Slashdot Mirror
Dismal Apple Forecasts Are Wrong
Nutrimentia writes "Tom Yager has a new column at Infoworld disputing poor analytic forecasts of Apple's future, especially based on criticism of Apple's lack of innovation (which seems to me to be pretty easy to refute, but whatever). It's a balanced article that looks at what Apple is doing right and wrong, and he offers some good reasons to pay attention to Apple even if you aren't a Mac fan, namely that the company's approaches to the market help understand many broader trends in effect."
First it was Petreley on Linux marketshare, then it is Yager on why to take Apple seriously. Infoworld should let CmdrTaco or Hemos do a guest column, assuming they've got enough editorial power to overcome all those typos. :)
http://tinyurl.com/4ny52
It's not as bad as Ross Perot thinking that there's no money in investing in Microsoft.
A: We'll soon find out!
He's right on target about developer training & documentation. It sucks big-time: poorly categorized and there is lots of missing information.
When I'm looking for an answer to a technical problem, I typically find answers at sites like Mamasam or CocoaDev. The Cocoa Dev Central site is a good source of sample code, too. Many more resources are listed here
Historically, Mac developer's have been very picky about this: Inside Macintosh is wonderful. It's an excellent technical reference presented in a consistent and easily readible format.
might as well turn off comments, trolls have got this one!
As an admitted Apple zealot, I used to get so pissed off about finacial analysts getting thier collective panties in a bunch about Apple going out of business within a year or so... Now I just don't care what they say. Apple is a good company, they respond quickly to market trends, and often are the ones setting trends, but they are not too quick to create a stupid PDA that nobody wants (anymore). They have about $4 billion on paper, the good kind of paper, CASH. For a company as relatively small as Apple is, they innovate and create or help to create more standards they just about anyone out there.
One last thought, just to show I'm not a completely blind follower of Lord Jobs. Had Apple not gotten OSX so gosh darn right, I would have bailed, OS9 was showing it's age and starting to get real flakey under stress. I'd either be running a user-friendly (although OSX has taught me a good deal of under the hood UNIX stuff) or, shudder to think, Win2K. However, I believe they did get OSX right, in my opinion, besides the first Macintosh, it's the greatest thing Apple has ever done.
Apple needs some fast processors from IBM and the education market back.
They will be fine.
Cloud City Digital: DVD Production at its cheapest/finest
I guess I was out of touch with the analysts of late, because I didn't know they thought things were so bad. Still, it's a good thing I wasn't paying rapt attention to them, or I would've sold my PowerBook and bought it back about 5 times in the past two years.
What I don't get it why they haven't figured it out yet that Apple is strong and steady, unlike its counterparts. The blips on the rader are just that, blips. I find it quite ironic that the people who are supposed to have this figured out are the ones who understand it the least.
Boom Shanka
Apple is still a computer company to watch, although it may be of lesser interest to stockholders today. Still, if you were to bet on any one personal computer company to make something that would transform a process, Apple is a safe bet.
Apple is where it is now for several great ideas and collossal screw-ups, many of which determined the company's present destiny.
(My history highlights come from Apple History to make my point easier, and for your reference.)
1977: The Apple II is born, beginning the personal computer boom in earnest. Apple develops, by some estimates, a 75% market share.
1984: Apple develops a successor to the Apple II line, the Macintosh. It used a graphical interface and mouse and was the first computer with a GUI to become commercially successful. Apple boneheads the initial fate of the Mac's success by: (1) failing to make Apple II apps work with the computer, (2) making the system underpowered until 1986, (3) making the computer with a 9-inch screen that was hard on the eyes, and (4) making the Mac very expensive ($2495).
1986: Apple updates the Macintosh with the Mac Plus, with more RAM, external SCSI support, and a true hierarchial file system update for the OS. A software company, Aldus, creates PageMaker, which takes steam as the first desktop publishing program. Apple soon offers the LaserWriter, one of the first laser printers. A good move by Apple that still gives them the lead in DTP and prepress work today.
