02-19-12 01:30 PM
74 123
tools
  1. TGR1's Avatar
    Vijik, that's some seriously impressive revisionist history even for these forums.
    Last edited by TGR1; 02-18-12 at 05:13 PM.
    02-18-12 04:54 PM
  2. Vijik's Avatar
    1) Apple did not need the money. It was a PR thing. ....
    You can't rewrite the history!
    02-18-12 05:07 PM
  3. Laura Knotek's Avatar
    Stop the lies! The day that Microsoft saved Apple | ZDNet

    Summary: Last week, with Apple overtaking Microsoft in market capitalization and with the floating of a crazy rumor that Microsofts Steve Ballmer would talk up iPhone and Visual Studio 2010 at the keynote of next months Apple Worldwide Developer Conference news stories on the Web, in print and on the tube repeated a serious urban myth: that Microsoft saved Apple in the summer of 1997.

    Last week, with Apple overtaking Microsoft in market capitalization and with the floating of a crazy rumor that Microsofts Steve Ballmer would talk up iPhone and Visual Studio 2010 at the keynote of next months Apple Worldwide Developer Conference news stories on the Web, in print and on the tube repeated a serious urban myth: that Microsoft saved Apple in the summer of 1997.

    Heres the most common version of the myth from the San Francisco Chronicle:

    Ironically, it was Microsoft that saved Apple in 1997, when it pledged to develop applications for the Apple operating system and invested $150 million in the company.

    The partnership allowed Apple to go about narrowing its focus to building well-designed products for consumers.

    Oops, didnt happen. This urban myth wont die and as we can see, its now accepted in the Apple-Microsoft canon.

    Heres the truth:

    Back in the summer of 1997, Apple was in trouble with its developers, installed base and investors. The was chaos in Apples product lines, SKUs with competing capabilities and positioning. Licensees for the Mac OS were clamoring over a go-ahead for new models. Just six months before, Cupertino had brought back Steve Jobs with his NeXT OS to create Apples next-generation OS, but its arrival on the Mac would not come for a long long while.

    And then there were worries about Microsoft Office for the Mac. As I wrote in a post about the anniversary of the keynote:

    But the most important announcement of the hour the one vital to the millions of users who used the Mac every day to get their work done was Microsofts pledge to keep developing Microsoft Office for the Mac.

    Worry over MS Office was a concern expressed then by the professional Mac community on the pages of MacWEEK where I worked as a senior editor. MS Word and Excel were used in all professional content workflows and Mac businesses. And in academia and government. And everywhere else. They were critical applications.

    At the Macworld Expo Boston keynote address, Steve Jobs told the crowd that Apple needed to improve its relationships. It needs help from other partners; it needs to help other partners.

    Of course, these partners Jobs mentioned werent the ones that most of the attendees hoped to hear about its Mac OS licensees. Instead, that partner was Microsoft. Surprise! The crowd around me in the Armory hall booed the announcement.

    One [relationship] stood out as one that hasnt been going so well, but has the potential to be great for both companies: Microsoft, Jobs said that day.


    Then, like Big Brother in the famous Apple Superbowl ad, Microsoft CEO and Chairman Bill Gates appeared above us on a huge overhead projection and made his own set of promises. The first was an investment of $150 million in Apple stock.

    Gates then said that Microsoft would continue to develop a Mac version of Office for at least 5 more years. In addition, the next version of Office would be a real Mac program and not warmed over Windows leftovers. It will be more advanced than whats on the Windows platform.

    This is the event that has been framed as Microsoft saving Apple. That Gates and Microsoft did a good deed for Apple, offered a helping hand out to the poor GUI interface cousin that was seeing bad days. And after the announcement, Apples stock went up, which some saw as proof. Analysts revised their predictions of Apples future prospects from dead or dying to doomed.

    Here are some backstory that recasts the myth in a different light:

    Microsofts $150 stock investment was the result of a settlement of a lawsuit. In fact, the investment was just an initial payment for other substantial balancing payments that would be spread out over then next few years, then Apple CFO Fred Anderson said at the time.

