VVORD.RU . , .


1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33  
with me but that wasn't the saddest part.
I would have gladly left Apple if
Apple would have turned out like I wanted it to.
People in the company had
very mixed feelings about it.
Everyone had been terrorised by Steve Jobs
at some point or another and so there was a certain relief
that the terrorist will be gone
but on the other hand I think
there was an incredible respect
for Steve Jobs by the very same people
and we were all very worried
what would happen to this company
without the visionary, without the founder,
without the care, without the charisma...
Apple never recovered from losing Steve.
Steve was the heart and soul and driving force.
It would be quite a different place today.
They lost their soul.
The years after Jobs left were the most
profitable for Apple Computers.
Apple people worked hard, they played hard.
They made the computer business
look like a beach party
and with a median age of twenty seven
the company was very sexy too...
...maybe too sexy.
There was so much sleeping around that
they came up with a travel policy back then
that men would share rooms with other men on the road
and women with other women
just to settle it down a bit.
They applied the California lifestyle
to the computer industry
and the computer industry
would never be the same again.
In this bizarre promo to inspire their sales force,
Apple stressed that the Mac's ease of use could
liberate the pathetic prisoners of the IBM PC.
We'll fight them in the office and the classroom
and the desktop with superior weapons.
With improvements to the hardware
and the boom in desktop publishing,
Mac production went into overdrive.
By 1987, Apple was selling a million a year. IBM numbers!
The Mac minted money,
half its 2000 dollar price was pure profit!
Apple arrogantly assumed their stuff was so good,
consumers would always pay a premium for it.
Big mistake.
The Mac really ought to have
won the battle for the desktop
OK, it was more expensive than an IBM PC
but if what you wanted was a friendly
easy to use system and surely everyone wanted that,
then this was the only game in town
at least that's what the boys at Apple thought
but they weren't reckoning on one man, Bill Gates.
Gates saw that the Mac's GUI represented
a long term threat to Microsoft's money machine,
to DOS, the clunky operating system
that sat inside every IBM PC.
So Bill had his boys create a GUI
that sat in top of DOS
rather like building a fancy facade
on an old building.
They called it Windows and
it wasn't much at first
but it was good enough to
defend the DOS franchise.
February or March of 1984,
which was just right after the
Apple Macintosh had been introduced.
And at that point in time we were firmly convinced
that we needed to bet on graphic user interface.
First with the Macintosh
and then with Windows.
At Microsoft, it was a long and
often frustrating struggle
to find a GUI solution
that challenged the MAC.
I know the feeling!
For years teams of Microsofties slaved in
their windowless offices to build Windows
refreshed by an endless supply of free sodas.
I was the development manager for Windows 1.0
and we kept slogging and slogging
yeah it took us i don't know about seven versions
just a few versions to get
things right for 1990, that's right.
Windows may at first have been
a joke compared to the Mac.
But Gates is persistent. Slowly it got better.
And the guys at Apple got worried.
As each new feature appeared on the Windows gui,
the more they thought Microsoft
was copying the features on the Mac.
So finally they sued Microsoft,
accusing them in a long legal battle of
stealing the look and feel of Apple's GUI.
The look and feel which is how it looks,
the experience of using it was not patentable
but it was copyrightable
but there was no precedent law.
This was going to be a precedent setting case.
But it was a period of five years where, Microsoft

- :
- 2

© 2010-2024 VVORD.RU