December 19, 2007 8:24 AM PST

Is Apple in danger of becoming Microsoft?

Approximately 10 years ago, Microsoft was easily one of the most hated companies in the world. With monopoly-oriented questions swirling around, and Bill Gates acting as the benchmark for just how bad big business can be, public perception of the company couldn't have been worse.

Of course, the most vexing issue surrounding that time was the fact that Microsoft was extremely successful at sitting atop the tech mountain, and much of its competition faded due to poor business practices and not necessarily as the result of product pricing.

If we fast-forward 10 years, the technology industry landscape looks much different. And while Microsoft is still hated by hard-core tech gurus, it has become an aging empire that may be on the verge of a huge collapse. To make matters worse, its figurehead--Bill Gates--is poised for his departure at the Consumer Electronics Show, and the future of his legacy is in doubt.

And with possible turmoil facing Redmond, a new company has emerged that could be in danger of taking the top spot as the world's most hated tech company. Only this time, the company was once an underdog that people hoped could turn things around. Well, it did. And with the help of its deitylike leader, some believe that Apple is on the verge of becoming this generation's so-called evil empire.

Of course, whether it really is an evil company doesn't matter. In this business, the court of public opinion will determine Apple's fate, and if it continues to do what it's doing, it may become one of the most hated tech companies in the world within the next 10 years.

To me, this idea of an 'evil empire' ruling the world of technology is an extremely short-sighted and inconsequential summation of what is really going on behind the scenes in the world's largest tech companies.

Although most people would disagree, I don't think Microsoft was ever evil, and in turn, I will never agree that Apple is evil. But one man's opinion certainly can't speak louder than millions, and so that term will continue to crop up with each passing of the former evil empire.

At its height, the fight against Microsoft revolved around its opponents' belief that the company was using its immense size and power to coerce--either legally or illegally--companies into licensing deals that cemented Microsoft as the de facto leader in the industry, with not a glance at what it was doing to its competitors. In turn, this created a monopolistic fervor among critics who claimed that Microsoft was the epitome of what unbridled growth can do to an industry.

On the Apple side of things, Steve Jobs and company have enjoyed unrivaled success with the iPod, and its integration with iTunes has created an end-to-end solution that some have called unfair.

Why, you ask? Well, take a look at other portable media players, and compare those to the iPod. Isn't it ironic that those players can do almost twice as much as the iPod and yet, we continue to buy the latter? Simply put, the iPod has a stranglehold on the MP3 player market, and some are wondering what can be done to stop it.

A court case filed in 2005 also addresses this issue. Dubbed Slattery v. Apple, the case features 10 counts of monopolistic endeavors through the iPod and iTunes connection, and asks the court to break the link between both solutions.

Of course, the lawsuits don't quite end there. In 2005, Apple was awarded the right to subpoena ThinkSecret, Apple Insider, and PowerPage for leaking details on the company's product plans.

Is Apple really that awful company that throws caution to the wind while doing everything it can to turn an even bigger profit? Some think so.

After making a deal with AT&T--one of the most hated companies in the world--for its iPhone, Apple may have showed its true colors when it bricked iPhones and basically wrested all control from AT&T on iPhone production.

Sure, some Apple apologists would say Apple just knows better, but others claim that it's just another example of Apple becoming evil.

Finally, most Apple haters like to talk about the company's "price gouging," whereby it charges too much for a device that can barely be configured and features most of the same components as a Windows-based machine. To make matters worse, the company charges a premium for its iPods, requires you to pay 99 cents for a ringtone when the same song costs that much, and generally does a fine job of providing a premium experience at a premium price.

Sounds pretty bad, doesn't it?

Now for the truth
Let me say this loud and clear: Apple is not in any way an evil empire and shouldn't even be thought of in that way. Further, Microsoft was never an evil empire, either. Who came up with this idea that just because a company is extremely successful and commands most of the market, it must be evil?

Personally, I think this mind-set is endemic to the entire human population. More often than not, people will find ways to hate large institutions for the sake of hating.

Think about it: people hate the New York Yankees, yet Derek Jeter is probably one of the classiest men to ever play the game; people hate Bill Gates, yet he's one of the biggest philanthropists in the world; some people hate the United States because of its perceived warmongering, yet it's the world's go-to country when something goes wrong. Am I missing something here?

In the end, the term "evil empire" is outdated, stupid, and does nothing to solve one of the biggest issues we face today: are we getting the kinds of products we want? So far, Apple has been able to provide just that. But if it decides to go the way of Microsoft, delivering crap, trust me, Steve Jobs will be the first to know about it.

