I've been in this industry for over 25 years. I've used Apples from the beginning. I have kept up on developments of the industry for that long at least. Apple licensed it from Xerox and it is hard to understand how they couldn't have known what they were licensing.

You probably need to go back and read some of the history written by those involved in it. There's plenty. Apple visited Xerox and played with the devices, etc. Both Jobs and Gates admit to taking from Xerox. Apple did a cya by licensing it.

Apple did try to sue Microsoft for copyright on the interface elements many years later. They lost. You just can't copyright certain things such as the feel of a chair or carpet or the dash of a car. You can't do the same with a computer software interface nor with the look of a machine.

Apple licensed it from Xerox. Sort of hard to not know what you were licensing.

Jobs was obsessed with brands. He wanted to make a brand. He was obsessed with the look of certain products. He simply followed what others had done. This doesn't mean that's bad. It's good. But let's put his quality efforts into perspective.

There were obvious issues with the company before Jobs came back. The lack of a decent OS (which Apple bought from Jobs), a bad series of high level executives that didn't know how to focus the company (not that another would not have done so and to say otherwise is to preach Apple's future doom) hurt Apple's future potential. Job's simply refocused on specific efforts, he got Gates to loan some money and continue to commit software development efforts, and brought his OS with him. This didn't happen overnight. It took years while building the right management team. Chrysler had the same resurgence with Lee Iacocca. And if it hadn't been for the rest of the industry turning down the developer of the iPod Apple would not be where they are today. So, hard work, a refocus, a new OS, a loan from Gates, and the serendipity of matching the iPod with a new 1.5" drive gave Apple it's resurgence. Jobs played a big part as a leader and was tremendously successful at redirecting the company focusing on products that were bound to benefit Apple (I'm sure there were many projects that were also of great potential that were killed). He was not a guru and through his ill temper and manipulation did he get people to serve him.

So, give him credit, but realize that there's a bit of distorted reality in how some here present what Job's did.

The fallacy of Woz's argument is that closed equates to quality. It does not. They have no relationship. I've wielded a Mac since the early days. Even today it is obvious there are quality issues abounding in OS X. Open one of their computers up one day and observe the components, look for blown capacitors, look at the obscure designs of the boards, and KNOW THIS, they are using regular PC components and technology and have been for a long time.

This isn't to say that LONGER development cycles don't add to quality, they do. Apple couldn't survive with release early and often.

If that's their strategy and if you actually believe they are making it easy for you to get your own media is in line with that, then we can all say "long lived Microsoft" now instead of wasting our time waiting for it.

It's more pig with lipstick and a wool sweater this time. I see it as nothing more than their attempt to create a pet pig for those willing to clean up the shit where ever it may fall.

Are we all really taking Win 8 seriously? At this point shouldn't we all be considering some other alternative? There's so much effort being focused at lock in and their ability control things that we really would be better served looking for something else, be it a Mac, or Linux or something other than an effort to lock us in.

I mean seriously, all of us here are wise enough to understand Microsoft's efforts. Why is it not possible for you all to think out of the box in order to understand that this is the end-of-life for Windows. They can't seem to come up with anything better. Really, they can't come up with anything better than what they call the metro interface? No safe mode? Only full screen apps? One app at a time?

Products like the Mac and Linux will be steamrolling Microsoft in a few years. How can so many people at Microsoft be so blind that they can't see the inevitable brick wall ahead and the steam roller behind? What they never open their eyes or turn their heads?

If the media didn't go after the biggest target then we'd know they were taking money to write positive stories. They probably are anyway. I don't like reading stories that are positive about tech companies, or any for that matter, for that means they are hanging their towels in the same sweat lodge.

Embrace

Extend

Extinguish

Do I need to say more?

Convicted monopolist maybe?

Easy solution. Just make them turn sideways.

Anyway I am appalled at the TSA for everything they've done, not just them trying to block the news coverage of this story.