I hate the term platform in technology writing. Writers use the word in a vague hand-waving way to refer to a piece of hardware or software, or both.
Like ‘thing’ the word comes in useful when the writer means to avoid precision.
Platform is also used as padding to make the subject sound more important. For example, there are writers who think “the Windows platform” somehow trumps “the Windows operating system” or even plain old “Windows”.
Likewise “the Intel platform”, or any other variation.
The same is true ‘environment‘. To me an environment is a pond with frogs hopping around. A rain forest is an environment.
To describe an operating system as an environment is pompous, wordy and just poor communications.
I can accept Windows being described as ‘software’, the word is accurate, if not precise. We can shorten operating system to OS when communicating with more tech-savvy readers.
There are people who think Apple’s tightly knit combination of software and hardware qualifies as a platform or an environment – though often people who use one term will use both to mean exactly the same thing. It isn’t the same thing, the two words have distinct meanings.
In the real world software neatly integrated with hardware adds up to a first class computer.
If you want to talk about what goes on in the world of Apple computers, say so, be precise, be accurate, call it an Apple computer. That’s a perfectly respectable term. It is unambiguous.
Good writing is clear, concise and unambiguous. “Platform” and “environment” fail on all three counts.