This scholarship essay is due Sept. 1, 2010 and will be evaluated for grammar and the ability to present thoughts clearly. Any help is greatly appreciated though I would like to focus on grammar and clarity. Thank you!
REMOVED
When one thinks of a business, one should think of profits. They are the ultimate goal of a business and in order to achieve the maximum profit possible, a business will virtually use any viable tactic. Back in the 1940's and '50s, after one buys a car, fridge, house, and microwave, what more did one need? Business owners would begin to worry because their factories had the potential to make lots more, but with no demand, the factories would eventually shut down resulting in fewer profits. However, manufacturers soon found a new tactic that would prevent their factories from ever slowing down-planned obsolescence. It is an industrial tactic of deliberately designing a product with a limited life so that the product becomes obsolete after a certain period. In short, companies want us to buy the same product over and over again after adding new features. Today, Apple is the epitome of planned obsolescence.
Throughout its 33-year history, Apple has consistently voted to limit consumer choice in its products. In an era where the Internet is integrated into daily life, the original iPad released on April 3, 2010 came with no 3G wireless connectivity even though the technology was already used on other products for a number of years such as the Amazon Kindle and Microsoft Zune. Other features that consumers expected the iPad to include were a camera for video chat, a USB port allowing syncing between numerous products such as printers and camcorders, and Adobe Flash. On April 30, 2010, just a few weeks after the original release, the Apple iPad Wi-Fi + 3G hit the stores in the United States. The new release was not a desperate attempt to make Apple's client base happier; it was the perfect example of planned obsolescence for profits. Both versions could have been released on the same day, but the well planned release dates of the two iPads were meant to increase Apple's profits, not make the consumer happier.
Apple's exclusion of essential features is not similar to Microsoft releasing operating systems every few years. Although Microsoft is still just like any company looking to make a profit, they have not used the planned obsolescence tactic that Apple has used on its products. Windows ME, released in September 2000, added a host of new features such as System Restore and Universal Plug and Play to the core Windows 98. While Apple chose to exclude features that were essential and already available, Microsoft chose to include innovative features never before used in computing. One may argue that Microsoft also uses the planned obsolescence tactic, pushing out operating systems only to be replaced by better ones. In retrospect, Microsoft's replacements were a consequence of negative criticism and for the purpose of making their client base happier. Windows ME was heavily criticized by its client base for its frequent crashes, freezes, and slowness. The Millennium Edition was even dubbed the "Mistake Edition" by PC World, placing it 4th on their "Worst Tech Products of All Time" article. However, in an attempt to make their client base happier, Microsoft released Windows XP just two years after Windows ME was released. The new operating system received universal acclaim after fixing many of ME's problems and lasted for a full five long years that proved its success. Similarly, after Windows Vista received negative reviews from critics and users, Microsoft promptly began working on the anticipated Windows 7.
In order to protect consumers from technological mistakes like Microsoft's Windows ME, a lemon law can't be placed on computing due to the many variables that affect the "quality and performance" of the software. The "performance" of the software depends on the hardware inside the computer such as the processor speed and the random-access memory (RAM). A really fast processor will allow you to load Windows pretty fast and the user will be happy, however with a slow processor Windows will take ages to load and the user will complain. Furthermore, Microsoft doesn't produce computers; they only make the Windows operating systems and the Microsoft Office suites. Computers today are built by Dell, Sony, Lenovo, Hewett Packard, Apple, and many others, and each of these companies already provides a one year manufacturers' warranty on its computers should anything happen. Other factors such as Apple's exclusion of obvious features also can't be restricted by laws. Apple is free to produce any product they want however they want in our free market economy. The government can't tell Apple to add a camera to the iPad.
While Microsoft and Apple are compared readily, they are more different than similar. Currently, 91% of computers use a Windows OS and only 5% use a Mac OS. Microsoft has been so successful because mainly because they have licensed out the Windows OS allowing multiple manufacturers such as Dell, Sony, and HP to use Windows and build their own computers. This builds competition between the companies allowing for a wide range of Windows computers for consumers. In today's economy where one can get a perfectly useable Windows computer for $600, a comparable Mac would cost two to three times as much. Apple, on the other hand, hasn't allowed other companies to use the Mac OS and have kept their price and quality higher than the Windows manufacturers. Ultimately, a Windows PC is generally seen as the choice for best value while a Mac is seen as the choice for best quality.
Apple, being one of the largest technology companies, also exercises more control over what its consumer can and can't do than does Microsoft. For example, buying an iPhone requires a contract with AT&T and only AT&T. Buying songs for an iPod requires buying from Apple through iTunes. Updating iTunes to a new version usually requires installing unwanted software such as Apple's internet browser, Safari. Buying apps for any of Apple's products requires buying through their App Store, which restricts developers from selling any app they want, unlike the Android OS. In the end, while Apple makes great products, they limit their consumers' choices costing consumers more.
For these reasons, neither Apple nor Microsoft will claim victory over the other. Apple will always be too expensive and limiting for most consumers. For others, a Windows OS computer will not offer the quality a Mac OS does. An open source solution, such as Linux, will also not make the Windows OS or Mac OS obsolete mainly because people tend to stick to what they already have. Software developers will keep developing for the most popular operating systems thus many programs will not work on Linux. In addition, Linux is tailored toward tech-savvy users, not the everyday normal user.
In the end, when it comes to listening to the consumers to make their lives easier and simpler, both Microsoft and Apple are winners. Otherwise, they wouldn't be where they are now. However, when we look at the real reason to why Microsoft and Apple listen to their consumers, we find that it is not because they have our best interests in mind, but because they have their own profits in mind. After all, they're not non-profit businesses, they're businesses for profits.
by Parth Patel
Any help is appreciated. Thank You!