1985: Bill Gates sends a memo to then-Apple CEO John Sculley (having been hired by Steve Jobs and then, shortly, has Jobs ousted from Apple). Gates recommends that Apple license the Macintosh (warning: PDF) to make it a standard computer operating system. Gates recognized that Macs were great but weren't reaching critical mass. When Apple refused, Gates requested a license to duplicate the look and feel of some of the Mac OS in a product he was considering with IBM. Biggest bonehead move of all for Apple as this would've made the landscape completely different from the OS world we know today.
1988: Apple finally offers a Mac with internal hardware expandability, including a larger screen: the Macintosh II. It was too late for those who chose a more expandable IBM PC. This moves breathes life into its products, and vendor support improves.
1990-1998: Apple creates more good, innovative ideas, such as the PowerBook laptop (whose design elements are commonplace on PC laptops today) and the Newton (the first PDA), but never capitalizes on them as they want to hold on to all rights. This"not-invented-here" policy nearly kills the company as expensive, confusing models aren't clear, and developers find Windows apps more lucrative. Apple's overall market share plummets. Windows 95's debut makes this worse. Apple considers and offers Mac OS licensing, but this only makes Apple's problems worse as 3rd party clones are better products than Apple's.
Apple completely loses its marketing model. Steve Jobs ousts CEO Gil Amelio to return to as company CEO and begins to repair Apple's products and credibility.
In my opinion, Apple's best move would've been in licensing themselves. It may have killed Apple ultimately, but the Macintosh technologies would have survived and improved dramatically as the PC clones have proved out over time.
Is Apple still a force to be reckoned with? Even if you don't know an Apple from a PC, the company history suggests that, if there is a new spin on a computer program or hardware product, Apple usually thinks of it first. Unlike the Apple of the past, however, don't expect Apple to abandon its creations at the first sign of trouble.
Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
I think that the big financial types keep seeing all this new press for Apple, and then look at sales. They are still treading water in the 3% area. They keep hoping for 10%. I doubt it. If the iMac/iBook/iPod/OS X press can't help 'em, I don't know what will :(
And yet, amazingly, Apple has been one of the most consistently successful computer companies of the past five years.
Sounds like somebody at Apple knows more about this than you do.
Just take a look at this article at www.imaging-resource.com.
...And we'd spent the whole time -- not just a large part of it -- arranging the show contents rather than fighting the program interface.... We were done at 6:26." He said "...the only [really] aggravating part of the whole process [was] getting the blessed cellophane wrapping off the blank DVD. We can't wait to get these in spindles."
This isn't a Mac bigot. This is a guy that completed a slide show project, after much struggle, using DVDit on a Wintel box. "Some helpful souls suggested we'd enjoy life more if we used iDVD on the Mac. So we did."
He started working at 4:50 p.m. Every darn thing he tried just plain worked the way he expected. "At 6:10 we were ready to burn.
Apple's situation has been the same as it always been. Microsoft, like IBM before it, has the hearts and minds of the corporate IT departments and wins all the top-down purchasing decisions.
But everyone who actually has to use the things finds that Apple's hardware and software, overall, are just plain easier, nicer, faster, and more productive to use than Wintel gear.
As long as the people who actually use computers have any say whatever in what computers they use, Apple has a bright future.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
Do Apple really have an exclusive deal with Sony Ericsson on syncable mobile phones? I thought it was just the competition (read: Nokia) that just had sub-standard SyncML implementations.
Oh well, I still love my T68i.
"I tend to think of OS X as Linux with QA and Taste", James Gosling, creator of Java
In Apple's latest numbers released in January for its fiscal first quarter of 2003, revenue fell from a year earlier and all of the company's major computer lines saw diminished numbers. PowerMac sales were down 20%, while iBook sales fell 8%.
At the same time Apple's sales were falling, PC sales rose, though just slightly, according to figures from IDC released last month.
The last time Apple was in this state, it brought back co-founder Steve Jobs to fix its issues. He fostered the development of the iMac and secured a US$150-million investment from Microsoft. But there aren't any new iMacs in Apple's future and Microsoft, bolstered by its victory over the U.S. Department of Justice, is clearly not going to help the beleaguered computer maker this time.
So what have you got left? Apple is a company that controls around 3% of the computer market, has recently undergone a restructuring and is slowly fading into nothingness. Software makers don't even have Mac users on their radar and it's not like Apple can bring Mr. Jobs back to right the ship this time -- he's already there.
