The good and evil in Apple & Microsoft

You do not have to write much Apple to irritate people that love Apple beyond all reason.  It's rare that I don't get a note when I comment on Apple's management style.  Then when I admit to using Microsoft products, I'm often accused of giving my money to the evil empire.

Many times these notes come from people who have never worked for any Fortune 500 company much less Apple or Microsoft.  Some time in the many business tapes and books that I have absorbed, I remember picking up the thought (maybe from Tom Peters or Dennis Waitley) that corporations are incredibly dumb.

I would venture to say, mostly they are too dumb to be effectively evil.

Before I get to Apple and Microsoft, let me outline a few thoughts.

Some corporations are dumber than others.  Some are harder to work for than others, but it is hard to measure that sort of stuff, because any person, assuming they can get the job in the first place, can survive for a time in a large corporation. 

That means they often have a sunny view of corporate life. They have likely never had to put their neck on the line for someone else.

It is the nature of the beast, that corporations no matter how "quickly" or "slowly" they turn out new products, almost always move relatively slowly on people.  Most of the time someone not doing well is buried in the organization until the incompetence cannot hide.

Rooting out incompetence happens a lot quicker when corporations are trying to shed people, and a lot more slowly when they are having trouble finding enough people to do the job.  Many people who are let go, just happen to be in the wrong slot at the wrong time.  They are actually very competent people.

There are a few ways to extend your career in a corporation. One is to hang your star on a rising star or someone who has upper management's ear.  That's pretty common these days from what I hear in many corporations.

Another is basically to hide.  Do your job, do not take any risks, and whatever you do, do not make waves.

The third way is to really try to be successful by building a team and achieving things that the corporation never believed were possible with even fewer resources than they could imagine.

This morning I read an article, Dirty Job, forwarded to me by one of my college roommates. The point the author is trying to make is that being a politician is actually the dirtiest job.

In short, in this job you must soil your honor and sell your soul by behaving foolishly and by saying things that you know to be false.

My point in linking to this is that when you are in a corporation when you reach a level or two above that of an individual contributor and become a significant manager, you get faced with similar choices.

How high the ground you can stand on, depends on how good you are at your job, the successes that you have had, and your guardian angels.

I think you find this in most corporations, if you are doing a really good job and have impressed some upper management folks, you can often walk the line of keeping your beliefs intact and your honor unsullied without getting fired.

However, if you have some powerful enemies, you have to be careful what you do or say.  Some people want to keep a job so much that they will do almost anything to keep their job.  I might know one or two Apple folks like that.  I also can find similar folks in Microsoft or other companies.

This might be arguing about angels on a pinhead, but I don't particularly think that either Microsoft or Apple can be called good or evil for this reason or a host of others.

Maybe Microsoft has done some more monopolistic things than Apple, but I don't think Apple is blameless.

An article over at Extreme Tech has some interesting points.

But the more time I spend on the Mac, the more I end up interacting with a group of people who obviously and transparently treat their favorite company by a different set of rules than everyone else. And worse, don't realize it or won't admit it.

I am sure that I have heard all the arguments, and I don't agree with them, that it is okay for Apple to restrict the use of its operating system to its own hardware.

If Microsoft would restrict their operating system to only those products manufactured by companies that don't do operating systems, the screams would be immeasurable.

Some will argue that Apple does it to protect their users' experience.  At one time the only way you could get a telephone was to rent one from AT&T. It was supposed to protect the quality of the phone conversation. That's not the case anymore.

I also don't see why Apple's proprietary stuff is less evil than Microsoft's.

The point here is that both Apple & Microsoft are companies with lots of employees.  Unless you get to that certain level with a company and interact with some key executives, I'm not sure you ever get to see the soul of a company.  Even if you do see it and don't like the looks of it, it is unlikely the company as a whole is evil.

I think I came as close as you can come to seeing Apple's soul. What I saw and the actions I have seen since I left aren't particularly pretty, but I have not declared Apple evil.

I have called them incompetent at computer sales a number of times and more than hinted that some of their HR people are actually trolls, but that is the way I see it, and I doubt any rational person would come to a different conclusion if they had seen what I have seen.  It still doesn't make Apple evil or good.  It also also likely means that most corporations are similar to Apple.

The company produces great products which I still buy and use.  I still have some really good friends there, and as I have said continually, the way that Apple treats its field sales people is radically different than how it treats its Cupertino people.  Steve doesn't particularly like sales people, and it shows.

It still hasn't stopped me from doing business with Apple.  Microsoft's behaviors around the world haven't caused me to throw MS Office off my computers or kept me from buying Windows based computers.

Long ago when I worked at Apple I had bought into the Ap

Comments

[JS]

Great article :)

[Tom]

Having worked for "big pharma" for 24 years you are spot on. For most of that time I had the formula for success. Then my sponsors all retired about the same time and a new leadership team came in. In 24 months I went from one of the highest rated performers at my level in the entire company (35,000 employees) to "marginal". They (the infamous "they") then eliminated my department and gave me a nice retirement bonus. Now 5 years later I have made several multiples of 6 figures consulting for that same company simply because none of the new people they brought in after I was let go can do my old job. Plus, my consulting practice has let me do things that are REALLY interesting that would never have been possible had I not left.

The company I worked for has an excellent public image. The inside story is much of what you saw at Apple. Who you knew was at least as important as what you knew. If you worked in an area that was "blessed" by the CEO your chances were a lot better than if you were in one that was not.

