Did Microsoft Really Copy Apple? [Updated]

It has always been a running joke that Microsoft’s Windows systems look surprisingly like Apple’s OSX systems, with features like desktop search in the taskbar, and the look of Vista.

There are two schools of thought here – on the one side, Microsoft copies all (or most) of their ideas from Apple, and claims them as their own executing the copies as originals. On the other side, Microsoft doesn’t take their ideas from Apple – period – and the similarities are purely coincidental.

I’d like to take you through a new concept – The Usability Funnel. This is a concept covering the evolution of operating systems and their interaction with humans.

The history of Microsoft and Apple is long, and entwined, with the two companies famously butting heads for years. (If you DO know the history here, skip the next couple of paragraphs)

In 1988, Apple Computer inc. (now Apple inc.) licenced Graphic User Interface elements to Microsoft for Windows 1.0, but when Microsoft made changes in Windows 2.0 making the interface more mac-like, Apple filed suit, claiming that the licence terms had been violated. There have been many occasions since then, where Microsoft and Apple have crossed swords, leading to Apple being incredibly protective of its intellectual property, and an air of resentment between the two companies, and some some childish bickering.

But, as I said in the title, did – or does – Microsoft copy Apple’s ideas? On the surface, it would appear that this is a no-brainer – given the similarities between XP and Tiger, and of course Vista and Leopard.

Stop for a moment here – try and forget about Windows, Vista, Linux, and other operating systems. Imagine an operating system entirely your own, with your own look, and all of the features that you want in an OS. Go ahead, I’ll wait.

Now, I bet that your dream OS has buttons, boxes, icons, and other metaphors like the desktop. It may even have a bar at the top or bottom.

Either way, my point is that Windows, Linux, and Mac all share these characteristics, because all the time, all three are moving toward a better, more intuitive user interface that better understands, and molds around the user. In a standard 2 dimensional environment, is there any other way to do this?

I think it’s a viable theory that the interface of computers has been shaped by not just research and focus groups, but by sales and the reaction from the users themselves. Is the explanation that this is really the best way for humans to interact with machines?

Let’s look at this another way. Think of this as what I like to call the “Usability Funnel”, in which there is one point of perfect interaction between machine and human, and all of these GUI-enabled operating systems are heading toward this point. In this scenario, Microsoft isn’t copying Apple, but moving towards the same goal.

 

 

Above: My depiction of the “Usability Funnel”

Overall, I think this is a provable theory that could really work. I may continue with this idea in the future, and I’d really appreciate your input on this. Developer, user, or observer? Comment here or email me, tell me what you think of this concept.

[Update]

In response to the comments on this article, I agree, that in the beginning – Microsoft did become a mirror for Apple products, and yes, Bill has admitted that he likes the Mac OS numerous times.

However, I stand by my diagram regardless. The reason that it is a funnel shape is to signify the point of optimum interface with humans. Please also note that the graph does not represent time on either axis, just usability and user integration.

And yes, Aero and Aqua do share some clear similarities, but at the same time I don’t think that this has a significant effect on the user’s interaction with the machine, it’s still a 2D interface with windows, buttons, boxes, and so on.

Is there any other way to express these metaphors besides icons, windows, bars, buttons, and the like?

Thanks for reading,

Graham