But remember: instead of going with DOS, or a PC compatible system, they developed their own OS. It’s always been closed. And doing things “their way”.
I’ve been a Mac user for more than 30 years, and I’ve always been isolated from the PC ecosystem. No PC Card was ever usable with a Mac, until they changed to Intel processors in 2005, and even then, you didn’t have drivers for those, you have to rely on some outside development. You could barely read PC files, and most PCs couldn’t read Mac files without external software until Apple changed to Mac OS X in 2001. PC peripherals were incompatible (different connectors and electrical requirements) until Apple introduced USB with the iMac in 1998 (and the PC ecosystem caught up with it).
While Macs were (somewhat) upgradeable, you needed to buy Mac specific parts to do it, made by Apple approved vendors.
So, It’s always been a walled garden. I know, I was there before the iPhone, before the iPod. They’re doing nothing different from when they started. The difference is in society: internet appeared, and we now expect everything to work with everything. We expect to be interconnected. But Apple? They always liked to be their own thing, to be different (“think different”, remember?).
So, it’s just normal Apple behaviour. Expecting anything different is not knowing what Apple really is. Fortunately, the EU thinks doing things “the Apple way” is no longer valid, and is forcing them to adopt standards, and don’t abuse their position. But they’re doing it reluctantly, complaining, and putting a fight.
While the bit about file interoperability may be more windows-specific, there is such a thing as the “PC Ecosystem”. The software has alternatives: dominated by DOS, then Windows, but also available are Linux and the various minor UNIX-likes, but the hardware really is a specific ecosystem based on a specific set of standards.
There is truth in what you’re saying, but I think it’s missing a lot of nuance especially when it comes to why a lot of the things you’re saying are true. A few quick things:
instead of going with DOS
Apple developed the original Mac OS to be the first major GUI OS, and MS was left struggling to catch up. Going with DOS would have been a major step back, and set computing back significantly.
always been isolated from the PC ecosystem.
which was originally more to do with IBM than Apple.
You could barely read PC files, and most PCs couldn’t read Mac files without external software until Apple changed to Mac OS X in 2001.
This was less because Apple wanted it to be that way, and more because Microsoft wanted it that way. The reason things switched in 2001 isn’t specifically because of OS X, it’s because Apple did a deal with MS in '99 or so (and MS only did it likely to avoid more regulatory scrutiny after losing an anti-trust case) and part of that deal was more interoperability. Apple had advertising campaigns basically saying “don’t worry, you can switch to Mac and bring your files with you.”
They’re doing nothing different from when they started.
This is also true, but again misses a crucial piece of context - they do it that way because they think it’s generally better and makes better products, and I think you’d generally have to be pretty unstable to argue otherwise. Think about snapshots in time - in the 80’s when it was DOS and original Mac OS. Do our computers look and work like DOS or Mac now? Compare modern laptops to a '94 powerbook or whatever was on the PC market. The modern phone and the modern OS compared to what came before iPhone. Or take a gander what Android looked like pre/post iPhone announcement; spoilers, it was a blackberry knock off instead of an iPhone knock off.) Even Windows today looks and acts more like macOS than it has since probably the 3.1 days.
Even some of the more seemingly shitty decisions follow this pattern. Remember, iMessage came out at a time when messages cost either $5-20 for what would now seem like an absurdly small block of messages a month or $0.10 a message. Its initial value prop was that it was stupid to pay that much and if you bought an iPhone you could cut your bill way down. Or Lightning instead of micro USB. MicroUSB couldn’t fulfill all of the functions Lightning could, and it’s a worse connector for a lot of reasons.
I mean, that said, iMessage was definitely designed to keep you on iPhone and it’s being deliberately used as lock in, and there are plenty of other shitty things about Apple (like any other corp) but the virulence with which people hate it is often just because they do not get it any more than I see people mindlessly bash Linux usually with insults that haven’t been true since 2006.
The locking down started with the original MacIntosh (or actually with the Lisa I guess). ISTR they had at least one bit more open period after that, but those have always been the exception.
Originally they focused on computers that could do more for less. They encouraged people to open them up and upgrade or mod them.
It wasn’t till the 2000’s that they started locking everything down.
