Apple's corporate ethos evolved from the work of men like Steve Wozniac, Alan Kay, and Bill Atkinson. Microsoft got its corporate roots from Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer. It's like comparing Albert Einstein to a carnival barker. One will fundamentally change the world, while the other sells lots of tickets to the freak show tent.

Talk about old news, come on

Allchin set the record straight on the Windows Vista Team Blog, http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2006/12/12/title.aspx

The old e-mail was sent out to spark change in Vista and motivate people to make Vista a better OS, and it did

Has this become MacWatch and they just forgot to switch the logo?

Having used MS for the last 15 years, I have been ready for something new the last 5 at least. My next computer is a MAC!!!!

What a load of marketing whooey that WINDOWS VISTA BLOG is. It's not even a BLOG. It doesn't allow COMMENTS. Microsoft doesn't really want to know what people think.

(note, the blog says "anonymous comments" are not allowed, but if you create an account, you still can't comment so NO comments are apparently allowed.)

Reading the VISTA BLOG is thrilling. "Windows Vista is a better product because of the tight collaboration between Microsoft and our customers, partners and community (you!)"

WOW, ( ME! ) WITH AN EXCLAMATION POINT !!!! GOSH !!!

They forgot to make every other letter a different color and flash.

How about Vista is a better product because it works. I'd settle for that. Or maybe bug free, or any of the things in Allchin's memo.

Face it, Allchin would prefer a MAC. He said so. He can back peddle all he wants but he as Apple Envy. And he should. They are a far superior product and the world is discovering them.

Its a shame that Microsoft's products aren't half as good as their marketing fodder.

Oops, sorry. They do allow comments if your signed in. My bad. I swear the comment box wasn't there the first time. dunno.

MicrosoftDoesntWantYourOpinion, you clearly have a grudge against Microsoft.

When they said, "Windows Vista is a better product because of the tight collaboration between Microsoft and our customers, partners and community (you!)"

They are not saying Windows Vista is better than OS X/Linux because...., they are saying that the feedback from customers, partners and the community made it a better product than it would have been without their help

Well, I've read the email and the "context" that is supposed to change the meaning of the statement, and...I fail how it changes the meaning of the statement. Allchin still said he'd buy a Mac if he didn't work at Microsoft. When you show me the whole email, he says the same thing, but with supporting evidence to bolster it. What am I missing that supposedly changes what the statement meant?

I wish I had bought a Mac rather than my recent Dell purchase. My next computer at home will certainly be a Mac. Why do people think that someone at Microsoft has to say that Macs are better to prove that they are? I bought a PC because I have a load of PC software. But now that it can run cleanly on a Mac I will never look back and thats a fak Jack.

Okay... I start by saying I'm a Mac-Nut and love the innovation and fun that Apple is bringing back to the industry... however....

I would also defend Jim too and his intent of his email was shock value with Vista team and the executives at MS. All I see is a product manager trying to fire up some support for a better product and a better team. They need it.

Microsoft has to be feeling like they have lost their edge.... lets face it... no one cares what Gates said at CES this week... but everyone knows what Steve said!

In or out of context, it still reads the same for me. What am I missing here? Sounds like he envies what Apple does with their operating systems, hardware and support as they are all tied together into a tight, fast, efficient way of doing business on a computer. I like that, so does Allchin. Finally, we agree on something!

As someone who makes a living supporting MS systems, I can honestly say, I use a Mac. I have for years. The reason, when I get home, I don't want to have to fight with my computer just to browse the web or check e-mail. The fact that I can do *almost* everything I need to on it is why I don't fire up my Dell very often. It might even be about 5 months out of date on patches because I use it so infrequently. This being said, MS will continue to give the end-user a product that is born out of wedlock. Case in point, where is the stop button on IE 7? On the other side of the page. Why? When you issue a new version of your biggest product, Office, it shouldn't come with a disclaimer stating that you should sign up for classes to learn how to use Word. They have ruined a perfectly good product line by listening to their user groups. These are the fine brains that brought us the XP start menu. WHERE ARE YOUR PROGRAMS? I could go on and on and on. But I won't. Cheers.

