HN Theater @HNTheaterMonth

Mac OS 8.x and 9.x shipped with both Netscape and IE4, 4.5, then 5, but IE was the default for the "Browse the Web" alias on the Desktop of new installations. Mac OS X 10.0 shipped with a very early Carbonized IE 5.0 that was unstable enough to earn a "prerelease" label on the startup screen. At the time I remember a lot of people did actually prefer to use the Classic OS version of IE 5.0 over the IE beta, at least until OmniWeb 4.0 came out around the same time as OS X 10.1 https://www.macworld.com/article/151892/omniweb.html

Announcing the browser deal is the only time I heard an entire crowd boo Stebe https://youtu.be/WxOp5mBY9IY?t=154

It's also amusing how Steve was still obviously using Concurrence instead of a Mac to do these early iCEO-era presentations http://www.kevra.org/TheBestOfNext/ThirdPartyProducts/ThirdP...

Pour one out for Visicalc, the precursor to Excel/Lotus and the 'killer app' of 1979 for the Apple II!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VisiCalc

Flash forward to 1997, and a key part of the deal for MS investing in Apple is...you guessed it, Excel on the mac.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY&t=2m0s

Funny to think about next time some engineer is telling you how this or that new cloud software will 'totally replace spreadsheets.'

Spreadsheets powered the personal computing revolution - single handedly determined the winner of the OS wars (when people fled to first DOS and then windows after MSFT build Lotus into Excel).

Like em or hate em, spreadsheets are here to stay.

⬐ mmphosis

Microsoft released the first version of Excel for the Macintosh on September 30, 1985, and the first Windows version was 2.05 (to synchronize with the Macintosh version 2.2) in November 1987. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Excel#Early_history

I remember there being dozens of different spreadsheet programs in the 1980's. Flash forward to 2020, and there is primarily Microsoft Excel, it's imitation LibreOffice Calc, Apple Numbers, and Google Sheets.

⬐ fulafel

> Like em or hate em, spreadsheets are here to stay.

Bold predicion!

⬐ agumonkey

the infamous talk.. what a special spot on the timeline of mainstream tech

⬐ davidwihl

I’ve seen Dan Bricklin in the local Whole Foods on several occasions. I want to yell out: “see that guy! He changed the world!” but then I let him pick an avocado in peace.

I've seen this many times, so great. Imagine Cook taking random developer's questions at WWDC today.

In that same year, the famous Gates at the big screen speech. The audience was booing. Can you imagine something even close to that today?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY

⬐ egsmi

> Imagine Cook taking random developer's questions at WWDC today.

Sure. Developers today would ask him about AppStore policies and things like that. No one would ask technical questions as it wouldn't make sense. And I am quite sure this scene will only ever exist in my imagination. :)

⬐ moolcool

I could see technical questions being asked about Apple Silicon, and other hardware considerations

⬐ saagarjha

Craig Federighi gets asked those once in a while.

⬐ charliemil4

And again, there's a powerful way to communicate vision fielding the hard questions about the App Store - they are perfect opportunities to build a strong community, buying into a shared future.

Most people only see App Store fees as a tax -- in some cases it really looks like that, but in the bigger picture, it's a beautiful example of values codified in a business model.

⬐ danielscrubs

That’s a great way to see it!

⬐ duxup

I think it is ultra hard to really convey the vision for what you're doing, what you did, and where you're going to really put developer decisions in context.

It's super easy to declare whatever executive to be some evil guy because he shot your product down because he killed your framework or whatever.

But sometimes these things are painful, but are done for the 'right' reasons.

Steve was able to communicate those things, I think most folks can't and thus don't.

⬐ jkcorrea

For what it's worth, I think Cook is a better CEO for the current era than Jobs would have been. He's not a strong public speaker, sure, but he's an operator who can execute on the vision Jobs laid out better than anyone.

On a personal level he's also a much more compassionate/empathetic person which I think plays well in the current social climate. I can't imagine Jobs getting away with some of his fabled antics today.

Finally, and probably due to the previous point, Cook is much more adept at playing the geopolitics game with India, China, Trump, etc..

But yes, him fielding random developer questions would be awkward at best. Which is why they shoo him off stage in favor of Craig/Sruji/some mid-level manager to talk tech every chance they get.