    The exact amount of the settlement is still unknown as far as I am aware. Ive seen estimates from $500 million to more than $1 billion.

    The two companies would cross-license all their existing patents, and any new patents that would become available during the next five years.

    That Apple would make Internet Explorer the default browser for the Mac. If this seems strange, then understand that it meant that Microsoft would support IE for the next 5 years, during a time when IE was the primary browser on the market and when sites were designed specifically to support it.

    What was this legal action that gave Apple so much leverage over Redmond? It was a strange one: the Apple Computer v. San Francisco Canyon Co. lawsuit.

    Stephen Howard-Sarin, now the vice president for business & finance brands at CBS Interactive, and I co-wrote the story for the Dec. 12 issue of MacWEEK (there werent the 24/7 Apple channels that we now have on the Internet back then; I believe we broke the story).

    Apple suit: Video for Windows cribbed from QuickTime code

    Charges of copyright infringement and wrongdoing were raised last week by Apple, which filed an intellectual-property suit against The San Francisco Canyon Co., a small third-party contractor for Apple. But the scope of the court action encompasses industry giants Microsoft Corp. and Intel Corp.

    Canyon worked on digital video software for both Apples QuickTime for Windows and Intels Display Control Interface (DCI). Apple alleges its copyrighted code found its way into the shipping version of Microsofts Video for Windows and will be used in future software from both companies.

    The suit alleges that a senior officer of Intel, after seeing demonstrations of QuickTime for Windows and Video for Windows at Comdex/Fall 92 in Las Vegas, asked Canyon to provide software to Intel that would make Video for Windows speed comparable to that of QuickTime. Seven months later, Canyon delivered its code to Intel, giving video for Windows 1.1D performance parity with QuickTime for Windows 1.1.

    A few months later, Apple added Intel and Microsoft to the action. In later testimony, Apple showed that thousands of lines of significant programming code for video acceleration used in Windows came directly from Apples QuickTime for Windows.

    A couple of years go by and the companies were all kisses and hugs for the keynote address to the Boston Macworld Expo.

    So, is there any ring of irony here as the reports make it sound? Not much to my ears. Microsoft and Intel got their fingers caught in the source code and paid for it. Microsoft hired a larger team of former Apple programers, which didnt help Apple directly, and Microsoft Office returned to being real Mac programs instead of lackluster ports.

    If we want to look for irony here, perhaps it can be found in the news that both Apple and Microsoft have recently issued public statements supporting H.264 for Internet video. Steve Jobs pitch gets a high marks from Microsofts Dean Hachamovitch, general manager of the Internet Explorer division.

    Group hug!
    Last edited by lak611; 02-18-12 at 05:39 PM.
    02-18-12 05:29 PM
  4. Vijik's Avatar
    Steve Jobs: "Oh it (Apple) was on the rocks. We were 90 days from going bankrupt"

    1) Apple did not need the money. It was a PR thing.
    ...
    You might be a PR thing, or at least try to do PR for Apple, but getting $150 million surviving money from Microsoft was not a PR thing!
    02-18-12 05:32 PM
  5. Vijik's Avatar
    Are these Apple fans (Jason D. O'Grady & David Morgenstern in that article) calling Steve jobs a lier?

    Steve Jobs: "Oh it (Apple) was on the rocks. We were 90 days from going bankrupt"

    See 6:24PM in this article:
    Steve Jobs live from D8 -- Engadget
    Last edited by Vijik; 02-18-12 at 05:48 PM.
    02-18-12 05:42 PM
  6. Laura Knotek's Avatar
    Are these Apple fans (Jason D. O'Grady & David Morgenstern in that article) calling Steve jobs a lier?

    Steve Jobs: "Oh it (Apple) was on the rocks. We were 90 days from going bankrupt"

    Steve Jobs live from D8 -- Engadget
    But he does not state that Microsoft "saved" Apple at any point in the interview.
    Last edited by lak611; 02-18-12 at 05:48 PM. Reason: grammar
    02-18-12 05:47 PM
  7. Vijik's Avatar
    But he does not state that Microsoft "saved" Apple at any point in the interview.
    Steve said that Apple was 90 days from bankruptcy and Apple fan boys here still try to deny that!

