> "GP clearly said that it was Jobs' obsession that was revolutionary."

And that's utterly inaccurate; nothing about that kind of behavior was revolutionary in any way; lots of CEOs were, are and will be obsessed with quality. If they can translate that into product lines, and to what extend, is written on another piece of paper.

I, for my part, was never impressed with Apple; their only product I really liked was one that Jobs allegedly hated: the Newton.

> "In bringing up modern Apple, you are arguing against things no one here has said."

It contrasts the criticism of modern Windows the guy I replied to brought up. :)

> "And are you actually claiming that Windows is an open ecosystem...?"

Uhm... no. But the IBM-compatible family obviously was and still is (x86/x64). It's not exactly Sharp's OS-agnostic "clean computer" concept, but it's the next best thing.

> "And in fact so great is its openness that slow UX isn't even a problem?"

Again, no. I said the Windows UX is, or can be, fast enough and is therefore virtually a non-problem (Windows's problems have much more to do with Microsoft's abominable corporate culture).

Unless you're computer illiterate and bloat-up your system with badly-coded applications, and/or don't do due dilligence by way of choosing, streamlining and maintaining the best Windows version for you in the first place. And yes, I'm aware that both can sometimes not be avoided as one is forced into specific toolchains.