Too bad about this in some respects -- embrace and extend. OTOH, maybe they can make it even faster?
Since Office 98, Microsoft has actually gotten itself a reputation as a good Macintosh software producer. I've read some interesting articles and interviews with people from their Mac development division that show them to be sharp and independent. Optimistically, I hope VirtualPC for Macintosh can become one of those good Microsoft Mac products.
Of course, I've all but quit using proprietary software, anyway.
Re:Microsoft and Macintosh
Theory on 2003-02-20T17:59:53
I've heard that, too. But I don't like IE compared to Mozilla, Chimera, or even Safari. And Office X apps crash about once an hour whenever I use them. They're usable and good apps, but the instability is annoying.
--David
Re:Microsoft and Macintosh
jdavidb on 2003-02-20T19:12:28
Ditto on IE; and I've never used Mac OS X or any of its apps. Office 98 seemed to be pretty stable when I used it, though.
Re:Microsoft and Macintosh
rcameron on 2003-02-21T21:35:24
I've been a Mac fan since before 1995 (mostly because my choice of operating systems came down to Win 3.1 or Macintosh...blech). I love OS X, and I was one of those that went kicking and screaming. It's unbelievably stable, and I love the fact that Apache is built in, as well as Perl and PHP. To start Apache, you click one button in the System Preferences (control panel) and that's it.
Anyway, ever since Microsoft created a separate entity just for Macintosh software, the quality of the software has gone through the roof. Office X is extremely high quality. Internet Explorer needs some updating, though; the latest version came out well over a year ago.Re:Microsoft and Macintosh
ziggy on 2003-02-20T20:49:57
Realistically, I don't think that's what drove this purchase. Microsoft has three primary outcomes in mind when it buys a company: kill a competing product, assimilate a bunch of "smart people" (and ignore their products in the process), or buy out a competitor's air supply.Optimistically, I hope VirtualPC for Macintosh can become one of those good Microsoft Mac products.Buying VirtualPC oozes of Microsoft wanting to make OS X less viable than it is today. That would also hit Microsoft's three primary acquisition goals. Making excellent Mac software is just a side effect of staffing a Mac software division with some pretty good and zealous Mac hackers.
I've heard a few other theories: that they're going to try and get into the VM business, making it easier to consolidate a few dozen single-purpose Windows boxes under a single uber-Windows box (with a mainframe class price tag to boot). Maybe there's a little of that going on under the covers, but if that were so, why not make VMWare an offer they can't refuse (and kill the Linux-based VM business all at once)?
Re:Microsoft and Macintosh
perigrin on 2003-02-21T00:41:08
Two points, first:why not make VMWare an offer they can't refuse (and kill the Linux-based VM business all at once)?I hate to say it (or perhaps I don't
... I'm not particularly partial here*) but Linux doesn't have Mac's market share. Microsoft still doesn't consider them competition when it comes to Desktops, and they're probably right. According to Google's statistics last year 1% of google clients were Linux based, while 4% were Mac. When (if?) Microsoft decides it needs/want a Linux presence VMWare will be lesiurely assimilated. Which leads me to the second point, anybody see a common theme between
.NET and VirtualPC (and eventually VMWare)? If Microsoft can make most of Windows run on VirtualPC then they reduce the burdern on their Operating System division. They can kill the Mac division with the justification that people can use VirtualPC and Regular Windows. And they find themselves easily ducking the Mac vs Windows war. * I run Windows, Linux and (hopefully again soon) Mac.