That said, this is one man's opinion, and unfortunately, this society is ruled by a large group of people who like to beat up on big companies just because they're big. And it's for that reason that--justified or not--Apple will become the next generation's evil empire.

Just don't expect me to agree.

Recent posts from The Digital Home
The Digital Home Video: What the music industry should be doing
If the film industry dies from piracy, I'll laugh -- hard
The Digital Home 27: Only Google Matters?
The Digital Home Video: Making the case for DRM-free music
Apple needs to bring Mac prices down
Add a Comment (Log in or register) 88 comments (Page 1 of 7)
by quadj December 19, 2007 9:40 AM PST
I agree with you except for one thing...Microsoft has been convicted of anti-monopolist practices on several fronts. (I'm not sure why people tend to forget this fact.)
Reply to this comment View all 2 replies
by originalanalog December 19, 2007 9:55 AM PST
My bias be known, I'm a huge fan of Apple and at times an apologist. That said, I love the irony that Apple maintaining control of the iPhone throughout the partnership with AT&T (known to have TERRIBLE customer service) somehow makes Apple evil. Who in their right mind want's to have AT&T support their iPhone? Setting up my iPhone is the only good customer service experience I've had with AT&T. Jobs' ego and need for control that some love to hate is the reason Apple has completely turned around. Sure, it occasionally overreaches (like the limitations of the iPhone and unflinching position with NBC) but without that ego the iPhone wouldn't exist.
Reply to this comment
by qwerty75 December 19, 2007 10:03 AM PST
Microsoft isn't considered evil because of its market share. It is evil because of its unethical and illegal business practices.
Reply to this comment
by Renegade Knight December 19, 2007 10:14 AM PST
When a company reaches out and costs you money and an honest effort to resolve the problem results in "talk to the hand" I can't say they are evil. Just completely underserving of any support in any way for any of ther poducts. You don't get that kind of treatment from a company without a corporate policy demanding it. That's Microsoft in the modern era. Too big to actually care about customers directly.

Apple on the other hand is just as draconian in different ways. Why no 2 button mouse? Why brick the iPhone? Why force a kickback from AT&T that customers have to pay when they already paid a fortune for the iPhone? I'm looking for alternates to Microsoft because of their direct failur to negitiate a probem they created that cost me money, but I'm not sure Apple is it either.
Reply to this comment View reply
by rexscar December 19, 2007 10:40 AM PST
Why no 2 button mouse? - maybe because apples 'mighty mouse' has 4 buttons?
unlocked iPhones were going for a fraction of the retail price on ebay.
blame AT&T.
Everything costs money.
blah
Reply to this comment View reply
by john55440 December 19, 2007 10:50 AM PST
Apple is already "delivering crap", the buggy Leopard, and the failed Apple TV.

Apple isn't evil, just smug, arrogant, and dictitorail. (grin)

The iBrick phone is just the latest example of Apple's long-term philosophy of limiting customer choice, by keeping things closed and proprietary.
Reply to this comment View reply
by DanM2 December 19, 2007 10:52 AM PST
If you don't understand why Microsoft was evil, you won't understand why Apple isn't evil. Apple didn't get a monopoly through illegal, anti-competitive business practices; Microsoft did. And it has consistently used that illegal monopoly as leverage as it attacks other market segments with the same predatory gusto. Apple's success is because it has good mojo and people enjoy the spirit behind its products, plus they are designed very well with great features. Those other mp3 players are great but they don't have the aesthetic quality of industrial design or the best online store access (to iTunes), plus people know the iPod name and trust it, like Sony's Walkman before it. I only know of one site which consistently disses Apple's products out of a sense of frustration at its success and that is CNET, which hungers for a horse race. Particularly disgusting is the way this site flogs the Microsoft Zune, the 4th, or is it 5th, most popular player, a cynical product made by a bunch of unethical jerks who were the bane of the industry, hated and feared by all, even Google's CEO, who still tries hard to tiptoe around and avoid getting Microsoft angry whenever he discusses his products, like a kid trying not to set off his drunken stepfather. It's really getting old. Now that Microsoft sees Apple's success and feeling threatened that their monopoly over media file formats, and hence their drive into the living room with the XBox, and even their browser monopoly and OS monopoly, is jeopardized, they release the Zune, and this site stands up and applauds, without informing its readers of the real motivations and consequences. Meanwhile Apple, getting ignored by the mp3 player manufacturers who were focusing on catering to the Windows monopoly and not bothering to make players that were compatible with the Mac, makes its own mp3 player, PC users and reviewers BEG them to release it for Windows, they do, and now this site complains that they're just like Microsoft. Which, of course, strategically does not offer the Zune for the Mac, unlike the bi-platform iPod which is available for both operating systems, though there wasn't a word about this in the review of the Zune, or in the above comparison of Apple to Microsoft. Ugh. Better reviewers, please.
Reply to this comment View all 2 replies
by mister_lister December 19, 2007 10:56 AM PST
I worked for a company that microsoft ripped off big time. Before windows 95 came out, microsoft approached our company to buy some printing development and products to incorporate it into Windows 95 printing. The owner refused (it was a big product for us), so microsoft stole it, by reverse compling and changing a couple things. When we got the beta of Windows 95 and reversed complied the print engine, sure enough the code was very familiar, but changed in just enough ways to make a law suit a little rough.