REMOVED
When one thinks of a business, one should think of profits. They are the ultimate goal of a business and in order to achieve the maximum profit possible, a business will virtually use any viable tactic. Back in the 1940's and '50s, after one buys a car, fridge, house, and microwave, what more did one need? Business owners would begin to worry because their factories had the potential to make lots more, but with no demand, the factories would eventually shut down resulting in fewer profits. However, manufacturers soon found a new tactic that would prevent their factories from ever slowing down-planned obsolescence. It is an industrial tactic of deliberately designing a product with a limited life so that the product becomes obsolete after a certain period. In short, companies want us to buy the same product over and over again after adding new features. Today, Apple is the epitome of planned obsolescence.
Throughout its 33-year history, Apple has consistently voted to limit consumer choice in its products. In an era where the Internet is integrated into daily life, the original iPad released on April 3, 2010 came with no 3G wireless connectivity even though the technology was already used on other products for a number of years such as the Amazon Kindle and Microsoft Zune. Other features that consumers expected the iPad to include were a camera for video chat, a USB port allowing syncing between numerous products such as printers and camcorders, and Adobe Flash. On April 30, 2010, just a few weeks after the original release, the Apple iPad Wi-Fi + 3G hit the stores in the United States. The new release was not a desperate attempt to make Apple's client base happier; it was the perfect example of planned obsolescence for profits. Both versions could have been released on the same day, but the well planned release dates of the two iPads were meant to increase Apple's profits, not make the consumer happier.
Apple's exclusion of essential features is not similar to Microsoft releasing operating systems every few years. Although Microsoft is still just like any company looking to make a profit, they have not used the planned obsolescence tactic that Apple has used on its products. Windows ME, released in September 2000, added a host of new features such as System Restore and Universal Plug and Play to the core Windows 98. While Apple chose to exclude features that were essential and already available, Microsoft chose to include innovative features never before used in computing. One may argue that Microsoft also uses the planned obsolescence tactic, pushing out operating systems only to be replaced by better ones. In retrospect, Microsoft's replacements were a consequence of negative criticism and for the purpose of making their client base happier. Windows ME was heavily criticized by its client base for its frequent crashes, freezes, and slowness. The Millennium Edition was even dubbed the "Mistake Edition" by PC World, placing it 4th on their "Worst Tech Products of All Time" article. However, in an attempt to make their client base happier, Microsoft released Windows XP just two years after Windows ME was released. The new operating system received universal acclaim after fixing many of ME's problems and lasted for a full five long years that proved its success. Similarly, after Windows Vista received negative reviews from critics and users, Microsoft promptly began working on the anticipated Windows 7.
In order to protect consumers from technological mistakes like Microsoft's Windows ME, a lemon law can't be placed on computing due to the many variables that affect the "quality and performance" of the software. The "performance" of the software depends on the hardware inside the computer such as the processor speed and the random-access memory (RAM). A really fast processor will allow you to load Windows pretty fast and the user will be happy, however with a slow processor Windows will take ages to load and the user will complain. Furthermore, Microsoft doesn't produce computers; they only make the Windows operating systems and the Microsoft Office suites. Computers today are built by Dell, Sony, Lenovo, Hewett Packard, Apple, and many others, and each of these companies already provides a one year manufacturers' warranty on its computers should anything happen. Other factors such as Apple's exclusion of obvious features also can't be restricted by laws. Apple is free to produce any product they want however they want in our free market economy. The government can't tell Apple to add a camera to the iPad.
While Microsoft and Apple are compared readily, they are more different than similar. Currently, 91% of computers use a Windows OS and only 5% use a Mac OS. Microsoft has been so successful because mainly because they have licensed out the Windows OS allowing multiple manufacturers such as Dell, Sony, and HP to use Windows and build their own computers. This builds competition between the companies allowing for a wide range of Windows computers for consumers. In today's economy where one can get a perfectly useable Windows computer for $600, a comparable Mac would cost two to three times as much. Apple, on the other hand, hasn't allowed other companies to use the Mac OS and have kept their price and quality higher than the Windows manufacturers. Ultimately, a Windows PC is generally seen as the choice for best value while a Mac is seen as the choice for best quality.
Apple, being one of the largest technology companies, also exercises more control over what its consumer can and can't do than does Microsoft. For example, buying an iPhone requires a contract with AT&T and only AT&T. Buying songs for an iPod requires buying from Apple through iTunes. Updating iTunes to a new version usually requires installing unwanted software such as Apple's internet browser, Safari. Buying apps for any of Apple's products requires buying through their App Store, which restricts developers from selling any app they want, unlike the Android OS. In the end, while Apple makes great products, they limit their consumers' choices costing consumers more.
For these reasons, neither Apple nor Microsoft will claim victory over the other. Apple will always be too expensive and limiting for most consumers. For others, a Windows OS computer will not offer the quality a Mac OS does. An open source solution, such as Linux, will also not make the Windows OS or Mac OS obsolete mainly because people tend to stick to what they already have. Software developers will keep developing for the most popular operating systems thus many programs will not work on Linux. In addition, Linux is tailored toward tech-savvy users, not the everyday normal user.
In the end, when it comes to listening to the consumers to make their lives easier and simpler, both Microsoft and Apple are winners. Otherwise, they wouldn't be where they are now. However, when we look at the real reason to why Microsoft and Apple listen to their consumers, we find that it is not because they have our best interests in mind, but because they have their own profits in mind. After all, they're not non-profit businesses, they're businesses for profits.
by Parth Patel
Any help is appreciated. Thank You!