Stick a fork in 'em -- this Apple is cooked.
He was at his church trying to use thier windows pc to print the church budget for a meeting. Windows kept giving him the error message that 'either the printer is off or the port is disconnected.' Well it wasn't. It was hooked up and it is usb. My roommate after several tried gave up and hooked the usb cord for the printer up to his ibook. The ibook recgonized the printer, and he was able to print. He was so happy as there was no software installation nothing. Just plug in USB and print.
Now before the mac haters or basher start I wil lsay this. Mac is missing a few things, like drivers for certain hardware. However the hardware that it does have drivers for works easily in my experience. Apple has done a wonderful job with their OS X and if windows was 1/2 as good we would not need as many desktop 'PC = personal computer' (which includes macs) admins. Yes some people would be out of jobs. I now do 0 admin on his machine whereas windows I was was doing lots of debugging because this or that did not work. I love mac's cause that have literally made MY life easeier. Your experience may vary, but I love the macs,a nd as soon as I can afford a powerbook, I'm getting one....
Only 'flamers' flame!
This is rediculous. apple is the first companie to mainstream unix in a way that a secratary can use it. they are using the G4 processor. by the way if you look at the bech marks and the the way the processors are built. are superior to amd and intel. and you look at the engineering. mac products are guaranteed to work with mac products. the same people who think that pcs are superior to macs also believe that coors light will make you sexy and cool. intel and amd are called junk processors for a reason.
for the first time in the history of computing unix can be used on the desktop. and here the slashdot crowd is being pessimistic.
talk about silly.
Now, enter iWorks, Apple's forthcoming answer to that bug-laden piece of poorly programmed crap that should still be in Alpha, called MS Office.
Apple is taking on MS on every front. In the enterprise, they're producing powerful, cheap, easy to deploy servers. And now they're producing the clients for those servers.
The day of the desktop PC for personal use is over, and Apple is the only company to see it. Desktops still have uses in the Enterprise, and Apple is poised to take over there as well.
did you save easter?
The personal would be slow to innovate if it weren't for Apple. Apple is the only computer that is willing to think outside of the box. Other have mentioned it before GUI interface, USB, Firewire, Good Design, etc. Does anyone think Dell and the likes would really fork tons money into R&D when they too busy cost-each other? Not really but they will borrow ideas from Apple once they have been proven to sell (wide-screen Insprions, thin and light centrinos with large battery life, gigabit ethernet in ThinkPads, DVD-R everywhere etc.) To tell the truth, I don't think anyone wants to see Apple go because then would have to start innovating for themselves.
You don't have to be smart to use a Mac, you just have to be smart enough to buy one
I find Entourage to be indispensable. I know there are worthy alternative products but this app works for me and never crashes. Word is another story. Don't know why.
"Form should follow function...unless it's just plain ugly."
If you'd said "don't blame the OS for crappy apps," or "don't blame the hardware for crappy apps," I might agree with you. But you specifically brought up the term "platform," which implies that we're talking about the whole package that's actually available to the user. Application quality is extremely relevant to that discussion.
The software you recommend appears to have a list price of $999.99. Compared to iDVD's price of free, that's a substantial downside. For that additional thousand bucks, you could buy a copy of Final Cut Pro, and once again leapfrog the functionality of the Windows software.
Check them out:
http://search.lists.apple.com/
Apple's ADC pages have quite a bit of source code as well I've found invaluable. No its not as nice as the initial volumes of Inside Mac were. However given the work Apple is doing on its development tools, there is too much of a moving target to have a tool like that. Apple's worked with O'Reilly to produce quality introductory materials. They also recognize that, unlike the 80's, most of us use the internet to get "how-to's." So it really is a different environment.
http://developer.apple.com/macosx/
besides, how do you account for the gay man's superior sense of style?
and, how do you account for proving this point by cutting-and-pasting the same woefully pathetic incendiary letter on every single goddam apple post?
how, AC, do you reconcile the fact that you are somehow *threatened* by what is (by your own admission) the mac's superior technology? how do you respond to that without looking for all the world like Jackass Prime?
answer: you don't.
Why does the general public think that 5% marketshare is a shameful thing in the computer world?