⬐ adaisadais

Tim Cook is arguably the greatest managerial operator of our times. Without him apple wouldn’t have been able to scale and refine their businesses processes like they needed to reach the $1T mark.

However, I believe it was Jobs who was the catalyst for the entire show. He was the spark that the rocket needed.

The company is in an incredible financial position but is still vulnerable to the next big innovation. The next usurper. The next Black Swan.

Jobs would be so antsy to have something new out at this point. And if he had a vision for something- which I think he would have Had- he would have made it happen.

Maybe some next great thing will happen for Apple soon? The device that cannibalizes the iPhone like the iPhone did to iPod.

⬐ JKCalhoun

I may be in the minority, but if the Apple Watch had a camera, I would leave my phone at home.

But then I'm not one of those guys always staring at their phone/watch.

What's the opposite of power user? Old guy, I guess.

⬐ amatecha

Yeah, I'd say the next great thing is coming: Apple "simulated reality" AR glasses... I'm totally speculating, but I think a lot of their recent innovations have been pushing in this direction, and I think they have filed patents exactly along those lines as well IIRC.

⬐ imglorp

Tim's obviously brought financial success, but where's Steve's user experience vision going?

After Steve passed in '11, it seems his idea pipe got drained. The watch came out in '15, the earbuds in '16 (neither earth shaking) and other than that, it's been small iterations on the same products for 10 years. Where's the new excitement?

⬐ analyte123

Yep, I definitely believe Jobs would have released a robot, a hologram machine, a magical glove tactile input device, a roomscale collaboration platform, or just something, anything besides 100 different variations of the iPhone and iPad.

⬐ phonon

Apple Watch and Airpods are a larger part of Apple's business than Macintosh.

⬐ scruffyherder

Isn’t everything bigger than Macintosh?

I’m almost surprised they are even bothering to continue the line and just don’t shove the dev work out to Microsoft. Especially since they have been de-thanged, Windows is no threat at all to Apple’s market.

⬐ jkcorrea

Very true. I think Apple's got another 10 years or so until they face this dilemma, so time will tell. Their commitment to data privacy really put them at a disadvantage in the AI race, but have made great strides with federated learning.

And you can see them getting a little scared of this coming doom with their commitment to the App store monopolistic practices (whether you believe it's wrong or not, they really can't afford to cave on this front for their long-term sake)

⬐ zobzu

I think some of the "fabled antics" are necessary for success. Tim Cook simply continue on what's already been built and would have to be really bad to really fail in that period of time.

In my opinion executive skills are of course needed but so are long term high level vision, with strong opinions like sjobs had - even if that makes them "less liked"

⬐ BurningFrog

We'll never know, but I think someone with Jobs' social skills would know what he could get away with in 2020, and adjust accordingly.

⬐ philwelch

That all having been said, I am curious how Steve Jobs would have handled the recent congressional hearings.

⬐ wyclif

He would have owned it, and deployed the Reality Distortion Field on Congress.

⬐ m463

> he's an operator who can execute on the vision Jobs laid out better than anyone

I think Jobs's vision was not static though.

⬐ ksec

>On a personal level he's also a much more compassionate/ empathetic person

I really dont see any of that. Definitely not to its customers or professional users and developers. If anything I think these compassionate and empathetic note, the so called "enrich" people's live is a recent thing in the past 4-5 years.

And personally I have not problem with that statement, except until you get caught not doing so people will judge you as a hypocrite. And it is exactly the same playbook as Google's do no evil. That is why Steve Jobs never talks much about any of that ( Despite I think he deeply cares about it ) and only talks about building GREAT products for their customers.

Steve cares or doesn't cares. You can tell. And he is being true to himself. Not the same could be said to Cook. I guess that is partly why Tim is an operational person and not a product person.

⬐ jjeaff

Is Cook more compassionate and empathetic? Or is he better at saying things to make him appear that way?

I ask that because I don't know. He does seem empathetic in his words. But the actions of Apple (from its production processes and sub-contracted systems to its treatment of developers and even iphone customers) seem as draconian and cut throat as they have ever been.

⬐ philwelch

I think the main difference is that Jobs would lose his temper and scream at people while Cook is more of the quiet, unflappable type.

⬐ DonaldPShimoda

When I interned at Apple, every person from the mid-level upwards (who had been at Apple long enough) had a story of either being subjected to a negative experience at the hands of Jobs or else were party to one. Like... everyone. He was notoriously asshole-ish.

