All Apple Products Forbidden in Bill Gates' Family

[youssef 2010]

If Jobs or anybody in his household wanted to game on a PC,he would have one option only & that's windows.But, I don't see a situation where the gates family would need any of apple's products.

Don't get me wrong, I like both companies.I'm just stating the facts.

 

[youssef 2010]

[citation][nom]ira176[/nom]I think I heard or read something about this in the Gates' family before. I guess until the kid can afford what he really wants he might be stuck with the Zune. I do think that it is a bit rigid to keep all competing products out of the house though.[/citation]

Using the competitors product gives a bad image to your company.

 

[rantoc]

A smart family, even when they can afford the hardware they realise you get more performance from other manfacturers

Not the usual 1-2 gen old tech in a shiny case!

Sorry the truth hurts!

 

[aaron88_7]

I guess that is one way of keeping your kids off the computer for hours and hours. If my only choice was to use all Microsoft products or go play outside I'd definitely go outside!

 

[g00ey]

There is an old expression "Know thine enemy". So even though Apple is a competitor there's nothing wrong with learning about their products. But I guess that if it turns out that one of the children or anyone in the family use a non-Microsoft product, that would certainly be the buzz of the day...

 

[jj463rd]

[citation][nom]TA152H[/nom]Gates is still Gates in his house. Forget what people want, just monopolize and force people to use junk they wouldn't otherwise want to. A leopard can't change his spots. Considering how often Microsoft finds itself trying to copy Apple, you'd think the higher ups would have loads of Apple stuff. Maybe that's why they're not too successful at it most of the time. They just better hope Jobs doesn't introduce a trendy game machine (kind of makes you wonder why he hasn't, yet). Microsoft will have to leave that market too, although their RRoD certainly is very happening and hip.[/citation]
Apple did try a gaming machine called the Apple Bandai Pippin in 1995.It was a big flop.

 

[back_by_demand]

[citation][nom]jj463rd[/nom]Apple did try a gaming machine called the Apple Bandai Pippin in 1995.It was a big flop.[/citation]
Odd really, seeing as Apple has aimed itself at the dumbest sector - ie, the consumer entertainment sector - you would have thought that gaming would figure higher on their list of priorities.

 

[ohim]

[citation][nom]makwy2[/nom]Surprising. Not.Also, why is the NYT interviewing Melinda Gates about Apple products? They ought to be focusing on all the work the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation does to help solve common problems plaguing humanity, like Malaria and Diabetes. Instead of focusing on the inane we ought to be talking about the extraordinary![/citation]Because lately is trendy to ask what Apple can and can`t do ..for instance here Apple products can`t get into Bill Gates`s house. I bet NYT journalists will have a shock if they`ll ask Ferrari`s CEO if they own a Lamborghini or not, them and Captain Obvious.

 

[Murissokah]

I'm guessing Job's house has no windows.

 

[rantoc]

Mac OS don't handle games well at all, just read one of the zillions of benchmarks of the latest games supported on both platforms and see that even a Win PC purchased at way below 1/2 price usualy beats it!

And considering the "latest" mac's usualy use 1-2 gen old hardware it's not hard to see why apple dont try to "shine" in the most demanding computer tests there are - try to please the extreme gamers since they can't compete in the sector at all. Its smart for them to stay out since it would make more people see the truth about the "old" hardware in a shiny case. Web surfing, listen to music, watching movies can be handeled by pretty any old machine!

 

[awood28211]

Haha. now to banish them from the world. mmmmm. Utopia.

 

[Marco925]

[citation][nom]TA152H[/nom]Gates is still Gates in his house. Forget what people want, just monopolize and force people to use junk they wouldn't otherwise want to. A leopard can't change his spots. Considering how often Microsoft finds itself trying to copy Apple, you'd think the higher ups would have loads of Apple stuff. Maybe that's why they're not too successful at it most of the time. They just better hope Jobs doesn't introduce a trendy game machine (kind of makes you wonder why he hasn't, yet). Microsoft will have to leave that market too, although their RRoD certainly is very happening and hip.[/citation]
And supporting the competition helps your business how?