That was my first real introduction to Microsoft's business tactics, which continues to this day, despite law suits.

For this reason I have bipassed both Apple and Microsoft and use exclusively open source software and OSs. I keep up with microsoft because of the work place but at home, I use Linux.
Reply to this comment View reply
by ripar1 December 19, 2007 11:17 AM PST
The difference is that Microsoft achieved dominance with a mediocre (at best) product by using illegal and unethical business practices.

Microsoft strategy was to eliminate competition by doing (among other things):

a) buy them out, then often just killing the product
b) kill their market (by spreading FUD or making it impossible to use on Windows)
c) co-opting the technology (either hire away the competition's talent, create a poor facsimile, or outright steal)
d) spend the competition into bankruptcy.
e) delay or deny 3rd party access to Windows code (think Wordperfect)

The point being that Microsoft, unlike most other companies is not interested in succeeding. It is interested in crushing competitors into non-existence. Big difference.

Oh, as for your Apple points:

Apple subpoenaed those sites on perfectly legal grounds. They were interested in discovering who leaked the information. The leaks were most probably under NDA, and were liable. The sites were not being sued directly.

The iPod became dominant, if you recall, because it was simply the best product available. Not because they somehow disabled the ability to use a Creative player on Mac or Windows.

iTunes is "monopolistic" from it's DRM, which is directly from the music studios, not Apple. Currently, if you purchase non-DRM music from iTunes or anywhere else, it will work perfectly fine on other non-Apple players or software.
Reply to this comment
by Jesse Chan December 19, 2007 11:40 AM PST
Microsoft was/is an evil empire in that they make products that are not of highest-quality, but have excellent business acumen. This may lead to their downfall as more nimble companies like Google and Apple can attack them on product quality as well as well as business strategy: http://digg.com/microsoft/The_Downfall_of_the_Microsoft_Empire
Reply to this comment
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Next 10 Comments >>
Powered by Jive Software
advertisement
  • About The Digital Home

  • Don Reisinger is a technology columnist who has covered everything from HDTVs to computers to Flowbee Haircut Systems. Besides his work with CNET, Don's work has been featured in a variety of other publications including PC World and a host of Ziff-Davis publications.

    Don writes product reviews for InformationWeek and is a regular contributor to Processor Magazine. You can visit his personal site at DonReisinger.com or if you would like to email Don with questions or comments, drop him a line at CNETDigitalHome@gmail.com. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.

Add this feed to your online news reader
Google
Yahoo
MSN

Subscribe to the Digital Home podcast

Have you ever wanted a no-nonsense discussion on what is really going with all the tech topics related to your Digital Home? If so, join Don Reisinger as he brings you the same biting commentary you've come to expect from his Digital Home blog in all its audio glory.


View all Digital Home podcast episode blog entries




Most popular stories

  1. Kaminsky provides the why of attacking DNS

  2. IKEA to sell solar panels?

  3. Black Hat a sure bet to be big, bold in Vegas

  4. Photos: More spins from the Oshkosh air show

  5. Images: Scientists develop eye camera

Latest tech news headlines

Featured blogs

Beyond Binary by Ina Fried

Coop's Corner by Charles Cooper

Defense in Depth by Robert Vamosi

Geek Gestalt by Daniel Terdiman

Green Tech

One More Thing by Tom Krazit

Outside the Lines by Dan Farber

The Iconoclast by Declan McCullagh

The Social by Caroline McCarthy

Underexposed by Stephen Shankland

advertisement
On TechRepublic: 19 words you don't want in your resume
Advanced
search
Advanced
search
Visit other CBS Interactive sites