Cook does not have this reputation. Whether that's a persona or the real deal is impossible for us to say (I've never met him and I'm not at Apple anymore), but I think it's not very useful to think about what he's "really" like. We can only see how he presents himself, and so far his self-portrayal is significantly more positive than Jobs's, regardless of how the company is run at a larger scale.

---

I also think it's impossible to compare Jobs's ethics to Cook's ethics by looking at how Apple as a company operates. The company has grown immensely in the past decade, so I think 2020-Apple can't be compared to 2010-Apple in this way. However, we can maybe look at Apple's increased commitment to certain real-world ethical concerns and stipulate a little bit.

Environmentally, they're 100% powered by renewable energy, and they recently announced they want to be 100% carbon-neutral by 2030. They have also said they want to manufacture new iPhones entirely from old iPhones, which would be great.

They're also a leader in consumer privacy and security, more than any other company of a similar size.

Then there's the manufacturing stuff. They certainly benefit from and make use of unethical manufacturing processes, but they seem to be trying to move away from that (to the extent that a company that requires as much manufacturing as they do can). I believe their chips are manufactured in the US (?), and I think they've started trying to manufacture certain other things in the US (I think the Mac Pro? or is that done with? I haven't checked in on it recently). Of course, they've got plenty of room to grow when it comes to ethical manufacturing, but what I'm highlighting here is that they've made some effort to improve as new issues have come to light, which can't be said of all companies with their manufacturing needs.

All that said, Apple as a company has plenty of room for growth in the ethical sense, but we can at least appreciate that these are issues that they address explicitly compared to the Apple of the past. As far as I'm aware, this has all been done under Cook's leadership, so perhaps it reflects on his personal values to some extent.

⬐ encom

>Environmentally

Bah. Apple makes a product like Airpod which is disposable and impossible to recycle. They design their products to be impossible to repair, and actually sabotage 3rd party repair efforts. Apple does not care about the environment at all. If they did, they would try to keep them out of landfills, make them easy to repair and recycle, and not design them to fail.

⬐ jariel

How those two were as 'personalities' may not have been important, and probably neither are the 'powered by renewable energy' efforts.

The former just doesn't matter that much and the later is just marketing.

What is material is their ability to make great things, delight customers, operate effectively etc..

Organizations are often led by complimentary types, Jobs is a classic Alpha, Cook a classic Beta, they happened to work well together. But Job's assertiveness, far from being a 'negative thing' may have been a quite essential spark in the formation of the company. Just because it doesn't make you 'feel good' doesn't mean it's bad for the creative process or the company. It also may have been irrelevant: it's entirely possible jobs may have been able to be jobs without that.

Apple is an IP company, their commitment to '0 carbon' is not really important compared to a chemical company, an oil refinery, or some entity whereupon operations are material contributors to carbon.

It's a nice thing to do, and it makes for good corporate citizenry, but it's mostly just that.

⬐ agumonkey

When I watch these confs and compare to today I see an empty pattern. Something's missing.

ps: by that I mean, the show goes on but the soil is dry, I don't think the world dreams or needs more digital tech. It's ironically in autopilot.

⬐ bpyne

Tech as it stands today requires a cognitive overhead that I think is wearing down people. It seems like we can make more complex software but we can't make it work smoothly. People are spending far too much time searching the web for tech workarounds and contacting support teams. Tech, when done right, should be unnoticed in the background of people's minds. It's anything but that right now.

⬐ amatecha

I'd argue that today's challenge is making powerful, complex software that is easy to use or accessible. The software industry, in general, makes customers pay for the developers' laziness in design and implementation. Every modal/alert you have to read, every choice you have to make, was something that could probably have been designed out of the user flow. Technology is complicated because companies/vendors choose for it to be -- generally they will invest just as much energy/money as they have to do ship something that checks off the bullet points and brings enough ROI to please the shareholders.

⬐ bpyne

There's no single culprit, but you hit part of the problem.

- Users prioritizing new features over rock solid performance hurt us badly. Basically, we as customers are our own worst enemy.

- Software done as distributed services when it doesn't need to be. Each tier added to a distributed architecture is a point of failure. And each tier needs to be supported in vendor upgrades and the like for server software, VM software, security patches, etc.

