising efforts with his >> charitable >> foundations after >> his professional work was finished. >> >> But a distinction that I think most people are referencing (at least >> unconsciously) in their >> tributes is that Steve Jobs always has had a very, very strong aesthetic >> mixed in with his >> business efforts. >> >> The look of Apple products; their ergonomic appeal; their conscious >> attempt >> at ease of usage >> (even when, to me it's irritating because they become increasingly >> difficult >> to customize) have all >> been a huge aspect of his contribution. >> >> I don't think this single aspect can be overestimated. >> >> Their has always been a sense of style, grace and beauty associated >> with his >> career. >> >> In a world that seems increasingly complex and perplexing, his >> aesthetic >> vision has been like >> a cool refreshing shower. >> >> I'll forgive him that his computers run really hot. >> I'll even most likely by a PC laptop the next time I"m forced to, but >> I really do get and appreciate where his heart has been the entire time. >> When you talk about billionaires, that says a hell of a lot. > > When I was at Microsoft, people would ask why it was that when Apple > took a > harsh and controlling stance the industry and public accepted it in a > way that > they never would from Microsoft. They wondered whether this had to do > with > Microsoft not being in the valley. But, of course, that would only > explain the > industry reaction and not the public reaction. My answer was that it had > to do > with the stated goals of the companies. Microsoft's goals were about a > PC on > every desktop running Microsoft software. It was a goal about reach and > about > reach for Microsoft. Apple's goals were about building the best > computer.(*) > Microsoft's actions would therefore be interpreted as being about > extending > Microsoft's reach. Apple's actions would be interpreted as being about > their > pursuit of the best computer. The former is about the company. The > latter is > about the product. The former directly benefits no one other than > Microsoft. > The latter most directly benefits the customer. And, so similar actions, > viewed through those very different lenses get viewed in very different > ways. > > Mark > > (*) One may disagree about whether their choices led to better > computers. If > one values customization, they clearly did not. But that disagreement > doesn't > undermine the notion that they were making decisions on the basis of > what they > felt would make for better computers. >