 

[Scotteq]

You mean... **GASP** that Bill Gates' family actually use the products his company makes??

Stop the preses while I roll my eyes at the author of this article...

 

[fayzaan]

its the internets!! its been hacked I tell you!

 

[tu_illegalamigo]

Yet again OSX != Linux!!!

 

[cookoy]

old news. read something like this before. well if an Apple product did make it to Gates' home, that would be news.

 

[ta152h]

[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]Does Steve Jobs family uses another brand besides apple when it comes to computers, smartphones,...? Does his family have a Dell laptop or an Motorola Droid or a Creative Zune?You keep saying that Microsoft copies everybody, but you forget that Apple does exactly the same. The big difference is in the marketing. When apple copies they call it magic and everyone seems to believe it.[/citation]

Apple creates markets, Microsoft goes into markets created by someone else, releases inferior products, and uses monopoly power illegally to destroy competition. This isn't opinion, it's backed by law. Microsoft has been punished with it.

The first Apples broke new ground. Lisa was the first generally commercially available GUI, so created the market and made it mainstream (with the Mac), despite the fact Xerox invented it. They couldn't get it anywhere. iPhone changed the market. iPad was considered useless until Apple did it right, and then everyone decided there actually was a market for it.

Microsoft has destroyed, illegally, products instead. What market did they create? How about Microsoft Bob? That was a nice attempt, huh? They destroyed OS/2, Netscape, 1-2-3, etc... by leveraging monopoly power, not because they had superior products (especially in the case of OS/2). They actually forced PC makers to pay for Windows, even if it wasn't installed on a machine they sold.

They keep copying everything Apple does, except they aren't competent so can't compete, and lose badly. Apple is pretentious and overpriced, but at least desirable for some people. Microsoft stuff is just crap, and even priced lower, can't compete. Their old solution was to knock the better company out of business by using monopoly power, but they can't.

So they lose. Again and again.

 

[figgus]

[citation][nom]TA152H[/nom]Apple creates markets, Microsoft goes into markets created by someone else, releases inferior products, and uses monopoly power illegally to destroy competition. This isn't opinion, it's backed by law. Microsoft has been punished with it.The first Apples broke new ground. Lisa was the first generally commercially available GUI, so created the market and made it mainstream (with the Mac), despite the fact Xerox invented it. They couldn't get it anywhere. iPhone changed the market. iPad was considered useless until Apple did it right, and then everyone decided there actually was a market for it. Microsoft has destroyed, illegally, products instead. What market did they create? How about Microsoft Bob? That was a nice attempt, huh? They destroyed OS/2, Netscape, 1-2-3, etc... by leveraging monopoly power, not because they had superior products (especially in the case of OS/2). They actually forced PC makers to pay for Windows, even if it wasn't installed on a machine they sold. They keep copying everything Apple does, except they aren't competent so can't compete, and lose badly. Apple is pretentious and overpriced, but at least desirable for some people. Microsoft stuff is just crap, and even priced lower, can't compete. Their old solution was to knock the better company out of business by using monopoly power, but they can't. So they lose. Again and again.[/citation]
[citation][nom]TA152H[/nom]Apple creates markets, Microsoft goes into markets created by someone else, releases inferior products, and uses monopoly power illegally to destroy competition. This isn't opinion, it's backed by law. Microsoft has been punished with it.The first Apples broke new ground. Lisa was the first generally commercially available GUI, so created the market and made it mainstream (with the Mac), despite the fact Xerox invented it. They couldn't get it anywhere. iPhone changed the market. iPad was considered useless until Apple did it right, and then everyone decided there actually was a market for it. Microsoft has destroyed, illegally, products instead. What market did they create? How about Microsoft Bob? That was a nice attempt, huh? They destroyed OS/2, Netscape, 1-2-3, etc... by leveraging monopoly power, not because they had superior products (especially in the case of OS/2). They actually forced PC makers to pay for Windows, even if it wasn't installed on a machine they sold. They keep copying everything Apple does, except they aren't competent so can't compete, and lose badly. Apple is pretentious and overpriced, but at least desirable for some people. Microsoft stuff is just crap, and even priced lower, can't compete. Their old solution was to knock the better company out of business by using monopoly power, but they can't. So they lose. Again and again.[/citation]
[citation][nom]TA152H[/nom]Apple creates markets, Microsoft goes into markets created by someone else, releases inferior products, and uses monopoly power illegally to destroy competition. This isn't opinion, it's backed by law. Microsoft has been punished with it.The first Apples broke new ground. Lisa was the first generally commercially available GUI, so created the market and made it mainstream (with the Mac), despite the fact Xerox invented it. They couldn't get it anywhere. iPhone changed the market. iPad was considered useless until Apple did it right, and then everyone decided there actually was a market for it. Microsoft has destroyed, illegally, products instead. What market did they create? How about Microsoft Bob? That was a nice attempt, huh? They destroyed OS/2, Netscape, 1-2-3, etc... by leveraging monopoly power, not because they had superior products (especially in the case of OS/2). They actually forced PC makers to pay for Windows, even if it wasn't installed on a machine they sold. They keep copying everything Apple does, except they aren't competent so can't compete, and lose badly. Apple is pretentious and overpriced, but at least desirable for some people. Microsoft stuff is just crap, and even priced lower, can't compete. Their old solution was to knock the better company out of business by using monopoly power, but they can't. So they lose. Again and again.[/citation]