    The fact is that if you are not close to go bankrupt, and if your competitor, Microsoft, didn't plan to shorten that 90 days with taking MS Office away from your relatively few Mac users, you didn't need to go to your competitors with your tail between your legs.


    6:24PM
    Walt: It is a little surreal. I remember talking to you when you came back to Apple... the company was in bad shape.
    Steve: Oh it was on the rocks. We were 90 days from going bankrupt.
    02-18-12 06:00 PM
  8. Laura Knotek's Avatar
    Steve said that Apple was 90 days from bankruptcy and Apple fan boys here still try to deny that!

    The fact is that if you are not close to go bankrupt, and if your competitor, Microsoft, didn't plan to shorten that 90 days with taking MS Office away from your relatively few Mac users, you didn't need to go to your competitors with your tail between your legs.


    6:24PM
    Walt: It is a little surreal. I remember talking to you when you came back to Apple... the company was in bad shape.
    Steve: Oh it was on the rocks. We were 90 days from going bankrupt.
    First of all, I am not an Apple fangirl. I do not own a single Apple product. I run Windows and Linux.

    Secondly, Microsoft wasn't "saving" Apple due to benevolent feelings. Microsoft got sued by Apple, and this investment was part of the settlement.

    http://news.cnet.com/MS-to-invest-15..._3-202143.html



    Microsoft has a long history of litigation. How about its anti-trust litigation in the EU, which forced it to stop preinstalling IE? Of course that came too late to save Netscape.
    Last edited by lak611; 02-18-12 at 06:14 PM. Reason: added link
    02-18-12 06:07 PM
  9. palmless's Avatar
    First of all, I am not an Apple fangirl. I do not own a single Apple product. I run Windows and Linux.

    Secondly, Microsoft wasn't "saving" Apple due to benevolent feelings. Microsoft got sued by Apple, and this investment was part of the settlement.

    Microsoft to invest $150 million in Apple - CNET News

    I've explained this countless times.

    Don't bother.

    It doesn't matter if you were there (I was). It doesn't matter if you link to the source documents (you did). It doesn't matter.

    In RIMM world, Steve Jobs was a horrible technologist, CEO, and person. Microsoft saved Apple. Apple never released anything good. Apple recovered from their near-death experience. RIMM is where they are because of the pro-Apple conspiracy. Because Apple recovered, RIMM will be fine.

    That's how it goes, and you aren't going to change it with facts, I'm sorry to say.
    Laura Knotek and avt123 like this.
    02-18-12 06:20 PM
  10. Vijik's Avatar
    First of all, I am not an Apple fangirl. I do not own a single Apple product. I run Windows and Linux.

    Secondly, Microsoft wasn't "saving" Apple due to benevolent feelings. Microsoft got sued by Apple, and this investment was part of the settlement.

    Microsoft to invest $150 million in Apple - CNET News



    Microsoft has a long history of litigation. How about its anti-trust litigation in the EU, which forced it to stop preinstalling IE? Of course that came too late to save Netscape.
    One would argue that Microsoft could just wait with Apple lawsuit (few months in patent infringing cases are very short), pull the Microsoft Office from Mac and the Development Tools for Mac and by the time the court could talk about a settlement there wouldn't be any Apple to discuss settlement (exactly like the case with Netscape).

    But, we are not discussing why Microsoft did help Apple, nor we discuss if Microsoft is a company with %100 glorious history.

    We were discussing that if Apple managed to turn the tide from days where they were so close to go bankrupt and they had to switch from daily barking at and biting Microsoft (both Apple and their fans) to "work" with them and get money from them, then RIM with its cash flow and user basis has a very good chance to do the same thing.
    02-18-12 06:38 PM
  11. addicted44's Avatar
    Are these Apple fans (Jason D. O'Grady & David Morgenstern in that article) calling Steve jobs a lier?