But remember: instead of going with DOS, or a PC compatible system, they developed their own OS. It’s always been closed. And doing things “their way”.
I’ve been a Mac user for more than 30 years, and I’ve always been isolated from the PC ecosystem. No PC Card was ever usable with a Mac, until they changed to Intel processors in 2005, and even then, you didn’t have drivers for those, you have to rely on some outside development. You could barely read PC files, and most PCs couldn’t read Mac files without external software until Apple changed to Mac OS X in 2001. PC peripherals were incompatible (different connectors and electrical requirements) until Apple introduced USB with the iMac in 1998 (and the PC ecosystem caught up with it).
While Macs were (somewhat) upgradeable, you needed to buy Mac specific parts to do it, made by Apple approved vendors.
So, It’s always been a walled garden. I know, I was there before the iPhone, before the iPod. They’re doing nothing different from when they started. The difference is in society: internet appeared, and we now expect everything to work with everything. We expect to be interconnected. But Apple? They always liked to be their own thing, to be different (“think different”, remember?).
So, it’s just normal Apple behaviour. Expecting anything different is not knowing what Apple really is. Fortunately, the EU thinks doing things “the Apple way” is no longer valid, and is forcing them to adopt standards, and don’t abuse their position. But they’re doing it reluctantly, complaining, and putting a fight.
The way you use “PC” as a synonym for “Windows” proves that you are indeed a long term Mac user.
…and an old fart, hahaha!
At least you didn’t call them IBMs
Of course, they are IBM compatibles!
While the bit about file interoperability may be more windows-specific, there is such a thing as the “PC Ecosystem”. The software has alternatives: dominated by DOS, then Windows, but also available are Linux and the various minor UNIX-likes, but the hardware really is a specific ecosystem based on a specific set of standards.
Shhh! Don’t upset them, they don’t know!
There is truth in what you’re saying, but I think it’s missing a lot of nuance especially when it comes to why a lot of the things you’re saying are true. A few quick things:
Apple developed the original Mac OS to be the first major GUI OS, and MS was left struggling to catch up. Going with DOS would have been a major step back, and set computing back significantly.
which was originally more to do with IBM than Apple.
This was less because Apple wanted it to be that way, and more because Microsoft wanted it that way. The reason things switched in 2001 isn’t specifically because of OS X, it’s because Apple did a deal with MS in '99 or so (and MS only did it likely to avoid more regulatory scrutiny after losing an anti-trust case) and part of that deal was more interoperability. Apple had advertising campaigns basically saying “don’t worry, you can switch to Mac and bring your files with you.”
This is also true, but again misses a crucial piece of context - they do it that way because they think it’s generally better and makes better products, and I think you’d generally have to be pretty unstable to argue otherwise. Think about snapshots in time - in the 80’s when it was DOS and original Mac OS. Do our computers look and work like DOS or Mac now? Compare modern laptops to a '94 powerbook or whatever was on the PC market. The modern phone and the modern OS compared to what came before iPhone. Or take a gander what Android looked like pre/post iPhone announcement; spoilers, it was a blackberry knock off instead of an iPhone knock off.) Even Windows today looks and acts more like macOS than it has since probably the 3.1 days.
Even some of the more seemingly shitty decisions follow this pattern. Remember, iMessage came out at a time when messages cost either $5-20 for what would now seem like an absurdly small block of messages a month or $0.10 a message. Its initial value prop was that it was stupid to pay that much and if you bought an iPhone you could cut your bill way down. Or Lightning instead of micro USB. MicroUSB couldn’t fulfill all of the functions Lightning could, and it’s a worse connector for a lot of reasons.
I mean, that said, iMessage was definitely designed to keep you on iPhone and it’s being deliberately used as lock in, and there are plenty of other shitty things about Apple (like any other corp) but the virulence with which people hate it is often just because they do not get it any more than I see people mindlessly bash Linux usually with insults that haven’t been true since 2006.
Truly you are a sage!
The locking down started with the original MacIntosh (or actually with the Lisa I guess). ISTR they had at least one bit more open period after that, but those have always been the exception.
Not really, they’ve always been big on being incompatible for the sake of locking in people: adb, FireWire, iPod requiring iTunes, etc.