Overview

**__The Neverending Battle__** Justin Long is a talented actor who always portrays the cool rebel in his movies. He is currently working in Apple's commercials and has begun to be known as “The Mac Guy.” In these commercials Justin has a conversation with what appears to be a very nerdy and socially awkward man. Justin asks questions about the P.C. pointing out all of Windows' problems, specifically those of Windows' newest platform, Vista. These commercials imply that if you are an Apple user then you are cool and chic, and if you are a P.C. user then you are nerdy and weird. This competition did not start a few years ago; in fact this competition started in 1984, with the release of the first Apple computer, the Macintosh. 

Apple introduced the Macintosh during the 1984 Super Bowl, with a commercial that portrayed IBM and Microsoft as Big Brother from george Orwell's 1984, and the Macintosh as a revolutionary product that literally shatters the competition. I say literally because in this "Big Brother" commercial, aired appropriately in 1984, a woman carrying a sledgehammer runs at a screen that seems to be mind controlling everyone else, and throws the hammer into the screen completely shattering it. Microsoft has just recently begun to defend itself against the Apple campaign with commercials showing a collection which show short clips of people standing up for their computers against Mac’s attacks by simply saying, “I’m a P.C.” These commercials come across as weak. Microsoft’s seriousness contrasts heavily with Apple's light humor. Apple’s commercials are always aimed at known problems with Windows, whereas Microsoft’s rebuttals only aim at dispelling the nerdy persona given to them by Apple. The Apple spots point out that Vista has so many bugs that, in order to run it, you need a patch every other day, and, in order to do anything at all, you have to confirm your decisions multiple times. Apple's commercials claim that, even to open up something as simple as Internet Explorer, you need to confirm your decision three times.   Microsoft has another commercial trying to defend itself against these Mac attacks on its newest operating system, Vista. The commercial shows the results of a blind test that they did concerning Vista. They told the people involved in the study that they were using a brand new type of Microsoft operating system called Long Horn. They then show their reactions to Long Horn in this new commercial. Since Microsoft produced this commercial, it shows people saying how amazing this new operating system is, and describing all the cool things it can do. It turns out that this Long Horn system is really Vista, and so the people are saying that Vista is just amazing.   It is hard to see a clear winner in this small but important commercial battle. Microsoft can’t really go on the offensive, since Microsoft has no one to really fight with who is even close to itself in size, and since anything other than a simple rebuttal only recognizes Apple as an equal.  The head-to-head competition between these two companies did not start in the last ten years. On the contrary, at one point in time these two powerhouses were actually working together. Microsoft had launched iys company with a program called Traf-O-Data, a program created by Bill Gates and Paul Allen that counted cars for highway departments (Antov). Microsoft then quickly evolved when they “made a deal to license Seattle Computer Products’ 86-DOS operating” (Antov). This basic operating system was at the time no more 4000 lines of code. It was so short that it was not only known as 86-DOS, but also QDOS, for Quick and Dirty Operating System (Antov).   Microsoft's real growth began when IBM used Microsoft’s new operating system, “Microsoft Disk Operating System 1.0” (Leaven). The two companies reached an Agreement, and IBM agreed to accept 86-DOS as the main operating system for their new PC (Leaven). Microsoft made a smart move, and purchased the rights to the system. “Microsoft purchased all rights to 86-DOS in July 1981, and IBM's Personal Computer DOS 1.0” was ready to be introduced with the IBM PC in October 1981 (Leaven). IBM Personal Computer DOS 1.0 was the computer that the 86-DOS system was run on. “It is sometimes amusing to reflect on the fact that the IBM PC was not originally intended to run MS-DOS. The target operating system at the end of the development was for a (not yet in existence) 8086 version of a basic operating called CP/M-86. On the other hand, when DOS was originally written, the IBM PC did not yet exist. Although PC-DOS was bundled with the computer, Digital Research’s CP/M-86 would probably have been the main operating system for the PC except for two things – Digital Research wanted $495 for CP/M-86, when PC-DOS was essentially free, and many software developers found it easier to write software for the existing CP/M software to DOS than to the new version of CP/M” (Leaven).   