Why are people threatened to the point of flameage over the simple existence of Mac hardware?
Why does Apple provoke such intense reactions?
They must be one of the most scrutenized companies in the world. And, as everyone knows, the joke is so old its got whiskers: "Sure Apple is going out of business. They'll still be going out of business long after you and I retire."
Is it because MS is the only other mainstream OS provider? I wonder if things would be different, in an alternate universe, where we're buying Atari and Amiga and BeOS boxen.
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
I am not disputing what you are saying but it sounds like end-user RTFM errors.
"Form should follow function...unless it's just plain ugly."
It is more like bad design (where it matters). Sure, the colors get copied by George Foreman grills, but there are the Apple's basic ergornomic failures that PC's are thankfully slow to copy, such as single-button mouse and bent paperclip in a hole media eject system.
Other Apple "firsts" do get copied, and the results are unfortunate. PC's used to have large obviously-labelled power buttons. Now they have followed Apple's lead and made this difficult so that yanking the power cable out the back is the quickest way to power down.
"The day of the desktop PC for personal use is over"
What country are you in? Start peeping in windows, Tom, and you will see that "just a few" people are using desktop PC's for personal use. The day is far from over.
Yes, they are successful, thanks to being bailed out by Microsoft
When did this happen? Facts, please.
and also their lawyers who file frivolous lawsuits to stifle competition.
And when has this happened? Again, facts, please.
Both companies realize that people will buy crap if it looks good.
If people are buying it, it's obviously not crap.
including a distribution policy that intentionally makes its computers hard to find
Yes, they did an excellent job hiding store.apple.com from the public view, didn't they?
while being in the computer business makes this an ultimately shaky foundation.
I agree completely. Apple is on its last legs. Just like it has been since the late 1980's.
It is more like bad design (where it matters). Sure, the colors get copied by George Foreman grills, but there are the Apple's basic ergornomic failures that PC's are thankfully slow to copy, such as single-button mouse and bent paperclip in a hole media eject system.
Back under the bridge with you, you old troll.
The one-button mouse straw man is older than your
mom and the paperclip eject scheme is on PC
hardware as well.
Other Apple "firsts" do get copied, and the results are unfortunate. PC's used to have large obviously-labelled power buttons. Now they have followed Apple's lead and made this difficult so that yanking the power cable out the back is the quickest way to power down.
You're obviously a moron if you can't find the
well-lit power buttons on most of todays machines.
I guess that explains the low quality of your
trolling skills...
Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine...
[quote] Also, like Hyundai, they realized that the visual design department can make up for mediocre product. Both companies realize that people will buy crap if it looks good. IMO Hyundai make some of the fugliest cars on this planet, they're down there with proton, yugo and lada
"Yes, they are successful, thanks to being bailed out by Microsoft (facts?)"
. miss/miss07.html
t ag=bpls t ...an excellent frivolous lawsuit example.
Please see http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/1997/web.whatnext/hit
Just one of many places the story of the most recent bailout can be found.
"and also their lawyers who file frivolous lawsuits to stifle competition (facts?)"
Try
http://news.com.com/2100-1040-230054.html?
If you will learn to research, I will leave it to you to find the frivolous Apple vs Atari lawsuit from many years ago.
"If people are buying it, it's obviously not crap"
And some people DID buy Yugos. What is your point?
"including a distribution policy that intentionally makes its computers hard to find"
In response, you posted a web site for ording machines. My point stands; the things are hard to get if you have to go to the web to get them! (instead of going to stores). The problem is Apple's policy of limiting dealers.
"I agree completely. Apple is on its last legs. Just like it has been since the late 1980's."
It's not. As soon as things get too dangerous, Microsoft will come and prop them up for a 3rd time. Microsoft has to do this, since without Apple they would be a monopoly. This will likely continue until Linux becomes large enough, then ol Daddy M$ won't be there they next time Barnum Jobs runs the company into the ground.
"and the paperclip eject scheme is on PC
hardware as well."
If it is, I would venture to guess that it is found on less than 5% of PCs. The rest have eject buttons. (talk about intuitive).
