So it's fair to say the "new features" are new to Apple users and not necessarily to the tech world in general? That's more of what I was wondering about. Apple has the luxury of flying under the hacker radar for now. The true test of their character will be if/when they are targeted by the hackers. That was a HUGE stumbling block for MSFT and a big reason I believe linux is becoming so popular. Linux presents ZERO challenge to hackers given it's origins so it's left alone. I think there is a market share to be held by both apple and msft, personally. They can coexist and still thrive in their respective niches. The only question is, which one will be greedy enough to push the envelope and fall flat on their faces?
To the bolded part I would say you have it completely backwards. Apple's OS Tiger was far superior to what XP could do with innovations using the OS. Vista from what I have seen on YouTube and other testimonials, to me, looks a lot like Tiger and in my mind is a copy of the "innovations" Tiger made into the computing world. Vista only looks like it is innovative and new because most Windows users never cross Apple's OS or care to even acknowledge its existence. Now, Apple's new OS has been shown by Jobs, and YouTube if you want to see, and the basic functions are even more innovative and user friendly. Most people will never come in contact with it though as they never cross paths with Apple. Apple is ahead of the game, they have to be, but I would never say they are playing catch up. They are playing their own game and perfecting that. If and when they feel the need to jump into the business world they will make small leaps and be successful at it. The pie is large and Apple is eating away at it nibble by nibble... not bite by bite.
I am not comparing just msft and apple. Adonis said the new apple os is based partly on the linux environment, so that wouldn't be "new" to me as a general technology person since I deal in linux more than anything, but it would be "new" to an apple user. Same goes with 64 bit technology or the use of intel chips etc. All that technology has been around for a great while. And while Apple is catching up, the introduction of these features to their platform may be new, but the concepts and base technology aren't. That's what I am trying to understand. So I'll ask again....the innovation you speak of...is it just apple incorporating existing technology into their world, or are they creating new technology of their own?
As far as the OS goes, the best description I can give is that they're making technology that has been available in general form for a while, accessible to any person. Not many people have the ability to run a linux machine, I'd guess fewer than 5% of all PC users. Not many people can understand the significance of 64-bit OS's, or have the ability to backup their machines, or many of the other things that are perhaps second nature to advanced technology users. What Apple does better than anyone else is to make this type of technology available to the average person. They pioneer user interfaces which are intuitive, stable, secure and simple. They simplify the entire user experience of using a PC through their production of their own OS, and their design of their own hardware. People say that Apple products "just work" and they do, precisely because Apple controls all aspects of using their computers, from the OS to the hardware. They've built their software on a secure base, and have apparently fully shifted to a UNIX based OS. They use advanced technology under their intuitive and pleasant OS and make it available to the average user.
So when I speak of innovation and Apple, I don't only mean a specific technological innovation, like developing radically new software or hardware. They're innovative in their ability to take what exists, package it into an accessible product that people enjoy using. The iMacs don't resemble any other PC in the industry. It's an innovative way of presenting a PC.
As far as real innovation, they developed a touch-screen for their iPhone that's better than anything out there, and they revolutionalized the portable mp3 industry by producing an elegant and easy to use product in the iPod.
Think of it this way. Linux is built on a Unix core, right? How many average users use Linux? How accessible is it? Now think of OS X Leopard. It's a UNIX OS. Compare it to Sun, or Linux, and see just how well Apple has utilized what exists, and packaged it into a form that can be used by anyone, without throwing away the underlying power of UNIX. It's still accessible, from a terminal and perhaps other ways. And think of how well the software and hardware work together, and how well any products that interface with their system works. Printers, wireless networks, external hard drives, etc. All available prior to Apple using them, but Apple uses them in ways that make them very simple to use.
And as far as Apple playing catch-up, I think that's certainly not the case. Apple isn't trying to catch Microsoft, implying that their product was somehow inferior, or lower-featured than the OS MS puts out. Their hardware wasn't inferior to other PC's or laptops either. They're blazing their own trail, not following behind MS or Dell or Gateway. Apple has taken a different direction, off the beaten trail, and only recently have people discovered that their trail is actually just as long, if not longer, and perhaps more scenic too, than the one Microsoft has made. More people are willing to walk down Apple's path now, and they're seeing what it has to offer.