    Steve Jobs: "Oh it (Apple) was on the rocks. We were 90 days from going bankrupt"

    See 6:24PM in this article:
    Steve Jobs live from D8 -- Engadget
    I don't think anyone is denying Apple was never in big trouble. However, Apple in big trouble at some point != MS saved Apple.

    Think of it this way. Even if you assume that Apple was 90 days away from bankruptcy when Bill Gates made that deal (this is a wrong assumption as Apple was already profitable at the time), Apple had approx. $1.2Bn in cash then.

    Microsoft to invest $150 million in Apple - CNET News

    So if Apple was going to run through that 1.2Bn in 90 days, the 150mn basically bought them another 11 days. You honestly think that the difference between Apple existing or not was a matter of 11 days?

    I was unaware of the lawsuit settlement aspect behind the money, but it was always well understood that the money was largely PR on both MS and Apple's side (MS was trying to fight Antitrust lawsuits at the time and needed good publicity, and Apple needed to show their customers and developers that the world's largest SW company believed in their platform). The real action was in the agreement by MS to continue developing MS Office and IE. The money was largely an afterthought.
    02-18-12 06:40 PM
  12. Vijik's Avatar
    I've explained this countless times.

    Don't bother.

    It doesn't matter if you were there (I was). It doesn't matter if you link to the source documents (you did). It doesn't matter.

    In RIMM world, Steve Jobs was a horrible technologist, CEO, and person. Microsoft saved Apple. Apple never released anything good. Apple recovered from their near-death experience. RIMM is where they are because of the pro-Apple conspiracy. Because Apple recovered, RIMM will be fine.

    That's how it goes, and you aren't going to change it with facts, I'm sorry to say.
    It doesn't matter if Steve Job said that Apple was close to go bankrupt, it doesn't matter if your links are to a page where other Apple fans are "discussing" your case, Apple was never going to go bankrupt. It was just a PR thing.

    Apple just got their money for their IPs from Microsoft. Microsoft didn't have any other options than "working" with Apple and paying them.
    Microsoft is a bad company, RIM is a failing company. Google is a bad company. Samsung is copying our IP.

    It is only Apple that can recover.

    Don't bother, just continue to discuss this on BlackBerry discussion forum
    Last edited by Vijik; 02-18-12 at 07:05 PM.
    02-18-12 06:50 PM
  13. addicted44's Avatar
    It doesn't matter if Steve Job said that Apple was close to go bankrupt ... Apple was never going to go bankrupt.
    Whether MS "saved" Apple with the 150mn, or not, the fact of the matter is that Steve Jobs's saying "Apple was 90 days away from being bankrupt" does not imply that those 90 days was during the period when the deal with MS happened, and even if it was, it still does not imply that it was the 150mn that MS gave them that saved Apple.

    If you really want to argue that MS saved Apple, you will be a lot better off saying that if it wasn't for MS's assurance of continuing Office for Mac, and IE for Mac development, Apple's platform would not have survived. The money was rather meaningless.

    Even if you don't buy my earlier argument that the 150mn was peanuts, considering Apple had 8 times that amount in cash, and could easily obtain a credit line many times that number, consider this. Why in the world would Steve Jobs go and ask Bill Gates of all people for 150mn? Steve Jobs was best friends with Larry Ellison. Why wouldn't he go ask Oracle to invest that money? Why wouldn't he go to the many investment banks, or wealthy individuals other than Bill Gates (whom he hated) and ask for their investment?

    If MS saved Apple, it was by giving their platform a vote of confidence when they desperately needed it by promising to continue developing critical apps for the Mac.

    Ironically, I believe RIM is in the same situation right now. They are not bleeding for cash, but rather, are suffering from a lack of consumer and developer confidence in their platforms. To push the ironic factor even further, I think MS is once again the company that could most help them, by demo'ing working versions of MS Office and Skype on OS10 during the BB10 launch event. Unfortunately, WP7 means this is almost certainly not going to happen. I am trying to think of alternate developers who could step in right now, and play the role MS did for Apple in 1997, but am struggling to do so. Do you have any ideas?
    Last edited by addicted44; 02-18-12 at 07:17 PM. Reason: My last paragraph got eaten by the message board gnomes
    notataloss likes this.
    02-18-12 07:10 PM
  14. TGR1's Avatar
    As someone else who owned Macs during Apple's bad years: yeah, everyone knew how badly Apple was reeling at the time. Be glad, so far RIM has not be favoured with the precious descriptor of "beleaguered". It was never stories about Apple but always "beleaguered Apple".