The first Apple computer The Lisa was always described by the critics, and in Apple's commercials, as being revolutionary and different. Mac had a "Lemmings" commercial that told the audience in a not so subtle way not to follow blindly into the horrible world of MS-DOS and Microsoft. The first Apple, Lisa I was released on April 1, 1976, and was the first computer to use a graphical user interface (GUI). This interface was much more user-friendly, compared to the not so friendly blinking cursor of MS-DOS.   Although Apple is credited with the “what-you-see-is-what-you-get (WYSIWYG)” approach to the operating system, Apple founders Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak did not come up with this idea. The imaginative printer people from Xerox actually produced the first GUI. Some Microsoft enthusiasts go so far as to, say Apple therefore stole from Xerox just as Microsoft stole from Apple, but this claim is impossible to support given the evidence. Steve Jobs negotiated a deal with Xerox in which “he gave Xerox a large sum of stock in Apple (worth millions) if he could come back, and bring some programmers -- to inspire them more on the concepts of the GUI. Xerox agreed, and so by no stretch of the imagination could this be called "ripping-off" (Every, Graphical User). The Lisa, as well as the Apple II, had many programs that “Tried to make use of the concept of overlapping windows, pull-down menus, and a mouse (or joystick) driven pointer” (Every) <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','serif'; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"> <span style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','serif'; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"> Windows 1.0, introduced in 1985, closely mirrored Lisa’s GUI, and this Microsoft mirror image of Apple’s software was what really started the fight between these two companies. “Microsoft began work on Interface Manager in 1981, though at that point, it lacked a GUI and many of the other features that would later come to be associated with Windows” (Perton). After taking a look at a beta of Windows 1.0, “Byte Magazine declared it had system that would” offer remarkable openness, the ability to be reconfigured easily, and transportability as well as modest hardware requirements and pricing” (Perton). <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','serif'; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"> <span style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','serif'; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"> At the time of the introdctions, Microsoft didn’t even have programs available for Windows 1.0, but it did have programs available for the Mac. It was not until 1987 and 1989 that Excel and Word were available for Windows 1.0 (Perton). Windows 1.0 was released in November 1985, and the Lisa had been released two years prior we know who stole from whom (Every).“ Despite claims that Windows was Microsoft’s attempt to copy the Mac (or Lisa) OS, the real inspiration, according to some historians, was the VisiOn desktop environment, which was released in 1982. Bill Gates was reportedly so impressed by a demo of VisiOn that he saw at Comdex that year, that he sat through it three times, and flew in other MS execs to check it out” (Perton). Windows 1.0 required 256kb of RAM, MS-DOS 2.0 (since it was just a cover DOS program) and two floppy drives (Perton). Even though Windows 1.0 lacked the basic software people desired, it did include “a calculator, clock, calendar, notepad and a handful of other small apps” (Perton). For advertising, Microsoft “Set out a press ket featuring a squeegee and washcloth to announce the launch of Windows 1.0. The press kit was sent out in November 1983, a full two years before the program was eventually released” (Perton). Before Windows 1.0, Microsoft had produced software programs for Apple, which included Microsoft Word and Excel. <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','serif'; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"> <span style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','serif'; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"> “Microsoft was deeply involved in the development of the Macintosh. Microsoft had been the first outside developer to get a Macintosh prototype” (Orchard). Without Microsoft, the success of Apple would not have been possible or at least extremely unlikely. This was because “Microsoft developed productivity software that the Macintosh desperately needed to make the Macintosh a contender in corporate markets” (Orchard). <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','serif'; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"> <span style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','serif'; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"> But Apple began to shoot itself in the foot when it refused to license its software and ROMs to outside manufacturers. Bill Gates even urged John Sculley one of the main players of Apple to do this in order to make “Macintosh [the] new standard in personal computing” (Orchard). <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','serif'; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;">