- Reduced emphasis on protocols. When my team started to develop services for the first time we decided to use JSON as the lingua franca for communicating between them. But we didn't think about developing protocols using JSON. Now it's a shit show of different messaging formats in JSON. So we don't have any standard components for parsing and forming messages.

- Here's a particular pain point with me. I'm sick of creating an account for every damned service I use. When I pull up an app to order takeout from a restaurant, I shouldn't need an account. All too often, I'm required to create one. I have accounts all over the web now and I'm sure I don't remember half of them. Of course, having lots of accounts requires lots of passwords to manage. So I have a password manager which works mostly until I'm in a hurry and then it doesn't.

I don't see a way out of our current predicament. But I do hear an undercurrent of "I want to simplify my life" growing. I believe that tech is taking too much cognitive effort from non-tech people.

⬐ amatecha

Oh yeah, regarding creating accounts, I had a recent situation where I wanted to make a reservation at a restaurant and the system they used required creating an account to do so. I disagreed with this so I phone them to make the reservation. After the call I actually got an email confirming my reservation, without me having given my email address! Their reservation system (Resy) had created an account for me! The only way I can think they got an email is from me having made a reservation with that restaurant in the past with a different reservation system and the restaurant took it upon themselves to populate that info in the new system, which then created an account for me. Needless to say I was a little frustrated that an account was created on a foreign-owned 3rd party service that I didn't agree to (and the whole reason I had called in the first place)...

Anyway, bit of a rant there but it's another symptom of software essentially disrespecting the user/customer and making them "pay" for the choices of product design.

Regarding cognitive effort, I talk about this with people on a pretty much constant basis. My feedback to designers and product people is always about how much cognitive energy I have to consume to interact with this feature/app/etc. We live in a time where our cognitive capacity is constantly sapped by exactly the things we're discussing in this thread. Extraneous notifications, software update reminders, "dark pattern" UX on news websites, animated advertisements, inconsistent/unintuitive design patterns across different software/platforms, low batteries (or other tech problems), etc.

Every bit of effort we can make on the creators' side to make the user's life easier is a 100% worthy undertaking, IMO. Not only is it a good thing to do for our fellow humans, they will recognize the ease of use and be a happy user or customer as a result.

⬐ charliemil4

What's happened is a very, very weird thing. Our 'capabilities' with computers have gone parabolic, but our personal 'possibilities' have not.

The next great technology revolution will give people (developers and consumers) the ability to imagine new possibilities. Some would say that requires new hardware embodiments (AR/VR), while others would say it's a merely a psychological change from the folks who build today (FB/Google repenting).

⬐ yellowstuff

Bret Victor has captured this really well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pTEmbeENF4

⬐ charliemil4

Dynamicland is the best form of 'AR' right now. Apple is taking a note via App Clips and the physical version of that - whatever they call it.

⬐ agumonkey

That's true, we're the bottleneck now.. and also society got the brakes off on the web. Computing is now a double edged sword instead of a fun tool.

I'm not sure AR/VR will make a big diff but time will tell.

⬐ reaperducer

There should be a betting pool for the month and year the first VR pop-up ad scares someone to death.

⬐ mindcrime

On the AR/VR note, does anyone know offhand if there's any decent "hacker friendly" AR and/or VR hardware out there? And by "hacker friendly" I mean "you can develop for the platform without having to buy some expensive / proprietary toolchain and SDK and need permission from the hardware vendor to load apps". Even better would be if the device firmware itself were F/OSS, but I realize that might be asking too much...

⬐ Impossible

Relativity was shared on HN a while ago. I can't speak to the quality of the hardware as I haven't tried it, but it fits your requirements, partially. For various reasons (and please correct me if I'm wrong) all VR compositors are tied directly to a store/platform because everyone has an appstore in 2020. wxrc (Wayland VR compositors) is in development but it looks like it's not quite ready for wide usage. That means PCVR is still mostly directly tied to Steam and standalone VR is mostly tied to Facebook...

⬐ amatecha

Yeah upon a cursory evaluation, almost everything we have today was possible 20 years ago -- the software possibilities have barely changed. We read web pages, send messages, play games, edit photos and post them online. There are a couple things that weren't around, like high-fidelity VR, smartwatches, or always-online cars, but otherwise, the ways we interact with and use technology day-to-day have not really changed. I thought things would be a lot different by now, compared to what I imagined when I was first dabbling on the internet in the 90's.