I worked at MS from '98 through '02, for one of the product groups under Allchin (more like Allmouth). For him to flap his piehole about quality, features, and packaging is ridiculous. He's the main reason those things are lacking at MS, not Gates, not Ballmer...ALLCHIN!!!

In gross, but fitting terms, he's the kid who shits in the pool, jumps out and points at it, saying "Look what somebody did!"

He shoulda stuck to guitar...something else he's mediocre at.

Chris...

Why do you accuse me of holding a grudge? Did you read my post? Maybe I wasn't clear. Let me go over it again.

1) The Windows Vista Blog is marketing material. Not a source of News. If you want to get your news from the Microsoft Marketing Dept. feel free. By the way, you can learn all you need about marketing departments from Dilbert. http://www.unitedmedia.com/comics/dilbert/

2) I was incorrect in the accusation that they didn't allow comments. I'm sincerely sorry. It wasn't until I returned using Internet Explorer with Javascript enabled that I was allowed to make comments. So Kudos to MS for allowing comments. Yea!

3) The "Microsoft is better" quote is an example of the worthless information posted on the site you suggested we all visit. It doesn't really matter what the intent was because it's meaningless marketing hyperbole. But thanks for explaining it. I'm sure the customer's who get stuck with products that don't work, partners who Microsoft now competes against (like adobe and antivirus), and "community" whatever that means feel better.

4) Even MS Executives prefer Macs. They wrote it down (oops).

5) I never said anything about Mac OSX or Linux being better. Although plenty of others have. Like Information Week for example: http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=196800670

This is a good piece of commentary on Mr. Allchin. When does everyone think MS is getting out of the OS business? They're much better at making toolsets (like Atlas) and integrated playthings (like XBox). My prediction is that Windows, as an OS, is marketable and competitive for about 5 more years. After that, Mr. Allchin is right - it's an OSX and Linux world.

I have been using win/dos for more than 25 years and I have used Apple computers on and off since the IIe came out. Recently we brought a new Intel MacBook into the house for both a personal system and to use in my work for website cross system checks and I have to say that neither is better.

I have grown to love XP and liked Win2KPro and cringe at mistakes unleashed on the ignorant masses that was WindowsME. OSX and Mac in general is based on the less is more principal but it is all too common that you run into something you want to do using your mac and you just can't. Websites aren't supported as there is no reliable browser with Activex support anymore since IE is no longer available. Setting up a home network--which I have done tonnes of times (fairly easily) in all sorts of flavours of Linux and BSD--is a sheer pain in OSX. Same with setting up a network printer--sheesh could you make it more cumbersome. If you were a non-admin type you would either give up, have to hire out or spend your weekend on the phone with Apple to get it to work. Lets also remember that you can't compare OSX with Windows because who knows what type of junk someone is running Windows on vs the supposedly tested and optimized hardware Macs run on--Never mind that the MacBook that sits in my office was the second one that they had to send me as the first was Dead On Arrival no boot, no lights; just a shiny white paper weight shipped all the way from China.

Allchin has said it, if I recall, Scoble said it but who cares. If you think about it, when have you said something like, "If I worked there I would do it this way or that way" . He shouldn't be held to any higher standard. He was lighting a fire under some a$$es to get some action on what he thought was a dreadful move. While Vista is looking poorly as it stands now I would hate to see what he was working with at the stage which he wrote the email.

Yeah, I used to bash MS, Gates and Ballmer but I am too busy working (with a reliable XP setup) to care anymore. BTW it has been said many times that great products create passionate opinions, bad products that are truly bad will wither and die.

What a joke. Mac's are the "Models" of the computer world, they look pretty and can do little else.

My wife is an avid Mac user, half the time the thing doesnt work, locks up, and just generally sits there and looks pretty. She is always angry that I cant fix it, it must afer all be the ISP provider, the application vendor etc, never her crappy OS.

My PC is about as easy to use as you can get, the differnce is I can do bad things if I am an idiot, on the Mac you are protected from yourself of course, which translates to much less usability.

Having experienced both the only people who choose Macs are tards who think that pretty=useful.

Most of the so called design programs work exactly the same on both platforms, people are victims of Apples marketing without all of the Microsoft apps that people run on them they would be useless.