    As I heard, Ellison was apparently entertaining the thought of buying Apple and installing Jobs as CEO. $150 million was *nothing* compared to the promise of continuing MS Office on Mac. Without that, Apple was likely indeed doomed.

    RIM isn't anywhere near as bad a shape as Apple was, but OTOH they are IMO in a much tougher market. Mobile is much more dynamic and, certainly in North America, strongly beholden to the carriers. Mobile historically has had at least one significant vendor disappear per year, IIRC. It's not an easy market.
    02-18-12 07:44 PM
  15. Vijik's Avatar
    Whether MS "saved" Apple with the 150mn, or not, the fact of the matter is that Steve Jobs's saying "Apple was 90 days away from being bankrupt" does not imply that those 90 days was during the period when the deal with MS happened, and even if it was, it still does not imply that it was the 150mn that MS gave them that saved Apple.

    If you really want to argue that MS saved Apple, you will be a lot better off saying that if it wasn't for MS's assurance of continuing Office for Mac, and IE for Mac development, Apple's platform would not have survived. The money was rather meaningless.

    Even if you don't buy my earlier argument that the 150mn was peanuts, considering Apple had 8 times that amount in cash, and could easily obtain a credit line many times that number, consider this. Why in the world would Steve Jobs go and ask Bill Gates of all people for 150mn? Steve Jobs was best friends with Larry Ellison. Why wouldn't he go ask Oracle to invest that money? Why wouldn't he go to the many investment banks, or wealthy individuals other than Bill Gates (whom he hated) and ask for their investment?

    If MS saved Apple, it was by giving their platform a vote of confidence when they desperately needed it by promising to continue developing critical apps for the Mac.
    Exactly.
    Steve Jobs went to a company who could help Apple out and that is what Microsoft did, and that is what some guys here try to deny by referring to these Apple fanboys article:
    Stop the lies! The day that Microsoft ’saved’ Apple

    Ironically, I believe RIM is in the same situation right now. They are not bleeding for cash, but rather, are suffering from a lack of consumer and developer confidence in their platforms.
    True for the US market.
    To push the ironic factor even further, I think MS is once again the company that could most help them, by demo'ing working versions of MS Office and Skype on OS10 during the BB10 launch event. Unfortunately, WP7 means this is almost certainly not going to happen. I am trying to think of alternate developers who could step in right now, and play the role MS did for Apple in 1997, but am struggling to do so. Do you have any ideas?
    I don't think that RIM with its BB7 and its planned BB10 OS, needs a vote of confidence from Microsoft otherwise they would have asked for it (unless Steve Jobs has filed an Apple patent for "Methods to ask your enemy for help when you are close to go bankrupt").
    02-18-12 08:31 PM
  16. TGR1's Avatar
    Exactly.
    Steve Jobs went to a company who could help Apple out and that is what Microsoft did, and that is what some guys here try to deny by referring to these Apple fanboys article:
    Stop the lies! The day that Microsoft saved Apple
    No one here is denying what Apple did; just what the impact was.

    While Microsoft dropping MS Office for Mac may well have killed the Mac and Apple, keeping it would not by itself have saved Apple from bankruptcy. Apple saved itself, by dropping manufacturing, streamlining inventory and product lines, and coming back with desirable new products and creating new markets for itself.