⬐ callalex

Maybe we just already figured out what works well. For example I interact with my kitchen sink in almost exactly the same way as someone 3 generations ago. It works fine, so why change it.

⬐ germinalphrase

I am far less technically inclined than most on HN. I find the premise of AR to be very exciting, but only if I am - as a nontechnical user - provided with tools for solving my own problems and augmenting my life experience as I see fit rather than merely consuming a series of curated experiences.

At the more extreme end, Keiichi Matsuda's "Hyperreality"* absolutely is a nightmare. It's not even the intensification of media that I find so abhorrent. It's the coercion and lack of user agency.

*https://youtu.be/YJg02ivYzSs

Here's the announcement from Macworld '97. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY

⬐ johnchristopher

That's really interesting to see how he managed to pull off that presentation and keep it on track. More impressive than the "and here's the iPhone" in my opinion.

⬐ projektfu

- Reciprocal patent licensing for next 5 years

- Continued development of Office for Mac for minimum 5 years

- Internet Explorer default browser on Macintosh

- Collaborate on Java

- Microsoft buys $150 million in non-voting shares of Apple at market price.

IIRC, the share price at the time was around $1. EDIT: apparently around $8.25.

How much in the minority am I for thinking this is a good plan for Nokia?

Echoing my post in another thread, Apple received $150 million in financing from Microsoft back in 1997 in exchange for including IE on the Mac (among other partnership goodies).

If you don't recall that period of computer history (when Apple almost went bust), you may want to watch this Steve Jobs Macworld 1997 presentation discussing their joint venture:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY

"Kneeling before Zod" didn't turn out too badly for Apple.

⬐ Pooter

I don't think the comparison between 1997 Apple and 2011 Nokia is particularly close, or instructive for understanding the deal.

But I do agree that this probably is a good deal Nokia; and for Microsoft. Nokia was never all tha great with software, and is generally a hardware engineering focused company. Basically, they're outsourcing all the software dev work to Microsoft. And, apparently, getting paid (possibly very well) to do so.

Microsoft, on the other hand, buys themselves exclusivity with a major hardware manufacturer. Instead of getting secondary consideration after Android from the likes of motorola or HTC, they get the whole smartphone focus from a company with a reputation for producing reliable and high quality hardware.

Honestly, and all jokes about two dinosaurs getting together to avoid extinction aside, this is probably the best move for both companies, if they're going to stand an chance of being able to compete in the upcoming smartphone market.

⬐ Geee

I never got this argument that "Nokia is a hardware company, they don't do good software." That's a shallow argument which doesn't really mean anything at all.

After all, most of their R&D budget is in software development. They have developed two dumbphone OSes (S30, S40) and two smartphone OSes (Symbian, Maemo), which are feature-by-feature the most complete software in the market. There's lots more of course.

But their software sucks.. Why?

⬐ Pooter

Im fine with the dumb phone OSes they've produced - they're actually nice to use and probably the best of such systems that I've used.

My experiences with their symbian devices, though (all s60, devices) was terrible. Crashy, with ugly and poorly implemented features, and a ui experience well behind other devices. To be honest, I haven't tried the ^3 series, but the reviews I've read don't indicate to me that they've addressed the problems.

Maemo, I've played with a bit, and it seems fine, but not great and not compelling over iOS or Android. And ive only seen it on one of their tablets.

Maybe its personal preference, dunno.

⬐ cosmicray

> Echoing my post in another thread, Apple received $150 million in financing from Microsoft back in 1997 in exchange for including IE on the Mac (among other partnership goodies).

Actually, based on my hazy recollection, someone at Apple had discovered an IP violation by MSFT (something to do with QuickTime code having leaked over to MSFT). Apple at that time was in pretty dire shape. Steve basically called up (Bill or Ballmer, not sure which) and said here's the deal..., after which it was decided that rather than protracted litigation, Apple would take a $150M investment from MSFT, and would issue a special class of stock, which could be convertible to regular stock at a later date. I do believe there was some kind of agreement to include MSIE, and/or that MSFT would make Office for the Mac a guaranteed product for a certain period of time.

From what I read, no one lost money on the deal. The cash investment helped Apple survive the rough patch, MSFT sold off their investment at a later date, Office moved on to be a solid product on the Mac, etc.

I do not believe that MSFT would have done any of this without a little persuasive arm twisting.

