03-14-2008, 09:02 PM

How did Microsoft take over such a huge part of the market? Thats what I have been wondering. How did they take it over? Was it lack of competition? How did Apple and others fall sssooooo far behind? I did a search, and couldn't find anything, not even on google. Feel free to chime in and ask/answer questions. I really would like to know. I have heard some things about the topic, but not really to any extent. Sorry if this seems a strange question, or its obvious and I just dont see it.

Thanks

03-14-2008, 09:04 PM

Apple didn't get their stuff together until OSX. Personal experience here.

03-14-2008, 09:29 PM

It's the lower price plus the fact that Dell, Acer, HP and all these big companies sells computers installed with Windows.

03-14-2008, 09:30 PM

Yes, but in school, I remember in about K-3rd grade we all had apple computers, including one in my room. Then bam, all gone. Was Windows really the only choice?

03-14-2008, 09:51 PM

One of many Apple histories is at Wikipedia.

03-14-2008, 10:18 PM

Originally Posted by CL33Zero

How did Microsoft take over such a huge part of the market? Thats what I have been wondering. How did they take it over? Was it lack of competition? How did Apple and others fall sssooooo far behind? I did a search, and couldn't find anything, not even on google. Feel free to chime in and ask/answer questions. I really would like to know. I have heard some things about the topic, but not really to any extent. Sorry if this seems a strange question, or its obvious and I just dont see it.

Thanks

Very simply, Microsoft sold an operating system to IBM, who in 1982 decided to enter the desktop computer market, dominated at the time by Apple and Atari, amongst others. What Gates did that was utter genius, is retain the right to license the OS to anyone else who wanted to 'clone' the IBM machine.

People point to MS stealing Apple's idea of a desktop GUI as a reason they succeeded and Apple failed, but the fact is that the desktop GUI was unimportant in regard to driving sales until at least 1995 (ten years later). Besides, the Atari ST, Amiga, Acorn Archimedes and many others all offered desktop GUIs similar to the Mac and better than Windows 1.0 throughout the 1980's.

IMO, Apple failed to distinguish itself from the other companies, sold their hardware a too high a price, and from 1992 until 1997, barely moved forward at all.

Microsoft, to their credit, did a great job of ensuring compatible transitions from one generation to another, whilst successfully driving competitors into the ground, not least of all IBM with OS/2.

03-14-2008, 11:09 PM

Microsoft made some very good business decisions in the early years of Windows. And they kept improving on their product. Another feather in their cap early was the battle between Internet explorer and Netscape. Back then, IE was hitting all cylinders with standards compliance, ease of use, stability, and innovation. It wasn't the over-bloated and shortsighted company that it is today. Now, they are their own worse enemy.

03-14-2008, 11:14 PM

Originally Posted by Zoolook

Very simply, Microsoft sold an operating system to IBM, who in 1982 decided to enter the desktop computer market, dominated at the time by Apple and Atari, amongst others. What Gates did that was utter genius, is retain the right to license the OS to anyone else who wanted to 'clone' the IBM machine.

People point to MS stealing Apple's idea of a desktop GUI as a reason they succeeded and Apple failed, but the fact is that the desktop GUI was unimportant in regard to driving sales until at least 1995 (ten years later). Besides, the Atari ST, Amiga, Acorn Archimedes and many others all offered desktop GUIs similar to the Mac and better than Windows 1.0 throughout the 1980's.

IMO, Apple failed to distinguish itself from the other companies, sold their hardware a too high a price, and from 1992 until 1997, barely moved forward at all.

Microsoft, to their credit, did a great job of ensuring compatible transitions from one generation to another, whilst successfully driving competitors into the ground, not least of all IBM with OS/2.

Apple also needs to make better inroads into the business community. The image of being a "creative interface tool" has been going on for too long to Apple's detriment. There is no reason a Unix based Mac server can't compete in a business environment.

03-14-2008, 11:35 PM

Originally Posted by Brown Study

One of many Apple histories is at Wikipedia.

That was pretty interesting. Thanks for the link!

03-15-2008, 12:09 AM

Three letters:

IBM.

IBM was the Microsoft of the 50s to the 80s. IBM handed Microsoft a huge lead, which the PC cloners magnified.

The same thing happened with Intel. Intel spent most of the late 70s and 80s playing second fiddle to MOS, Zilog, and Motorola. (You're thinking, "Who?") Intel got IBM and the compatibles, and never looked back.

03-15-2008, 12:31 AM

What exactly did IBM do that helped them so much?

03-15-2008, 12:40 AM

Originally Posted by CL33Zero

What exactly did IBM do that helped them so much?

From about the '50s onward, IBM was computers. They were the computer company. They were the face of computers; they promoted their huge "electronic brain" "thinking machines" when nobody had heard of a computer.

IBM built a huge sales-and-service operation, and took good care of it's business customers. (And charged them by the hour!) Businesses knew and trusted IBM. When IBM put it's blessing on a desktop computer, it became the instant standard. Companies bought them in droves, and the market-share war was over. Apple and Tandy and Commodore lost overnight.

Only by being "100% IBM Compatible" (while simultaneously being much cheaper than actual IBM hardware) could other PC vendor succeed.

03-15-2008, 02:27 AM

If you're looking for a more entertaining (though slightly unaccurate) history, may I suggest "Pirates of Silicon Valley"?

03-15-2008, 03:26 AM

Originally Posted by PinkLemonade

If you're looking for a more entertaining (though slightly unaccurate) history, may I suggest "Pirates of Silicon Valley"?

Entertaining, maybe, but I think the question has been well-answered in the comments posted above.

03-15-2008, 04:21 AM

Another thing that Microsoft did was create a license agreement with the hardware vendors that pretty much forced them to supply their OS with every machine that company sold, because the license had to be paid for every machine that company sold regardless if it was actually loaded and sold with every machine. Great business tactic by Microsoft. I believe that was eventually found to be illegal in their big battle.

IBM was the leader, but then a company, Compaq, reverse engineered the most difficult part, the BIOS, to be very compatible with IBMs. Before that the BIOS were very different and Microsoft had to be tweaked greatly for each one. When you bought software that was IBM OS compatible, you were not garanteed it was fully compatible. There were issues. Compaq, and then ohters, chanded the game with extremely compatible BIOS' allowing Microsoft to sell just two OS versions. One to IBM, and another for all of the other hardware vendors. Prices started dropping dramatically. Apple foolishless kept their margins high pricing them selfs out of the market. Only in the last several years has Apple really been competitive.