    I don't think that RIM with its BB7 and its planned BB10 OS, needs a vote of confidence from Microsoft otherwise they would have asked for it (unless Steve Jobs has filed an Apple patent for "Methods to ask your enemy for help when you are close to go bankrupt").
    Maybe, maybe not we are not privy to the back room approaches and negotiations these companies deal in. In any case, RIM would be hard-pressed not to entertain options with whatever company that are of (somewhat) mutual benefit like the Apple/MS deal. Such as perhaps kissing up big time to Verizon and putting in horrible battery-eating LTE in every BB in 2012 plus an extra surcharge; it may be the bitter price to be paid for that precious and effective carrier attention.
    Laura Knotek likes this.
    02-18-12 09:09 PM
  17. VanCity778's Avatar
    RIM also has a patent list a mile long that any telecom giant would love to have. So if they did fail, the share holders will benefit more than any failed telecom company in the past.
    02-18-12 09:19 PM
  18. maddie1128's Avatar
    Pretty much what RIMM has in common with WordPerfect, Amiga, Palm, Novell, Netscape, and all the others that have blazed this exact trail.

    A fanatical fan base, to the point of rabidity.

    Disregard for all evidence, acceptance of managements pronouncements, some future "It's gonna be so awesome when version ___ ships and everyone sees" event that never really materializes, and huge emotional investment by a core that keeps the company from taking the steps necessary to expand the market.

    Every piece of bad information is characterized by some as part of the corrupt conspiracy, and by others as "good news" via untrackable leaps of logic.

    If you've been around awhile, you see that this is precisely matching the pattern.
    And if you've been around awhile, you see the same people trolling every thread too.
    sleepngbear likes this.
    02-18-12 10:37 PM
  19. Economist101's Avatar
    And if you've been around awhile, you see the same people trolling every thread too.
    He'll also see commenters who add nothing substantive to threads, choosing instead to simply complain about "trolling."
    02-19-12 12:31 AM
  20. kevinnugent's Avatar
    RIM CEO has not gone to competitors crying and asking to give him money to pay employee salaries (Like Apple CEO did).
    Even if RIM end up doing that, it is still hope for RIM like it was hope for Apple.
    What a load of codswallop. Seriously.
    02-19-12 06:07 AM
  21. Vijik's Avatar
    No one here is denying what Apple did; just what the impact was.
    Wrong. Many here are trying to say that Apple did not need the Microsoft help in 97 and Apple was not going to go bankrupt.


    While Microsoft dropping MS Office for Mac may well have killed the Mac and Apple,
    Exactly.
    keeping it would not by itself have saved Apple from bankruptcy. Apple saved itself, by dropping manufacturing, streamlining inventory and product lines, and coming back with desirable new products and creating new markets for itself.
    Apple was 90 days from bankruptcy. "dropping manufacturing, streamlining inventory and product lines, etc" will not take effect in 90 days.

    Apple guys need to accept the fact that if Microsoft had decided to pull the plug on Apple in 97, there wouldn't be any company left to restructure and turn into world most valued company!

    Anyway, RIM is not that desperate yet to go to archenemies asking for help.
    Maybe they will in future, but right now they say that they are not.

    Maybe, maybe not – we are not privy to the back room approaches and negotiations these companies deal in. In any case, RIM would be hard-pressed not to entertain options with whatever company that are of (somewhat) mutual benefit like the Apple/MS deal. Such as perhaps kissing up big time to Verizon and putting in horrible battery-eating LTE in every BB in 2012 plus an extra surcharge; it may be the bitter price to be paid for that precious and effective carrier attention.
    I agree on that. I wish RIM had done just that with Verizon. We could then have BB10 BBs in hands earlier.
    02-19-12 08:01 AM
  22. tack's Avatar
    This topic has now become pretty meaningless responses from two people opposed in their views. Sad
    02-19-12 08:13 AM
  23. TGR1's Avatar
    Well, I don't think my posts have been meaningless but I agree they aren't going anywhere except off-topic so won't take it further.
    02-19-12 12:47 PM
  24. Vijik's Avatar
    This topic has now become pretty meaningless responses from two people opposed in their views. Sad
    The real sad thing is that iPhone owners come to BlackBerry discussion forum and do a fortune-telling that RIM will fail. They do that in parallel as they tell Apple didn't need help and Apple is where it is just because of its efforts and not Microsoft.

    Fortune-telling for RIM while ignoring what has already happened for Apple!
    02-19-12 01:30 PM
74 123
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD