Slashdot Mirror


Steve Jobs' Grand Vision

ejungle writes "The Toronto Star has an excellent article on Steve Jobs and his increasingly interesting role as head of both Apple Computer and Pixar Animation Studios. The article goes into the market pressures surrounding both companies, and goes a long way to explain their recent moves."

101 of 522 comments (clear)

  1. Call me sick to death of the media... by irn_bru · · Score: 5, Funny

    but I kind of wanted to stop reading after this:

    "The late Walt Disney built his empire with a mouse. The same can be said about Steve Jobs"

    Dial a cliche...

    1. Re:Call me sick to death of the media... by radicalskeptic · · Score: 5, Funny

      "The late Walt Disney built his empire with a mouse. The same can be said about Steve Jobs"

      The difference being Mickey traditionally had two buttons on him...

      --
      WARNING: If accidentally read, induce vomiting.
    2. Re:Call me sick to death of the media... by cujo_1111 · · Score: 5, Funny


      How dare that reporter call Steve Wozniak a mouse!!!

      --
      If I point out that you are incorrect, making me a foe does not make you any more correct.
  2. Pixar's Linux Render Farm by Nakito · · Score: 4, Interesting

    An idle question: Has anyone ever seen Steve Jobs make any significant public statement about the fact that the Pixar render farm uses Linux computers? I'm sure he has an opinion on the benefits of Linux, but I don't know if he's ever expressed it near a reporter.

    1. Re:Pixar's Linux Render Farm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Only on /. can you find a comment relating an article on the business moves of the CEO of an animation studio and a computer company related back to needing more advocation for Linux.

      And then it gets modded up??? Puh-Leeese

    2. Re:Pixar's Linux Render Farm by Ianoo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      On Intel Xeons, noless. That said, they built it signficantly before the G5 Desktop and the G5 XServe were available. No offense, but much as I want a G5 and like the look-and-feel of Mac OS X, you have to admit that a bunch of overheating 1GHz G4's were significantly less cost effective than a similar bunch of P4 Xeons at the time the render farm was built.

    3. Re:Pixar's Linux Render Farm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Dude's been a Unix-head for a long time. c.f. NeXT in the late-80s/early-90s... It's zero suprise that not long after he comes back to Apple, OS X is announced, a unix-based OS (and at that, one *strongly* derived from NeXTSTEP). I don't know what he thinks of Linux in particular, but it's obvious he likes Unix in general.

    4. Re:Pixar's Linux Render Farm by phatsharpie · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, the RenderMan Pro Server version 11.5 is already supported on the Mac.

      https://renderman.pixar.com/products/techspecs/i nd ex.htm

      AFAIK, many artists do their modeling using Maya then offloading the rendering to the server, and since Maya is available on the Mac also, it should be possible to do the whole production on a Mac as it is.

      -B

    5. Re:Pixar's Linux Render Farm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If the Pixar modeling/rendering software ran on MacOS X, then there'd be an army of Joe Sixpacks out there competing with Pixar, with a few thousand dollars worth of computers.

      I read statements like this with a bit of bemusement. Here's a clue to all you movie makers of the future: it isn't about which software have, or which computer you are running. Movie making is hard because most people don't tell very interesting stories.

      Let's look at it this way: Steve Jobs runs both Apple and Pixar Animation Studios. One could imagine that if a move to MacOS X allowed such a dramatic reduction in costs for movie development that perhaps Pixar would go ahead and take advantage of it themselves. Or perhaps you think Pixar works hard to spend millions of dollars on salaries and equipment when it cut expenses and expand profits by the simple process of porting software?

      Get real.

    6. Re:Pixar's Linux Render Farm by Nakito · · Score: 3, Insightful

      To the contrary, I think it's an interesting question. Jobs is the head of one of the world's great computer companies. Jobs is also the head of one of the worlds great computer animation studios. As both mentioned in the article. But his studio's render farms -- the industrial engines that churn out the frames -- do not run on his computers, even though for many years he has pitched his computers as the machines of choice for computer graphics. I know that rendering is actually on the "production" side rather than the "development" side, and that it is a batch process rather than a creative process, but still, it creates an interesting tension from a PR standpoint. Kind of like finding out that the president of Chrysler drives a Porsche.

    7. Re:Pixar's Linux Render Farm by chunkwhite86 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If the Pixar modeling/rendering software ran on MacOS X, then there'd be an army of Joe Sixpacks out there competing with Pixar, with a few thousand dollars worth of computers. Steve JObs wants to keep this business obscure enough to keep the bar raised to where Pixar offers a unique and valuable service.

      Hold your horses there cowboy bebop. It would take a lot more than Pixar's software to turn Joe Sixpack into the next "Finding Nemo" creator.

      All the software in the world cant get around the CPU cycle requirements for this type of rendering. Perhaps if Joe Sixpack had a raised floor room in his basement with about 2000 Xserve G5's (Ok, so it's a big basement) then maybe the release of this software on OSX would be a threat.

      --
      I'd rather be a conservative nutjob than a liberal with no nuts and no job.
    8. Re:Pixar's Linux Render Farm by chunkwhite86 · · Score: 4, Informative

      On Intel Xeons, noless. That said, they built it signficantly before the G5 Desktop and the G5 XServe were available. No offense, but much as I want a G5 and like the look-and-feel of Mac OS X, you have to admit that a bunch of overheating 1GHz G4's were significantly less cost effective than a similar bunch of P4 Xeons at the time the render farm was built.

      Now wait just a gosh-darn second here! Who you callin "overheating"??

      PowerPC chips use MUCH less power than Xeon. Tons less. In fact, that's what the PPC architecture was designed for was embedded applications.

      Overheating G4's????

      --
      I'd rather be a conservative nutjob than a liberal with no nuts and no job.
    9. Re:Pixar's Linux Render Farm by RickoniX · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't think so, it's more like finding out the president of Chrysler's landscapers drive Ford trucks

      --
      Geekleak.com - Silly name, serious geeks
    10. Re:Pixar's Linux Render Farm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If the Pixar modeling/rendering software ran on MacOS X, then there'd be an army of Joe Sixpacks out there competing with Pixar, with a few thousand dollars worth of computers.

      Steve JObs wants to keep this business obscure enough to keep the bar raised to where Pixar offers a unique and valuable service.


      yeah, sure. It's not the machines, it's not the software. It's the talented people who know what to do with the software, and know how to work around all the things that it can't do.

      and the talented people who can write a good script, design good characters, and act. Without them, the people who know how to push the buttons don't have anything to do. ... and the talented people who know how to organize all of the above.

    11. Re:Pixar's Linux Render Farm by RedWizzard · · Score: 4, Informative
      On Intel Xeons, noless.
      At 1024 2.8GHz Xeons that renderfarm would be just behind the smaller of Weta Digital's renderfarms. Weta are at #44, and #48 on the November Top 500, with 1176 and 1080 2.8GHz Xeons.
    12. Re:Pixar's Linux Render Farm by summernot · · Score: 5, Informative

      Nope. It's still $1 per year.
      Plus options.
      And a jet.

    13. Re:Pixar's Linux Render Farm by Durandal64 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, it's kind of like finding out that a company uses the best tools for the jobs it needs to do. Apple doesn't run on all Mac OS X boxes, either. And I'll bet that SGI workstations aren't powering the SGI website, either. Oh the horrors and hypocrisy!

    14. Re:Pixar's Linux Render Farm by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 4, Insightful

      their art work and prototyping is done on Macs..rendering is grunt work, why not do it on cheap machines?

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    15. Re:Pixar's Linux Render Farm by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 5, Informative

      I read that book cover to cover and have absolutly no recolection of his talking about OS X...especialy considering that OS X was not even in public Beta yet when that book went to press.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    16. Re:Pixar's Linux Render Farm by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Linux is outpacing Mac because it is out cheaping MS on cheap boxes.

      anyone who would say Linux is a better Desktop system than OS X are crack heads....and this is coming from a Linux desktop user.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    17. Re:Pixar's Linux Render Farm by Darth · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I disagree. As the president of Pixar, his job is to do what's in the best interests of the company. If his admins came to him and said they wanted to make a render farm using a bunch of xeons running linux and he told them to use Apple products instead, just because he's in charge at apple, he wouldnt be doing what is in the best interest of Pixar. He'd be doing what's in the best interest of Apple, and that's not his job at Pixar.

      --
      Darth --
      Nil Mortifi, Sine Lucre
    18. Re:Pixar's Linux Render Farm by byolinux · · Score: 4, Informative

      The G5 Video - http://www.apple.com/powermac/video/ has someone from Pixar, talking about how great they are... and showing RenderMan on OS X.

    19. Re:Pixar's Linux Render Farm by martinX · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I read statements like this with a bit of bemusement. Here's a clue to all you movie makers of the future: it isn't about which software have, or which computer you are running. Movie making is hard because most people don't tell very interesting stories.

      As one who had a Mac and a LaserWriter but failed to takeover the world of publishing, then a Mac and Dreamweaver but failed to become a DotAnything, and now a Mac and iMovie and am totally non-threatening tp Spielberg, I concur. Anyone can buy equipment but it takes a talented person to use it. Michelangelo (artist, not turtle) didn't even have a Wacom tablet!

      Talent is innate, but it ain't in me.

      --
      When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
    20. Re:Pixar's Linux Render Farm by ChuyMatt · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I would think that he would never make pixar stoop, but make apple reach. I believe i read a story about how pixar uses the best comps available. Why not make your other company the best available so you can, without any bitching from anyone else, have your other company buy your computers, as they are the best for that application.

      i think we have seen that with the Xserve G5s and such. The man is unquestionably smart.

  3. Only One Steve Jobs by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 4, Funny
    The way Steve Jobs manages all these tasks is that there is the real Steve Jobs, and the other company is run by a clever, leading edge animated, life-like, 3-Dimensional replica.

    It's up to the reader to decide which is which.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    1. Re:Only One Steve Jobs by cujo_1111 · · Score: 5, Funny

      They gotta fix the anti-aliasing around his eyes. The jaggies are creating things that look like wrinkles...

      --
      If I point out that you are incorrect, making me a foe does not make you any more correct.
    2. Re:Only One Steve Jobs by AoT · · Score: 4, Funny

      Thats a *feature* not a bug.

      The silly humans will never believe in one of our kind... er... um...

      look at how that apple logo lights up on the PowerBook, isn't that shiny. Yes, look at the shiny.

  4. 1.7 Billion by tyleroar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Jobs, who is worth $1.7 billion (U.S.), according to Forbes magazine last year, routinely declines interview requests and could not be reached for comment for this story.
    What does Steve Jobs not wanting to do an interview for the San Francisco Chronicle have to do with how much money he is worth?

    --
    Portland, North Dakota Puppies
    1. Re:1.7 Billion by chunkwhite86 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Jobs, who is worth $1.7 billion (U.S.), according to Forbes magazine last year, routinely declines interview requests and could not be reached for comment for this story. What does Steve Jobs not wanting to do an interview for the San Francisco Chronicle have to do with how much money he is worth?

      Hell, me and my $1.7 hundred (U.S.), according to my most recent bank statement, would decline an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle.

      --
      I'd rather be a conservative nutjob than a liberal with no nuts and no job.
    2. Re:1.7 Billion by tverbeek · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's just an exaple of typical modern journlistic style. Got a factoid you want to include, but don't want to dump it in as a stand-alone non-sequitur where it'll stick out like sore thumb? Use it in a compound sentence.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
  5. Jobs going overboard? by -Grover · · Score: 3, Insightful

    While I firmly agree with Pixar breaking off from Disney, the statement

    Jobs went so far as to declare that Pixar had surpassed Disney as "the most powerful and trusted brand in animation."

    seems a little fishy to me. While Pixar is amazing at what it does, it's no Disney. Nobody wants to take thier kids to Pixarland, and you don't get the Pixar channel at home, and I'd say it'll be quite a while before either of those happens. They are by no means trusted to the level of Disney in a family atmosphere.

    They have a good thing going, but IMHO they are far from the top still.

    1. Re:Jobs going overboard? by Snoopy77 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think Jobs was probably referring to just the movie animation industry in which case it is not too far fetched as sweeping statements go.

      --
      "She's a West Texas girl, just like me" - G.W Bush Iraqis
    2. Re:Jobs going overboard? by phatsharpie · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Personally, if there IS a Pixarland, I'd go in a heartbeat, and I'll bet millions of people would too. Consider how long Disney has been around versus Pixar, and in time I think Pixar - if it continues to make smart decisions in its productions - could have a wide reach than it does now. However, it would probably take at least a couple generation of leadership - like Disney. I doubt Steve Jobs can do it all, but maybe he is Superman in disguise.

      -B

    3. Re:Jobs going overboard? by mugnyte · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's exactly what Comcast is wondering: Disney isn't just a movie studio, radio station, tv channel, theme park, touring ice skating show, toy brand, ocean cruise line, hotel chain, or marketing monster. It's all of these things.

      Pixar doesn't have to beat any of these to be *more* successful than Disney : It merely has to have better ROI, better employee retention, more creative output, and freedom to break the Disney Oversight in all things they do publicly. This is what they suffered from.

      Jobs is a smart man to break out now. The crowds will show up for 2 movies past a crap release (proof: Matrix) and Pixar has released blockbusters so far. The Point: Pixar is now a Name Brand.

      No need to have foam-headed characters dance around a plaster castle giving out happy meals to sell this stuff; it's good all on its own.

    4. Re:Jobs going overboard? by JanneM · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ah, but he talks about animation - not family entertainment, not amusement parks, not television programming. In the field of animation, it has been quite some time since Disney last did anything worthwile.

      That said, in animation, I would put at least Studio Ghibli right up there with Pixar as well.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    5. Re:Jobs going overboard? by squiggleslash · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I can't comment on whether Pixar is the most respected name in animation, but I can say your counter argument isn't really an answer to that claim. Disney certainly is a respected name in massmedia and entertainment. While these may have been helped early on by its respectability in animation, neither really have anything today to do with that animation expertise any more. Disneyworld seems largely based upon stuff Disney was doing fifty years ago, the Disney Channel is largely live action rather than animation.

      One might argue that Google has greatly surpassed Yahoo as a search engine, and try to argue against that on the grounds that Yahoo has great email, a comprehensive customizable news service, etc. Well, sure, it's a great portal, but it isn't the leading directory service people switched to first back in '95.

      Pixar certainly seem to have developed a name for themselves. It's quite possible to believe that as Disney have allowed their animation side to fester and decay, Pixar and others have stepped in to take Disney's place.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    6. Re:Jobs going overboard? by prockcore · · Score: 4, Funny

      Personally, if there IS a Pixarland, I'd go in a heartbeat, and I'll bet millions of people would too.

      My god, the thought of a themepark run by Steve Jobs is frightening. First it'd cost you several hundred dollars to get in, everything would be stark white with accents of brushed steel and a few aqua bubbles.

      There would only be 3 rides, and they'd be the really old ones "ported" from Magic Mountain, and before you entered the park, there'd be a little tutorial demonstrating how powerful and intuitive everything is.

    7. Re:Jobs going overboard? by Strudelkugel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      While Pixar is amazing at what it does, it's no Disney

      Wall Street is beginning to take the same view. People have come to the conclusion that animation has to be 3D to sell, but try telling that to Fox (Simpsons, King of the Hill.) Don't forget Southpark, or all of the anime stuff, either. The key to most entertainment is the story.

      Another question to ponder is what happens to Apple if Jobs if occupied doing other things? Can he really run Pixar and Apple for a long time, and not have both worse off for it? So far Apple has a bad track record when left on its own, and Wall Street doesn't see that Jobs has done much about succession. No question, Jobs is brilliant at popularizing technology. But has he built anything that will last once he's no longer involved? Pixar probably has a better chance, since it was around before Jobs was on the scene.

      --
      Imagine how much harder physics would be if electrons had feelings! -Feynman, maybe
    8. Re:Jobs going overboard? by RedWizzard · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Jobs went so far as to declare that Pixar had surpassed Disney as "the most powerful and trusted brand in animation."
      seems a little fishy to me. While Pixar is amazing at what it does, it's no Disney. Nobody wants to take thier kids to Pixarland, and you don't get the Pixar channel at home, and I'd say it'll be quite a while before either of those happens. They are by no means trusted to the level of Disney in a family atmosphere.
      Note he said "animation". Not TV, not amusement parks.

      My wife and I had a conversation about this a few weeks ago. Our verdict was that Pixar has a better track record than Disney has recently. I would be willing to see a Pixar movie without knowing anything else about it. I can't say the same about Disney.

    9. Re:Jobs going overboard? by thefinite · · Score: 5, Funny

      Or even worse, a Bill Gates theme park. There they regularly have to reinstall the same rides, shuffle everyone out of the park for five minutes so they can turn the power off then on again, and charge everyone's admission through car manufacturers assuming that you want to go anyway. They also regularly report to the media that they are taking the defective rides (and associate deaths) seriously and are making it their top priority to fix them...any day now.

      Then there is always the Linus Torvalds theme park, but not many people go there. Although the rides are rock solid, they are a lot less fun and harder to figure out.

      --
      Boom Shanka
    10. Re:Jobs going overboard? by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "seems a little fishy to me. While Pixar is amazing at what it does, it's no Disney. Nobody wants to take thier kids to Pixarland, and you don't get the Pixar channel at home, and I'd say it'll be quite a while before either of those happens. They are by no means trusted to the level of Disney in a family atmosphere."

      Hmmm. And I don't want the Disney Channel, ABC, ABC Family Channel, or ESPN on my cable bill, but for some reason I have to have them according to Comcast. And after Comcast acquires Disney, I'm sure us customers will be treated to even more dreck from the *Mouse House.* I do not trust Disney one bit. They were a big supporter of the DIVX DVD format too, remember?

      --
      "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
    11. Re:Jobs going overboard? by idiot900 · · Score: 4, Funny

      The Linus Torvalds theme park would be free to enter. You'd get roller coaster blueprints at the gate. The park would consist of 100 yards of roller coaster parts and a pile of oxyacetylene torches in the corner. The other patrons of the park would be happy to show you how to build a roller coaster, but if you haven't memorized everything on the blueprint as well as several physics textbooks you'll be yelled at for being too stupid to ride a rollercoaster.

      Then Darl would come by and scream at the top of his lungs that he owns the entire thing because roller coasters make him puke, just like the paint he sniffs, so they must be one and the same.

  6. Closing ranks on rebels? by CrackedButter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Jobs is a rebel because he is successful and innovative and they will close him down? No wonder the entertainment industries don't seem to get things right if thats the definition of a rebel.

    1. Re:Closing ranks on rebels? by phatsharpie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think the sad fact is that people who move into these industries forget that these industries' initial successes are due to risk-taking, since these are essentially "creative" industries (maybe I am stretching a bit here in regards to IT, but I think creativity is still vital to IT). So when creativity is taken out of the equation, the industry gets into trouble.

      This was clearly shown in the 60's and 70's when Hollywood was in severe financial trouble (after the Hollywood "Golden Age"), and what saved the industry was an injection of brand new talents (with regards to cinematography, directing, writing, and technology).

      -B

  7. Oldie but goodie... by twoslice · · Score: 5, Funny
    Mickey and Minnie were in divorce court...

    Judge: Let me get this straight Mickey, you want a divorce from Minnie because you say she is crazy.

    Mickey: No, I never said Minnie was crazy, I said she was fucking Goofy!

    --

    From excellent karma to terible karma with a single +5 funny post...
  8. Steve Jobs has vision by cy_a253 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Steve Jobs DOES have vision, and a profound understanding of the principles of technological innovation, no matter what some people might think. For example, he wrote that famous text himself: http://www.apple.com/thinkdifferent/

    1. Re:Steve Jobs has vision by rampant+mac · · Score: 5, Insightful
      "The people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world without a lot of cash don't."

      Mahatma Gandhi was rich?

      "But then again we are talking about Apple ppl here who must have more money than God in order to afford an Apple computer."

      I own 4 of `em, and I certainly don't consider myself "rich" by any stretch of the imagination. I use my machines to make money on the side and I use the tools that will make me more productive. It might cost me more initially, but if I can complete a job faster, with the least amount of hassle, then the machines have paid for themselves.

      --
      I like big butts and I cannot lie.
    2. Re:Steve Jobs has vision by tverbeek · · Score: 4, Insightful
      But then again we are talking about Apple ppl here who must have more money than God in order to afford an Apple computer.

      You can get an eMac (1GHz G4, 17" CRT, DVD-ROM/CD-RW), or last year's iBook (800MHz G3, 12" LCD, CD-ROM), for $799. Financing available. If God can't afford that, no wonder He has so many of His followers on TV asking for money.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
  9. Disney came out ahead on Pixar deal! by callipygian-showsyst · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Disney got the better end of the deal when DISNEY dumped PIXAR. (Not the other way around, as the Steve Jobs faithful believe.) Here's why:

    1. Under the current deal, Disney has the copyrights to the existing movies and can continue to make revenue off of them, licence merchandise, etc.
    2. Pixar is still committed to making two more movies
    3. Movies are a "hits" business. You can't predict if future movies will be successful. Steve Jobs wouldn't deal unless he could get the rights back to the existing movies. Disney would have been CRAZY to do this--those movies can bring in a few BILLION over the next decade.
    4. To trade away the Toy Story/Nemo/Monsters franchise in order to bet that Pixar will continue to make hit movies is a bad bet. Nobody stays on top forever in this business.