I can't seem to understand one thing... if Windows is crappy, has virus, does not look cool, does not have cool features, has horrible user experience, hogs resources, yadda yadda... how come they have 95% of the market share?

(now don't give me the "corporate bullying", "abuse of monopoly" thingy. if you haven gotten that far, that means you are already sucessful!)

Nathan, why do people smoke? why do people gamble? why do people do all kinds of self destructive stuff? Probably because it was sold to them.

Windows has definitely gotten better over the years and I'm sure Vista is an improvement. But Linux and Mac have improved as well. So now Microsoft is in the position of IBM or DEC just before they slid into the "also ran" position. In short, don't expect MS to hold 95% of the market share a year from now. It will start in the home/consumer market and then it will move into the enterprise. (I suspect, and maybe Joe W. can help with these numbers, that Apple has gained a fair share of the notebook market for 20 somethings in the last couple of years.) Its all about GROWTH. Investors want it. Employees want it. Customers want it. Microsoft has not delivered. Apple does. Even Open Source has. Hence, Microsoft products suck.

You happy with Vista? Good for you. But if you haven't actually tried a MacBook, Itunes, or an Ipod (and I suspect Iphone and the real sleeper, Apple TV) then you should 'cause Apple has made using a computer fun again.

todd writes: "My wife is an avid Mac user... She is always angry that I cant fix it, it must afer all be the ISP provider, the application vendor etc, never her crappy OS."

Why is she dependent on a Mac-ignoramus? Too bad she isn't posting her distress signal here, I'd tell her to go to any number of sites who would happily offer her help.

That iLife '04 video is still years ahead of Microsoft's digital vision.

Vista is yet another in a long line of Mac OS inspired ripoffs courtesy of our friends in Redmond.

Why would you want a half-baked copy of Mac OS X when you can have the real deal. My iMac which I use everyday has been on and working fine for:

19:46 up 81 days, 1:06, 3 users, load averages: 0.58 1.30 1.17

The Windows XP box I have here for testing barely goes a week without requiring a restart, or restarting for me (thanks WIndows Update!).

NotAllBad:
People smoke, gamble etc. but not 95% of the population! anyway, the point I am trying to make is that Mac OS might be technically better but people find more value in going with Windows. Because of the way Microsoft designed, partnered and marketed Windows, people find this more affordable, having more choices of hardware, finding more applications to play with. OS is not just a standalone product - it is a platform and creates an ecosystem around it.

Going with Mac will reduce options people have, increase TOC. Like they say, you could spend millions of dollars to invent a pen that could write upside down so that astronauts can use it or you could just use a pencil! I am talking about the overall approach MS took towards their OS (since the DOS days) and that is the reason I am willing to go with MS platform anytime over a Mac.

And BTW, one would never know how vulnerable/unstable Mac OS would prove to be if they had 95% market share. Hackers would rather spend tjeir energy attacking Windows than spend their energy focussing on 5% of the market. Really, we are not comparing oranges to oranges.

I'm still waiting for the "disclosure" of Allchin's subsequent email that begins with, "What I really meant was...".

I disagree with Wilcox's assertion that this e-mail was somehow taken out of context. I don't see any change in context. If it was taken out of context then by who? The news media? The context appears to be exactly what I remember the news reprots being... Allchin thinks Longhorn sucks, that MS is going in the wrong direction, is envyious of Apple's strategy and technology, says he would buy a mac if he didn't work for MS, encourages MS to go in apple direction. It doesn't appear to have been taken out of context at all...

Mac bigots suck too. I've supported MACs and they have just as many problems as Windows machines.

The context, BillyBobThorton, is that Allchin thought Longhorn suck. The context being the meeting was three years ago. The context being he was frustrated in the direction Longhorn development was going, and that he wanted it to change dramatically.

I think he was successful. I doubt he feels the same way today about Vista as he did in 2003 about Longhorn.

Why is that so hard for Macintosh affectionados to comprehend?

Nathan; Good point about the 95%. Here's the very short answer.

1) Macs are better engineered from the ground up than Windows P.C.s. It's true. This isn't just some Mac Fanboy garbage. Ask an engineer.

2) Choice: Macs ship with almost everything the "average" home user needs and wants. Better, its easy to use, stable, secure and looks good doing it. Maybe I'm getting old, but I don't need a large selection of crap to chose from. I know if I choose the Mac, it will work and be quality.

3) Price. Macs start as low as $600 for the Mac Mini and hit price points on the way up. If you actually look at what your getting, Macs are cheaper than an equivalent PC. Sure you can buy 2 PCs for the price of a Mac Pro. But they are not the same thing, don't fool yourself.

4) Certainly Macs will increasingly come under attack. But they are actually better engineered. You can't even open the CD drive without authenticating to the operating system. Nothing electronic is safe.

5) I have grown up using Windows and will continue to use Windows (at work) and I don't currently own a Mac. I see your arguments all the time from "windows groupies". Frankly, I don't think they hold water. All it took was a few weeks access to a Mac to appreciate what Apple is doing. Go check one out.

I disagree with Joe. There is no hidden meaning or hidden context behind Jim Allchin's email.

I know because I was feeling the same way that year. I grew up using Windows. I studied in school using Windows. I worked using Windows. By 2004, I was just fed up with the constant lockups, crashes, and massive security holes with Windows... This was acceptable when Windows was a game machine or just a word processor for school, but things changed when I needed to use it as a work machine for programming.... eventually after enough frustration (especially with the new XP licensing terms) I just bought a Mac - Never been happier. (To minimize my tech support duties to my family: mom, uncles, aunts, cousins; I also got them to switch to Apple - same result)

In my opinion the only good MS product out now that's good enough in terms of being secure, stable, and fast is Xbox 360.

Forgot to add - the only reason Jim Allchin feels he needs to explain the "true context" of the email is because like Paul Allen, he owns a good bit of MS stock... doesn't like the situation, but he likes the money

1) Macs are better engineered from the ground up than Windows P.C.s. It's true. This isn't just some Mac Fanboy garbage. Ask an engineer.

Tell that to everyone who got a first generation MacBook Pro, with the extra ability to fry bacon just from the heat it emitted. Tell that to the people with the first generation iMac G5s which overheated causing the capacitors to explode. Tell that to anyone who was subject to any one of the fifteen recalls Apple has had to perform on its equipment over the years.

2) Choice: Macs ship with almost everything the "average" home user needs and wants. Better, its easy to use, stable, secure and looks good doing it. Maybe I'm getting old, but I don't need a large selection of crap to chose from. I know if I choose the Mac, it will work and be quality.

This would better be written as "Choice - Lack Thereof" That is not a bad strategy, as it has been shown that too much choice can confuse people, but with that, it does mean that there are things I cannot get in a Mac, like a decent Core 2 computer w/out a monitor for under $2500, or a notebook without a camera, or with a telephone modem. (I do need to use dialup now and then, and it would be nice to fax as well.) As for "quality", see #1.

3) Price. Macs start as low as $600 for the Mac Mini and hit price points on the way up. If you actually look at what your getting, Macs are cheaper than an equivalent PC. Sure you can buy 2 PCs for the price of a Mac Pro. But they are not the same thing, don't fool yourself.
Only for some rigged set of comparison. I will just point to this article by a Mac writer about why price comparisons are never fair.

4) Certainly Macs will increasingly come under attack. But they are actually better engineered. You can't even open the CD drive without authenticating to the operating system. Nothing electronic is safe.
As written, this is contradictory. As reference to reality, You have no clue what you're talking about. You don't need to "authenticate" the OS (whatever that means) to open the CD drive. If you mean that you can only eject the CD through software, that's true enough. (Though there is a troubleshooting way to get it open before the computer boots into the OS). However, even that has drawbacks... a dirty disc can get "stuck" in the computer and OS X will choke on it for several minutes before it will give up and eject. Depending on what else is going on in the OS, it can stall it for several minutes while trying to read that messed up disc.
5) I have grown up using Windows and will continue to use Windows (at work) and I don't currently own a Mac. I see your arguments all the time from "windows groupies". Frankly, I don't think they hold water. All it took was a few weeks access to a Mac to appreciate what Apple is doing. Go check one out.
Wow, that explains a lot of the misconceptions in your post. There's really a lot you don't know about Macs. it's kinda bizarre to slam people posting here as groupies when your knowledge of Macs are superficial at best. I post this as an owner of a Macintosh. I love them, but I don't call them the be-all end-all of computers.

Wes, Macs are better engineered for the reasons outlined below:

The main differences with Applie is that hardware parts are KNOWN and LIMITED, and they were willing to throw out years of work (which resulted in the garbage known as OS 9) for better technology that was proven (BSD - yes I know Jobs probably did it for selfish reasons too since he owned NEXT)

It's simply too damn hard / pretty much impossible for one company to make a stable and secure OS when they want to be compatible with an infinite variety and infinite combinations of hardware; all the while not making backward's compatibility just an emulation; stubbornly holding on to years of accumlating crap...

Interestingly, MS decided to go the Apple route for the Xbox 360. Hardware choices are limited and well known in advance and old software tech is thrown out for better technology (backwards compatibility is achieved through emulation I think). The end result was a pretty stable and secure box that was fast. Xbox 360 proves that MS can make something close to or equal to Apple's quality products (and no I'm not saying that Apple's stuff never fails, it just fails a lot less than a Windows PC in my personal experience)...

hopefully xbox 360 isn't artificially crippled for too long (makes sense since MS doesn't want to piss off PC makers)

I have to agree with a lot that is said on both sides. My iBook is quieter, better equipped (port wise) than an equivalent PC laptop, and then I can only compare with a Thinkpad.

The OS is better. Sorry, and perhaps that is how I prefer to work, with icons rather than menus, but that's just me. I love XP's flexibility and robustness - my poor dual Xeon is still going after beta on beta and mountains of test material, programming, virtul machines and has never glitched because XP just works.

However, my problm with Apple is not their equipment, but the sheer fact that they're style over substance. Get past the fancy design and clever marketting. Call their technical support people and struggle to understand them. Find out that documents cannot be emailed, only faxed. Find out there are no telephone numbers for central warranty people, or that the Indian at the end doesn't even understand that a HDD has crashed and sends you RAM.

Try to invoke an engineer to visit for your on-site warranty and give up when they don't arrive. Depressingly, Dell do things better than Apple. So do Acer, HP and IBM. My Thinkpad T60 broke in Shanghai recently - a man toddled out, spoke perfect English and replaced the motherboard, having spares for everything else. That's not fancy advertising, that's a real company serving my needs, and I am happy to say if I could run OS X on my thinkpad, I would, but I don't take my iBook with me on business. I take the Thinkpad, because I trust that little chap to come out in 24 hours. I know Apple wouldn't even consider it.

That's the real difference.

As I read the various comments about MAC's and PC's I struggle with how unfair the comparison actually is when the expecations are so different for each platform.
First MAC hardware with MAC software has some wonderful benefits to being so proprietary (certianly for the MAC bank account) totally integrated. A Microsoft OS on the other hand has to work with a multitude of hardware possibilities because of what many in the market place demands. A MAC is an OS and a hardware environment Microsoft is an OS environment and depending on the hardware provider you get more or less added value. Some of the added value is quite amazing when looking at PC's from Lenovo for example.
So far the comparison is an unfair one, comparing hardware and OS with just an OS, comparing expectations of a plethora of hardware\software choices to a more limited few.
Microsoft isn't just an OS its an integrated component of a larger network infrastructure something a MAC user mostly cares little about. (If you want a reality check try integrating a MAC into your windows network.) Mostly independent users enjoying a change of user interface and may enjoy some additional stability. But again an unfortunate comparison with a 5 year old operating system being compared to something new in 2005 for a MAC OS.
Microsoft has its flaws but so does MAC and if the expectations of Windows was placed on a MAC this whole discussion would be a very different one.

Why would I want to buy a mac when I can buy a PC for less than half the money? Now that Macs run on the same hardware as PC's why would I want to spend hundreds of dollars more just to have a different OS? If Apple was smart they'd sell their OS separately for $50 and allow it to install right along side of Windows on a Dell or HP. Once their install base reached 50% then they could then raise their prices. But of course, Apple computer cuts it's nose to spite it's face and snobbishly refuses to sell it's OS. So instead they get what they deserve. A paltry 4% of the computer market.