They both have their place, I guess
They both have a place in my studio!
On Oct 9, 2011, at 11:23 AM, Richard Atkinson wrote:
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
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
On 10/9/11 9:46 AM, "Mark Hamburg" <email@example.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,
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
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
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
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.
(*) 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.