    1. Re:Disney came out ahead on Pixar deal! by snStarter · · Score: 4, Interesting

      But PIXAR will, at least, have control over its own destiny and no longer have to put up with having each film it produces going into the Disney "great animation" hall of fame.

      In fact Disney has begun to fail more often than succeed. Pixar may produce a lesser film than any so far, but they would have to sink a long way in order to reach the currest state of Disney offerings. Or any other American company's for that matter.

      You are falling for the same drivel that Hollywood believes - that it's only a "hit" business.

    2. Re:Disney came out ahead on Pixar deal! by Bendebecker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then again, can you name any Disney movie in the last couple of years that was:
      1. Animated
      2. A hit
      3. Not made by Pixar

      Their only non Pixar movie in the last couple fo years that was considered major and not a pixar film was that Sinbad one that tanked at the box office. Unless the future of Disney Animations is making cheesy home videos, they're going to have to do a lot of work to get anywhere near where Pixar and who ever they ally with will be.

      --
      There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
      most of us won't be able to afford it.
      -- Lemmy
    3. Re:Disney came out ahead on Pixar deal! by cujo_1111 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      1. Under the current deal, Disney has the copyrights to the existing movies and can continue to make revenue off of them, licence merchandise, etc.

      But Pixar still receives a percentage of that revenue stream. That revenue could be enough to keep Pixar afloat in the lean times between hit movies.

      4. To trade away the Toy Story/Nemo/Monsters franchise in order to bet that Pixar will continue to make hit movies is a bad bet. Nobody stays on top forever in this business.

      A few years ago people were saying "Pixar is taking a huge risk to move away from the Toy Story franchise and make Monsters Inc." and then more recently "Pixar is taking a huge risk to move away from the Toy Story/Monsters inc. franchises and make a movie about fish."

      They probably are sitting on more than a few movie scripts that are complete gold, we don't know. But I am willing to bet that Jobs knows what he is doing here and the split from Disney will be a success.

      --
      If I point out that you are incorrect, making me a foe does not make you any more correct.
    4. Re:Disney came out ahead on Pixar deal! by Fancia · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sinbad was from Dreamworks. And I do believe you've forgotten Spirited Away, the 2003 Best Animated Feature Academy Award-winner.

      --

      Bít, zabít, jen proto, ze su liska!
    5. Re:Disney came out ahead on Pixar deal! by RickHunter · · Score: 5, Informative

      Spirited Away wasn't Disney either, TYVM. It was written, animated, and directed by Studio Ghibli, possibly the best animation company on the planet. Disney just took it, attached a half-hearted dub, dutifully shoved it in theaters for a few days to honor their contractual obligations, and then crossed their fingers and hoped it wouldn't overshadow their carefully-chosen "hit" movies.

      Unfortunately for them, it did.

      Looks like Disney hasn't had any hits in years. They've just been selling other people's. Guess all those copyright extensions they pushed for haven't helped their creative output much at all, have they?

  10. Jobs and the Disney/Comcast Merger by paxcirca · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The article fails to mention that Jobs can also play an increasingly large role in the proposed Disney/Comcast merger. Comcast's CEO, Brian Roberts, is trying to pursuade Steve Jobs to join ranks with Comcast. Since Pixar has been directly responsible for a very large portion of Disney's recent success, and since Pixar will be severing ties with Disney, if Steve Jobs endorses the merger and decides to renew the contract with Disney (because of the Comcast deal), stockholders will be significantly more inclined to approve the merger.

  11. Re:Jobs is a hypocrite by CrackedButter · · Score: 5, Insightful


    That means what to the point a made?
    As a side note, i don't watch TV either or drink "sickly sodas", they are both detrimental to the human condition, looks like Jobs is being a reponsible father, I would do the same.
    Besides its not like he could do the rest of the population the sam favour is it? Big money and power comes from feeding kids crap foodstuffs and having them watch TV all day long.