All of this 'Nokia is doomed because of their Microsoft partnership' talk reminds me of when Apple announced something similar back in 1997. Anyone remember this Steve Jobs talk from when Apple was on the financial ropes?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY

If you think Nokia is doomed, you might want to re-watch that video. Things didn't turn out quite so bad for Apple.

⬐ gamble

Except Apple didn't put NT on its computers.

⬐ charleso

But Apple did make Microsoft Internet Explorer the default browser on the Mac, which was Microsoft's battlefield at the time.

⬐ gamble

That's fair. They did work pretty hard to get rid of it and regain control of their platform, though. I hope Nokia will make the same effort.

⬐ rbanffy

The browser is not part of the core of the operating system. And it was far less an important part of the user experience at that time.

⬐ Anechoic

> And it was far less an important part of the user experience at that time

I don't think that's necessarily true. The browser was an extremely important part of the user experience, but 2 things happened: 1) MS stopped developing IE which allowed Mozilla and Apple to leap frog MS in terms of user experience, and 2) the iPod came along which became a gateway drug to Macs and helped Apple become what it is today.

However the 90's Apple/today's Nokia analogy only fits if Nokia has something outside of phones that it can use to grow it's business. It remains to be seen if that's the case.

There's also the problem that Apple became more insular in terms of developing the whole widget and making sure it wasn't dependent (as much as it could) on ISVs while Nokia seems to be going in the exact opposite direction.

⬐ yuhong

Yea, it was nothing compared with the attempt to integrate IE with the Windows shell and make it's renderer a core system component. BTW, WebKit is also a core system component on Mac OS X now, yet it is updated as part of Safari.

⬐ bandushrew

hmmm? not that it is the slightest bit relevant, but I dont think webkit is a core component on mac os x, unless you are using the word differently than I would have expected?

⬐ charleso

"At that time" Microsoft ruled everything except for the browser. The public internet was emerging as a surprisingly powerful force against the desktop and the argument before the courts was that the browser WAS part of the core operating system and could not be removed.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft :

Microsoft stated that the merging of Microsoft Windows and Internet Explorer was the result of innovation and competition, that the two were now the same product and were inextricably linked together and that consumers were now getting all the benefits of IE for free.

It doesn't look like much now, but installing IE as the default browser on Mac was a pretty big deal at the time. Microsoft won the 'browser wars' due to this and other key moves.

Today, the 'wars' are in the handheld o/s and default search engines. Microsoft is again making shrewd moves in those battles and their partners are far from guaranteed to die as a result of their alliances.

Somehow, despite their Microsoft partnership, Apple managed to do a bit better than simply scrape by. I'm sure Nokia will see a similar recovery over the next few years.

⬐ rbanffy

Well... At least IE wasn't an integral part of MacOS...

What? A link to this story and no one linked to the legendary video of Bill Gates appearing on the big screen at the Macworld Boston Keynote 1997, looming large over Steve Jobs and the crowd booing?

Here, I will do that: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY (skip to 3:30 if you want to see how the investment is received, skip to 4:40 if you want to see Bill Gates)

⬐ quizbiz

Those were very desperate times for Mac.

⬐ noelchurchill

Steve looks like it was so difficult for him to announce the micosoft partnership

⬐ ArcticCelt

I always wondered if Bill got nostalgic and decided to spare Apple specially when it was lying on the ground nearly dead. Maybe he decided to give a chance to is old foe? (Maybe I am just crazy)

⬐ BJWSmith

It was politically the best move for Microsoft. As Jobs states, Apple + Microsoft = 100% market share for desktops. If Apple were to go, as start ups enter, Microsoft's shear size would be an easy target for monopolistic practices. Propping up Apple enables Apple to potentially share that burden, all the while having a very public act to ward off the litigious.

⬐ moe

Thank you, I had a great laugh starting at 2:23.

The audience reaction is just priceless. "Since we believe in choice"...

⬐ Sam_Odio

I thought this was good, especially if you watch The Pirates of Silicon Valley first: http://news.ycombinator.com/comments?id=15248

⬐ gyro_robo

For background on that, watch Triumph of the Nerds -- it was on Google video; still available on torrents.

⬐ vlad

I think after the 3 hour Nerds documentary I posted, everybody's been watching it and nothing has been voted up since! I'm still watching that but I'll watch your link right after.