"The one-button mouse straw man is older than your"
Count the numbers of buttons on the mice. This design flaw on Apple's part is one of the things that makes Apple's OS's seem rudimentary and harder to use.
"You're obviously a moron if you can't find the
well-lit power buttons on most of todays machines."
If they aren't even lit on most machines, does this non-fact on your part make you the moron?
"First, your use of the phrase "most recent" to describe something that happened nearly six years ago is pretty bizarre"
Well, this is in fact the most recentl bail-out. There is not one more recent. The number of years does not change this fact. -1 for you!
"They had more than $2 billion in cash in the bank at the time. Microsoft's investment of $150 million didn't even register."
It certainly did. It was a top business headline of its day, according to business and computer experts alike...and it was a bailout. Register it certainly did.
Jesse Berst, zdnet: "Solidifies the [Apple] stock price" (This quote is just one that shows that the bailout did make a difference.)
O'Reilly of oreillynet: "...dated back to 1997 as part of a "bailout" deal"
Business 2.0: "...It even suffered the indignity of a bailout by arch-foe Microsoft"
Since you made two incorrect claims, you are -2 on this one. I suppose the next retort is some sort of claim that all of these guys are in on some sort of anti-Apple conspiracy.
"Frivilous? Obviously not. Apple won the Emachines lawsuit"
The wild claim by you is that frivolous lawsuits are not won. The fact is that many frivolous lawsuits are won (from hot McDonald's coffee to the burglar who cuts himself on the window he broke to get in). This is why they are a problem. -1 there!
"The cited suit was over trade dress, which has nothing at all to do with innovation."
I was wrong on this one. However, it should be pointed out that while the eOne looked like an iMac, it ran more software, was more versatile, was a lot faster, had more storage and memory, and had the hardware missing from the iMac... all while costing much less. A real embarassment for Apple to let this thing be out there. The point is yours, however.
"What's yours? You say that Macs are crap that looks good. This is obviously not universally true; they're selling machines faster than they can make them. People are buying them, therefore they are not crap.
Another -1 on your part, as you have done nothing but repeat the baseless assertion "if it sells, it is not crap". Did you realize you CAN watch Joe Millionaire and buy Twinkies?
"Explain how their retail strategy-- which, again, adds up to Apple selling computers faster than they can make them-- is a "shaky foundation?"
The selling situation you mentioned is not part of the shaky foundation. I never claimed it was. The crumbling bricks in the foundation I mentioned was over-reliance on box colors instead of box content, and a distribution system that makes its computers hard to get. -1 on your part: attack me for something I never said.
"So... facts mean nothing to you, I suppose? The fact, for instance, that everything-- every last blessed thing, without exception-- you said in your last post was wrong, means nothing to you?"
Hmmm. I show above how you are wrong on 6 of the 7 points you made (not counting your incorrect summary directly above). Sorry, my being wrong 1 in 7 times is not being wrong on "every blessed thing"
"Explain how their retail strategy-- which, again, adds up to Apple selling computers faster than they can make them-- is a "shaky foundation?"
The history of business is littered with failed companies that had the problem of demand that could not be met (selling faster than they could make), from Tucker Auto to Coleco (cabbage patch kids, Colecovision) to Atari. If this is happening (there is a demand for the product that the company is not able to meet), something is going wrong.
If you had read the grandparent post, you would have seen that he made a bunch of ludicrous claims that were, all but one, easily refuted.
But you know that already, you are likely his sock-puppet.
"Wow, you're a moron."
Such a powerful argument. I'm speechless.
But don't confuse design with innovation. Apple's hardware is mostly put together from off-the-shelf components. Sure, they choose nice components, but so do high-end PC vendors. Their software technology is mostly NeXSTStep, which is itself a combination of a Objective-C, open source Mach, and Adobe's graphics engine, none of which were developed either at NeXT or at Apple.
Apple used to try to innovate: they had research groups in speech recognition, handwriting recognition, human-computer interaction, multimedia, 3D graphics, and hardware. But none of that exists anymore. It is a real shame. But Apple didn't have the money to support it, and whatever they did, Microsoft essentially just cloned, if not in quality, at least in appearance.
And this does raise the question: where is Apple going? I selling nicely designed high-end machines running a homegrown OS enough in the long run?