It looks like the Godwin’s link didn’t play nice with the apostrophe. It should be:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

I know it was a bit provocative, but I actually meant it.
1.
Every new product, OS and software upgrade for iLife, iWork etc. from Apple is a “revolutionary new …” making everything, even that gadget they released themselves only 5 months ago, completely obsolete. They get everyone, especially me:) , worked up over some small enhancement to the OS/Software/Hardware that 50% never knew they needed and 50% never will use. It’s brilliant, they don’t force it on me or twist my arm..but I want it, why? See 2. and 3.

2. and 3.
Ohh Apple is the undisputed master of cloak and daggers, I really don’t believe that the “cellphone pictures from distant asian factories” and the “trusted sources” doesn’t sometimes come directly from Apples top with clear instructions on how to bait the blogosphere. This makes all the “analysts” reading the blogs go ape doo-doo and start praising stuff that nobody ever saw.
Apple might be all the way up there when it comes to marketing budgets, but they generate at least twice that amount of publicity from the bottom up at 1/100 of the cost. Leading me on to..
4.
Apple makes mastermind campaigns that goes directly for the heart, cause that is where the money is. MS tried going “You can have a business solution with..bla bla bla” but Apple went “This is so sexy and easy to use that it will definitely rub off on you if you buy it” even though it sounds sinister, it actually shows that Apple knows they are selling stuff to real people, which again rubs of on the way they put together their products. Microsoft still thinks their customers are minions they can boss around. Apple uses this with surgical precision, everything timed around keynotes, WWDC and competitors product releases.

So that was why I used “subtle and elegant” :) but still claim that the tactics could just as well be Apples.

You could make that same statement for the majority of recent OSes, as they’re all pretty mature. What can you do with Leopard that you couldn’t do with OS X 10.0, really? I mean, sure, there are lots of little things, lots of new products and features, but is there a fundamental difference between the functionality of the two operating systems? I don’t think so.

Also, are you familiar enough with Windows to know what’s in it? Not a slam, but a genuine question, because I’ve noticed that people on both sides of the Mac/PC divide seem terribly well aware of the benefits of their chosen platform, but only aware of the faults of the other.

They just didn’t have the smarts to port to Windows or Apple’s OS. Left behind when everyone else moved on from DOS.

Just to chip in my take on this…

Firstly OS X and XP came out about the same time. OS X has had 4 major paid updates (10.1 was free upgrade) Windows has had 1. Now I would say 10.0/1 were not a great OS’s, it did not come into it’s own until 10.3.

So if you take how much OS X has changed since 2001 and how much it’s improved and compare that to how much Windows has improved since 2001 then Apple has come the furthest.

The big difference seem to be OS X has advanced with harmony while Windows has fragmented. How many version of Windows has there been since the first version of XP? But OS X has made each version a bit better without sacrificing features.

10.2 was mainly software improvements/additions and generally making the whole thing better.
10.3 brought a more refined UI, fast user switching, Exposé and Safari.
10.4 Spotlight, Dashboard, Smart Folders
10.5 Time Machine, Spaces, quick view

While brining all these new features and more Apple also worked on converting the whole OS and all the software to be 64 bit while keeping 32 bit apps running ok and supporting Intel and PowerPC chipsets.

I have still yet to see a great list of things Windows 7 can do over windows XP (or even windows 98 for that matter). To me it still seems to be the registry based windows of old with lots of patches… And it still can’t read an OS X formatted drive out of the box!

Apple’s primary claim to fame (and source of annoyance to most tech writers and analysts) is their secrecy. I don’t understand how you can say that steps 1 and 2 in the FUD steps are part of their tactics at all. They are not. Apple has let information out about Snow Leopard of course, but has done so slowly, and is rumored to be hiding plenty. They are notorious for this.

As for pre-announcing products, you can’t be serious. That’s normally the exact opposite of Apple’s strategies.

For the most part, I think OS X has been evolutionary as well. (Well, pretty much since 10.2.) That MAY not be true of Snow Leopard, as it appears they’re working a lot deeper under the surface, but that remains to be seen.

Understand I have no issue with Windows 7 being a nice evolution to Vista. In fact, I said as much. But all Vista — as opposed to Longhorn before it — was supposed to be was a modern and more secure XP. If Win7 gets Vista “right”, that’s STILL all it is.

I am not against a concentrated ad campaign, but I believe a boatload of it is FUD spread by a willing (or ignorant) press. MS can still get the presses rolling like no company can. Not even close.

Im a bit slow, was the above bullets Apple’s or Microsoft’s strategy ;)

Sorry but it does look a bit like Apple’s tactics, they just carry them out much more elegant and subtle… i.e. not using a fat bald man screaming and shaking his fist at the moon.

With Microsoft they always feel the need to throw their old products away to the point where they almost rubbish them in order to promote there new system.

Apples system of progressive refinement, at a vastly more reasonable price with far less confusing version options is easer for me to stomach. It also gives the impression that they have respect for their own product whereas Microsoft dump their current OS the minute a new one is on the horizon and expect you to upgrade your computer and shell out a couple of hundred pounds for the privilege of using it.