<span style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','serif'; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;">The relationship between Macintosh and Microsoft was, and coninues to be, mutually beneficial. The relationship continued with Bill Gates, the CEO of Microsoft, and Jean-Louis Gassee, the newly promoted CEO of Macintosh, after Steve Jobs was fired. Bill Gates knew that working with Macintosh would be much better for both companies than competing. But the same views were not shared by Gassee. He “was probably a little distrustful of Microsoft’s motives. It was in Microsoft’s interest to maintain the IBM PC standard” (Orchard). This was because most of Microsoft’s software, and along with their own MS-DOS, was running on IBM computers, which were the most popular personal computers at the time. “In [Jean Gassee’s] mind, the agreement between Apple and Microsoft could have been an attempt to sabotage the Macintosh” (Orchard). The way Gassee thought that Gates would sabotage Apple was by taking Macintosh code and secrets, and giving them to Macintosh’s competitors, IBM. So Gassee was extremely suspicious that Microsoft was only offering to work with Apple in order to infiltrate and gain information, and then take that information and give it to IBM, which would in turn hurt Apple’s revenues, and eventually run it out of business. But “ <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','serif'; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;">Despite Gassée's objections to working with Microsoft and IBM, Sculley believed that it could help Apple establish the Macintosh as the personal computer standard, supplanting the IBM PC and MS-DOS” (Orchard). What Sculley was trying to do here was to focus mainly on software and Mac’s new operating system. Sculley knew that this new “what-you-see-is-what-you-get” operating system would revolutionize the personal computing industry. He wanted to work with Microsoft and IBM, in order to use their computers to run his operating system. If this had been done effectively on all personal computers, we would now probably be using Apple’s latest operating system and would have never even heard of Windows. Even though Gassee was extremely suspicious of Microsoft’s intentions, Apple still went ahead with licensing their patents to Microsoft, in order to keep the agreement between Apple and Microsoft, by which, in return for the patents, Microsoft had to keep creating Word and Multiplan, the earlier version of Excel for Apple(Orchard). Even without the agreement, Bill Gates most likely would have continued to create Multiplan and Word, even if Macintosh had refused to give up the patents. We know this because “In later interviews, Bill Gates himself points out that Microsoft made a lot more money selling a Mac user a copy of Word and Multiplan, than selling an OEM DOS license, so a Macintosh standard would have benefited both companies in the long term” (Orchard). An OEM DOS is justthe system put in the computer by the original equipment manufacuter Some of the settlement discussions between Microsoft and Macintosh “included selling entire system boards to manufacturers, porting the Macintosh software to the IBM PC and selling the software to consumers” (Orchard). In other words, Apple’s operating system would have been run on IBM’s personal computers. Since there were a lot more of those computers in the world, cooperation would have benefitted both companies. It would have benefited Microsoft because more of their Word, and Excel programs would have sold. It would have benefited IBM, because, with a more user-friendly operating system on it, a lot more IBM Machines would have been sold. And it would have benefited Apple, because they would have had the standard operating system in today’s market, like Windows is today. This would have meant that, instead of giving up their patents directly to Microsoft, they would have sold their GUI, along with Microsoft’s Word and Multiplan, with each IBM computer. So, instead of them just making their software for their own hardware, they would have been selling their software with their own hardware, as well as everyone else’s. This would probably have been an excellent move on Apple’s part, because the competition would have driven prices down, which in turn would have increased demand and ultimately increased profits for everyone. But, because Apple held on to their hardware, and was still suspicious of Microsoft’s intentions, it refused to even think about this idea.

Macintosh was given another chance to firmly establish itself in the computer market as the main graphic user interface that people used. The market was very interested in the Mac OS (operating system), so much so that “John Sculley sent vice president, Chuck Berger, to travel the nation talking to possible Macintosh licensees” (Orchard). John Sculley did not think about taking Apple’s GUI global until Microsoft executives “Eilers and Gates suggested [that Apple sell] consumer electronics to companies with no presence in the US market” (Orchard). “Berger found that even large, well established companies were interested in licensing the Macintosh. Apollo, DEC, and Wang all gave Berger letters of intent” (Orchard).

The one company that Macintosh really wanted to snag to expand their software platform was AT&T. “The Company was so interested in bundling the Macintosh software on its UNIX workstations that CEO Bob Allen personally contacted John Sculley” (Orchard). Just as Apple was about to establish itself as the operating system standard in the computer industry, Gassee shot himself in the foot again, allowing his suspicion and pride taking over. “He [then] became more and more adamant in his opposition to the plan. He wouldn't have any other company cannibalize Apple's Macintosh sales, even if it meant establishing an industry wide standard” (Orchard).

