Re: OT Re: RIP Steve Jobs... What if he had never been?

[tEd ® KiLLiAn <tedkillian@charter.net>]

Thanks for the insight Mark.

On Oct 9, 2011, at 9:46 AM, Mark Hamburg wrote:

> 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.