  12. Re:Why? by juuri · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What really bad ones? You say there were a lot...

    And NeXT was fucking fantastic, it amazed me that even in '99 the rest of the computing world hadn't caught up to how far along NeXTSTEP was when it came to providing a useful, coherent, sane computing environment.

    Installed base is a much more useful number than market share, unless you really think real computing advancement comes from the hundreds of mid to low end machines typically deployed in corporations (hint: it doesn't). Emacs don't cost near 2k, iMacs do and they are poor sellers because of it. The G5 machines are priced well if you do a serious comparison of what you get for the money... and more importantly they are priced great since Apple sells them as fast they make them (the single 1.6 excluded).

    I realize you are doing the anti-popular opinion troll for mod points but unfortunately for me I can't help but reply.

    --
    --- I do not moderate.
  13. Re:Why? by ibmman85 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    the market share thing is really strange... I keep seeing more and more and more macs out there (especially powerbooks).. most of the linux market share has to be in servers. I'm at RIT and I think about half the people I see now have apple laptops, its really insane. even the members of the Computer Science House (special interest housing) about half have mac laptops, despite most also having desktops running windows or linux or windows and linux.. Apple's market share definitely is not decreasing at least.

  14. Not entirely. by juuri · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Your above statements only hold true if you assume Pixar can't create any other market-winning content. Obviously they believe they can and to their credit, Nemo, etc... were very successful market creations, much more so than anything Disney has created in a while.

    --
    --- I do not moderate.
  15. Forgot the consumer, uh? by DF5JT · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "He might be surprised to find that Hollywood closes it ranks to rebels," said Kay, the IDC analyst. "By aspiring too high, too quickly, that could be his downfall. But that story's not told yet.''

    Certainly not. People want to see Pixar movies and that is guaranteed money. I can see Hollywood closing its rank to rebels when it comes to cash. Right.

  16. interesting little nugget by sootman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    the most interesting bit from the article--"Jobs bought Pixar from LucasFilm in 1986, during his exile from Apple...
    [Lucas] sold [Pixar] to Jobs for a bargain because Lucas needed cash for a divorce settlement."

    is that really true?

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    1. Re:interesting little nugget by xanderwilson · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yeah. California law says you split your fortune down the center in divorce and, since more than half of the Lucas fortune was tied up in Lucasfilm, he had to sell off parts of the company or else he wouldn't have been able to retain sole ownership over his company.

      Alex.

    2. Re:interesting little nugget by BiteMyShinyMetalAss · · Score: 4, Informative

      Slithyly OT but interesting: the Genesis video sequence from Star Trek II was one of the early works of Pixar, back when they were still at ILM, circa 1981/1982.

  17. Re:Why? by WinterSolstice · · Score: 5, Informative

    Well,

    Since you asked so nice, and aren't AC :) I will tell you why I (a 10+ year vet of the computer field) went to it, and why I like Steve Jobs.

    1) Apple makes systems with a tight verticle integration. The same reasoning behind AIX, RS/6000 and Shark storage holds for a G4/G5. It is designed and optimized like a console, but allows for upgrades. (The whitebox upgrades are even supported by the warranty. I can add RAM or vid myself under warranty. Can I do that with a Dell?)

    2) Apple really understands the customers. It has a really good idea of what people expect from Apple Computers, and usually does a pretty good job of delivering that.

    3) Apple has a three year warranty that is only the price of a low-end vid card. It is around 150, if I remember correctly.

    4) Apple support is composed of some of the nicest people I have ever talked to, and I even have some friends now who work there. They are willing to patiently explain that something a user did was dumb, and explain how to fix it. Without making even a grandmother (who WASHED her mac) feel stupid. My wife even likes talking to them.

    5) Apple has really top-notch driver integration. I have only installed one driver on a Mac. Ever. Dozens of hardware add-ons and accessories, and I only had to install a driver for an ancient Wacom tablet. Everything else was perfect plug and play. It just doesn't happen with Windows. REALLY doesn't happen on Linux.

    6) Full media ships with the computer. No crippled OS versions. It is the whole enchilada.

    7) Safe system restore. Fix the problem in about 15 minutes, without losing a single byte of your data. It rocks! I've only had to use it once, but it was amazing.