In 1985 Apple gave up trying to liscense its GUI to any outside companies. This was only one year after Scully had sent Berger out to try to get people to get on the Apple bandwagon (Orchard). This is the moment when Macintosh really started to tank; their sales were more than 30,000 units under their projected sales estimate of 50,000 units (Orchard).

On November 15, 1985 Bill Gates went for the kill when he launched Windows 1.0. His GUI was no big surprise to anyone. There were many companies out there that already had similar, if not better, GUI’s than Windows (Orchard). Many companies thought of Windows as no competition, since “ <span style="color: blue; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','serif'; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;">[|Digital Research GEM] <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','serif'; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"> mimicked the Mac interface almost perfectly -- and had color to boot. <span style="color: blue; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','serif'; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;">[|VisiCorp VisiOn] <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','serif'; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"> had a built-in office suite” (Orchard).

In Windows 1.0 you could not overlap any display windows. So, if you wanted to have more than one program open at a time you had to move them around “like a jigsaw puzzle” (Orhcard). But when you only needed one application you could maximize it to fit the entire screen, or minimize it at the bottom, much as is done in the task bar we have today (Orchard). When Gassee saw this project he did not feel threatened whatsoever, and paid no attention to the similarities between Windows and the Mac’s operating system (Orchard). “But when Sculley saw the software, he was enraged. Microsoft had been provided early prototypes of the Macintosh, and also some source code, <span style="display: none; color: #00589b; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','serif'; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-hide: all;"> <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','serif'; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;">to help Microsoft develop and optimize Word and MultiPlan. Now Windows had a menu bar almost identical to Apple's. Windows even had a 'Special' menu, containing disk operations. Other elements were strikingly similar. Windows came bundled with Write and Paint, mimicking Apple's MacWrite and MacPaint” (Orchard).

Scully reacted strongly even though Microsoft’s Word and Multiplan accounted for more than two-thirds of Macintosh software sales (Orchard), Scully “dispatched an Apple lawyer, Jack Brown, to Microsoft's headquarters to threaten Bill Gates with a lawsuit for violation of Apple's copyrights on the Macintosh” (Orchard).

What was Microsoft’s argument against these accusations of a theft of ideas and patents? Microsoft claimed that the “ <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','serif';">development of Windows had begun before the Macintosh had even been demonstrated to Microsoft. Besides, Microsoft had licensed GUI elements from Xerox, including a desktop-style interface used on the Xerox 8010, the commercial version of the Alto. Apple had also licensed the GUI from Xerox for $100 million in Apple stock” (Orchard). Alto was Xerox’s GUI. Thus do two wrongs make a right in the world of patent theft, it atleast sounds as if that is what Microsoft’s theory is. If Apple had originally stolen the software, then it wasn't rightfully theirs, and so stealing from Apple is not stealing at all, but simply business. Bill Gates was very offended at these claims, and “supposedly called Sculley personally and told him that if Macintosh was going to sue Microsoft, ‘I want to know it, because we’ll stop development on all Mac products. I hope we can find a way to settle this thing. The Mac is important to us and to our sales‘” (Orchard). <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','serif'; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"> <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','serif';"> It is hard to think that Bill Gates was this good a business man to have thought so far ahead in this game, and to have perfectly planned what happened next. It is a mere coincidence that Microsoft got such a good deal. What happened that day, when Gates and Scully met one on one, was “Ultimately, Sculley agreeing to license the Macintosh’s ‘Visual displays’ to Microsoft to use in the software derived from Windows 1.0” (Orchard). All that Microsoft had to do was to continue making the Mac programs that accounted for a large amount of Microsoft’s income, as well hold back the release of Excel for two years.

“To each his own”, is the only thing that will solve this argument. Each one of these companies brings interesting ideas to the board. Microsoft with its numbers and cost effectiveness which is heavily favored by business, or Apple who brings easy to use good looking computers that excel in art and graphics design. With this in mind I am afraid that this battle is far from over. Microsoft has the standard but Apple is making a great come back. If one computer will ever come out on top it will be through marketing. This is because both these computers are so similar to day that in the next couple of years the only things that will be different are their shells. <span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','serif';">