Comment Re:Yes and no (Score 1) 722
That's the "walled garden" bit. You're not refuting the parent post.
If I put it this way then? Was it Apple or MS that implemented Kerberos and then "extended" it just enough to break compatibility with other implementations? (hint: the answer is MS).
You're going to blame that on MS? How about blaming the idiots that designed the Kerberos standard and made extensions optional? MS just happen to require the optional extensions that they implemented. They may not have followed the "spirit" of the standard, but they followed the standard.
That's the difference between Apple and MS, Apple has actually increasingly been using standard tech behind the scenes (which means if you know anything about *nix it's a lot easier to deal with interoperability than it is with Windows), MS otoh is still trying to push various MS standards.
Bullshit. A friend of mine put it very well (and he happens to own and like Apple products). "Apple products are great until you have to plug them into something else". I had to get extra software to get the lone Mac at work to join and talk to the domain (alternatively I could disable some of the security on the domain, but why would I want to do that?). The Linux box that I had to setup was difficult, but I managed to find a how to on how to do it and no extra software was needed.
Or to put it another way: When some new cool tech comes out Apple will adopt it and build and integrate into OS X their own simplified GUI tool but will generally leave the underlying bits in place and even contribute back to whatever OSS projects they've taken code from. MS will create a competing standard or an standards-incompatible implementation to try to push the original/standards-compliant version(s) into obscurity.
Name something recent where MS has been able to do this. Like in the last 5 years. From IE7 to IE8 and now IE9, MS has been trying to become more and more standards compliant with their browser (they don't really do hardware).
Contrast with Apple. They put a notch on their keyboard USB cables that has to be filed down if you want to use it anywhere else. They've recently adopted a bleeding edge standard from Intel that's meant to replace all other connectors. I think it's cool personally, but you'll need to get adapters for everything else you own to use them with the iPad 2. They don't allow Flash on the iPod Touch or iPhone despite the fact that the market clearly wants it.
In short, Gates may have wanted to steer standards and users a certain way, but Jobs flat out puts up a wall.
That's why Apple isn't as bad as MS in my eyes anyway (although with some of their design choices for OS X 10.7 "Lion" I may end up eventually switching back to Linux on the desktop but I'm waiting until I get a chance to try it out).
If MS is a software monopoly, Apple is a hardware and software monopoly. Apple controls all aspects of the device unless you jailbreak it. That's what makes Apple worse than MS.