I am still vacationing in Hawaii and Beaver Creek, living in a nice home (paid off by the retirement bonus) but working only about 2 days a week for pay.

Revenge is indeed living well and having fun. I'm sure you agree...

:)

Tom

[david atkins]

I'm just a Apple consumer, but I'm also an amateur evangelist. First, do you know if Steve has become 'kinder and gentler' since his near death experience? Secondly, I just can't see how you see Bill Gates in a better light than Steve's. Yea, sure Gates is using, IMHO his ill-gotten wealth to combat malaria, but are we sure he isn't somehow making money doing that? I've heard that he has had money invested in companies in Africa that actually are polluting the area where some of the recipients of his aid live.. hmm. To me it's like Steve is more the visionary, while Bill is just a pirate. I see Apple cruising like a Hydrofoil, while Microsoft is more like The Titanic.

peace, david in Mpls.,MN>

[ocracokewaves]

I guess I will have to disagree with you on that. I was still at Apple when Steve had his experience.

No one ever said anything about Steve showing a softer side.

A friend at Microsoft recently wrote this to me.

"Bill's determination to give away all of his wealth in a positive, constructive way to charity is admirable. He also has created a great sense of being self critical within MS. There is something to be said for allowing employees at all levels of the company to feel empowered to change anything at the company with established channels to talk directly to VPs/Presidents across the company."

Bill Gates made an operating system that has allowed most of the world to use computers. Many of those businesses are using MS products to deliver services to us. On top of that a robust group of partners have created systems that would have never happened without MS.

If you have bought as many companies as MS has, I seriously doubt it would be possible to give away money in only places where there is no MS money.

I certainly think the Mac would have been a much less successful product without Microsoft Excel, Word, and Powerpoint.

Was MS too aggressive at one time, probably yes. Is Apple a nicer company than MS, ask those companies who had licenses to distribute their hardware with the MacOS.

Given my choice of keeping the iPod or keeping the Windows operating system which runs most of the world's companies, I would keep Windows.

I have read Bill Gates speeches I think he is sincere. I believe what Bill says far more than Steve. My guess is Steve got religion on DRM free music when he thought the European Union was coming after him.

I'm sure that Bill Gates wants MS to continue to be successful, but I doubt he loses much sleep over Apple gaining a point or two of market share. After all if you are at 94% there not much farther that you can go.

I suspect Microsoft will be selling software long after Apple goes into spin mode when Steve disappears.

[Elder Norm]

You said, "I'm sure that Bill Gates wants MS to continue to be successful, but I doubt he loses much sleep over Apple gaining a point or two of market share. After all if you are at 94% there not much farther that you can go.

I suspect Microsoft will be selling software long after Apple goes into spin mode when Steve disappears."

I am not so sure about that. Ballmer is now running the company. Yelling is good, BSing about other companies products is standard, but that does not make your products better.

I remember only a few years ago, comments like your were standard. Microsoft products suck but they are OK cause the sort of work. Yea Microsoft. Now many people are not afraid to complain out loud about Xbox 360 and the billion dollar boondoggle. Zune .. er the what? and Vista, the suckiest OS ever.

Its like a giant tide is turning. Yes the Titannic was huge, but..... it sank. It took a while but it sank.

Apple is selling at 3-4 times the other companies. LInux is growing. Microsoft is sustaining but only if you believe the MS hype machine. (Vista rules and sells millions...... but is anyone really using it???? :-) )

Maybe the Googles and Apples are the new direction that companies are heading. Make great stuff and just let people enjoy and buy. Not try to cram junk down their mouths cause you can.

Toyota is now the largest car company in the world. Ford, GM and what-its-name are still slipping. PS, Ford joined with MS to make Zune enabled cars. Talk about joining with a sinking ship. :-)

Just a thought.

[ocracokewaves]

Most businesses in the world run on Microsoft not because it sort of works, but because it actually does work.

Does Vista need some work? Absolutely.

The one thing I have learned about Microsoft is that they have a dogged determination to keep fixing stuff.

XP has been very reliable for me, I expect them to get Vista to the same shape.

It is interesting that every time I float the idea of Apple OS X running on different platforms, people immediately say that it would be impossible for Apple to do it right because of all the different configurations.

Actually Microsoft does that with every release. Through thousands of configurations, MS products work well enough for most of the world to get their work done.

Don't get me wrong, I love Macs. I use them every day to do some work.

What I hate is this attitude that Apple only makes great products and Microsoft only makes junk.

It is just wrong. The Mac would have probably disappeared without MS's Office suite.

I have been using Vista for several days now. I can get everything done on it that I can on my Mac. Some of it is faster, some of it is slower, but they both work.

I am actually quite happy for Apple to keep improving their products and for Microsoft to keep making their stuff better. I also expect the Linux folks to keep making progress.

I wouldn't bet on any of these operating systems disappearing.

While Balmer may make a lot of noise, I seriously doubt he is any more or less good or evil than Steve Jobs.

[veggiedude]

"I also don't see why Apple's proprietary stuff is less evil than Microsoft's."

It isn't. Microsoft can do anything they want with their zune and X-box, and with the keyboards and mice they make.

Just as Apple can do anything they want with their Macs and iPods and other misc hardware.

The trouble is when you confuse the two.

You see Microsoft being accused of being a monopoly in the PC world and can't differentiate the difference when you see Apple with 80% of the music player market and somehow isn't being accused of being a monopoly.

But the two are not the same. MS exerts its power over hardware companies it does not own. Apple exerts power over hardware it does own.

Big diff.