FANBOI ALERT!!!

If you think Apple is any better than Miscrosoft, you're crazy. In fact, for a lot fo your dissertation you could use "Apple" instead of "Microsoft" and "image marketing" instead of "monopoly". Fancy that.

 

[eyemaster]

If you trick or treat at Bill Gates' house, will they give out a real apple instead of candy, ya know, as a trick? 😛

 

[blibba]

This makes him an excellent father, disallowing his children from wasting their wealth.

 

[tolham]

this isn't journalism. this is laziness.

 

[gm0n3y]

Microsoft certainly makes products for the Macintosh.

Good answer there Melinda.

 

[agnickolov]

[citation][nom]khimera2000[/nom]Jobs has a PC in his house... it has a mac logo on the side, and linux installed, uses all kinds of PC hardware, with a really locked up librariy that makes everything look special, I think they call it OSX or something like that.[/citation]
You are wrong in thinking Mac OS X has Linux under the hood. There's nothing in common between FreeBSD (which is the kernel of Mac OS X) and Linux apart from both of them being open source Unix clones.

 

[g00ey]

[citation][nom]agnickolov[/nom]... There's nothing in common between FreeBSD (which is the kernel of Mac OS X) and Linux apart from both of them being open source Unix clones.[/citation]
I don't agree with you at all. FreeBSD and Linux have a lot in common although they are different operating systems. Many of the applications (if not most) found in the Linux userland are also found in the userland of BSD (at least FreeBSD). They basically have the same shells (Bash, Tcsh, etc) and the basic commands are the same (such as ls, chmod, su, etc). A regular user won't see any significant difference until when he tries to configure the hardware or tries to run Linux software directly in BSD or vice versa (as they are not binary compatible with each other).

You are actually kind of contradicting yourself; How can you make a clone out of something and expect them to not have anything in common? If two clones don't have anything in common then they are no clones!

 

[gm0n3y]

[citation][nom]hythos[/nom]LOL remember "Marathon"?? One of the first first-person shooter clones of Doom/Doom2, 10 or so years before Doom was ported to Mac... though Marathon didn't help Apples' game-market at all because of the magnificently engineered single-button mouse...[/citation]
Marathon was a great game at the time. And you are correct that the one button mouse really killed off any attempt at making (especially FPS) games for the Mac.