Heh. I think they are going the right way, too, but they're up against the types of those who think Facebook or YouTube should never change the UI and leave it alone forever.
Apple is slowly converging OSX and iOS into one platform, "inspired by iPad", etc. Microsoft isn't doing that. They are smashing the two together at once, when they should really have created an OS that ran alongside the PC market until the proverbial train tracks merged. This way, everyone melds into a comfort zone rather than being shoved into it (not comfy).
I don't know if Apple initially figured this out intentionally but they are surely proud of it today, because people want iOS features on OSX – least to a degree. Apple incentivized the experience through the needs created by developers. Microsoft is not answering these needs (API) directly, instead, just supposing they should exist and that will translate into useful applications.
> Apple is slowly converging OSX and iOS into one platform, "inspired by iPad", etc. Microsoft isn't doing that. They are smashing the two together at once,
Apple emphasizes that iOS and OSX fundamentally different platforms and will stay so, and says they're borrowing relevant ideas from one and bake them into the other (and vice versa).
Microsoft says their strategy is the Windows Everywhere convergence, and stitches the desktop and Metro side by side with no overlap.
It's interesting to see that their approach is the exact opposite of one another.
> Apple emphasizes that iOS and OSX fundamentally different platforms and will stay so, and says they're borrowing relevant ideas from one and bake them into the other (and vice versa).
I agree. But I think you think that this mentality is set in stone, just as console gaming must have a standard controller, or personal computing must have a physical keyboard. Touch is the marvel of today. Voice may be the marvel of tomorrow. Eventually a keyboard and mouse will be the old way of doing things. Your knee-jerk reaction to that sentence is also mine. I can't see a world without keyboard and mouse, but that is because nothing better currently exists. Remember: Unreasonable men with unreasonable ideas.... Touch only supplants certain features of the keyboard and mouse. Apple was unreasonable. Nintendo was unreasonable. What technology will be the next to pull us out of our comfy habits? The technology that improves upon the existing infrastructure wins, not the one that asks us to change our habits or do more work.
Microsoft is asking their users to do just that – more work. Does it work in Metro? Standard?
With iOS, I don't have to ask. I know. It is too underpowered to handle intensive applications. I don't have to look it up in the "app store" to find out. I don't have to look for "designed for X" stickers or buttons. I immediately know because my technological emersion and knowledge of what is possible makes this argument for me.
I don't. I merely restated the current public discourse of each company. This is not a knee-jerk reaction, because it's not a reaction at all, merely a summary.
Apple is slowly converging OSX and iOS into one platform, "inspired by iPad", etc. Microsoft isn't doing that. They are smashing the two together at once, when they should really have created an OS that ran alongside the PC market until the proverbial train tracks merged. This way, everyone melds into a comfort zone rather than being shoved into it (not comfy).
I don't know if Apple initially figured this out intentionally but they are surely proud of it today, because people want iOS features on OSX – least to a degree. Apple incentivized the experience through the needs created by developers. Microsoft is not answering these needs (API) directly, instead, just supposing they should exist and that will translate into useful applications.