    8) Well-laid out keyboards. Personal preference.

    9) Fantastic engineering. Again, personal preference. I happen to like a 6 lb 1" laptop with the power and battery life of something much larger. And a DVD burner. And the ability to run 2 external screens at the same time as the internal screen. I frequently use mine in dual screen mode at work.

    10) iLife. A simple suite of cheap/free apps that really cover the bases. They work together nicely, too.

    11) Safari. Really nice, fully integrated mostly STANDARDS COMPLIANT browser.

    12) .Apps. Seriously. These things rock. I like the whole framework. I can drag them around to install them, delete them to uninstall them, launch them from the CLI, copy them, back them up, etc. It is great.

    13) Free dev environment. Full on IDE that is actually pretty nice. Works for Java, Perl, AppleScript, and C/C++/ObjC.

    14) Finder. Finder is a very smooth way to navigate a computer. It has some issues, and I will certainly bitch about them.

    15) Unix based. I like this. I've been on Unix since the mid 80's, and I love it. I'm glad Apple went that way.

    Now, as for what I like about Jobs? He's a really charismatic person who is willing to tell people to go fly a kite. He goes in really weird directions, does really weird things, and they even sometimes work. What I really like, though, is that Apple seems to suck without him.

    There you have it. Feel free to complain or flame, but understand that I really couldn't care less. I love my Macs, and I am not a PC Gamer. I play NWN on them. I do not buy computers to be game consoles, so I couldn't care less if $game supports it. I probably wouldn't own that game for windows, if I owned it.

    Of course, there is also no guarantee that my next 4 computers will be Macs like my last 4. It is highly likely, though.

    -WS

    --
    An operating system should be like a light switch... simple, effective, easy to use, and designed for everyone.
  18. Woz Invented the Apple, not the Mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    The mac was invented by a team of people. Steve Jobs was very active in the Mac project. While it appears he claimed a lot of other people's ideas as his own, he had the knack to always figure out which idea of all the ones out there was the one that should be used. So Jobs is an innovator. Read Andy Hertzfeld's siteFolklore for more information.

  19. Jobs buys Disney...actually a good idea. by MsGeek · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Awww heck, why doesn't Apple just go ahead and buy Disney and keep all those profits they were trying to get Disney to give up? :)

    Well, oh Anonymously Cowardly one, this is actually a damn good idea and one that makes complete sense. Remember when it looked like Apple or Pixar or both were going to buy Universal Music? I remember mentioning that it made more sense for Apple and Pixar to buy Universal Pictures for a guaranteed advantageous home base to release Pixar movies. I believe that Jobs can marshal enough money to beat the Comcast offer, and would be looked upon very kindly as a "white knight" versus Comcast's hostile bid.

    Apple, Pixar, Disney, ABC TV (USA) and Disney Cable Networks? A match made in heaven. Do it, Steve. Do it.

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
    1. Re:Jobs buys Disney...actually a good idea. by The_Steel_General · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Agreed....and I think that's been the plan for awhile.

      Does anyone else remember this:

      Apple buys Next in order to have a source for its next generation operating system. Steve Jobs gets a bunch of stock options. Some months later, when the stock isn't doing so well, he suddenly dumps them with a comment about how he doesn't think the company is ever going to come back -- coincidentally driving the stock down even more. Soon after, the CEO of Apple is out and, oh look, Steve is in.

      Compare with: Disney partners with Pixar for a number of successful films. Some years later, the stock isn't doing so well and a major shareholder starts a campaign to get rid of the CEO. Suddenly, Steve Jobs ends negotiations to continue the relationship.

      Think it's a coincidence that this gave the CEO a bunch of trouble at a time when he didn't need it? That it was just as annual reports and proxy cards were going to shareholders?

      Think Steve would allow Pixar to be merged with Disney if he replaced Eisner? Me too.

      TSG

  20. Re:Why? by melatonin · · Score: 5, Informative

    but a lot of really bad ones.In the meantime, the Mac's marketshare fell below 2% and has been overtaken by Linux Desktop's share.

    That's not Jobs' fault. That's Sculley's, and that's the dispute that caused Steve to leave Apple. Steve and Steve started Apple to make computers For the Rest of Us. Computers that people could use; not room-size boxes hidden away in an industrial building.

    Sculley had a vision of using Apple's superior technology to make products with high margins and turn Apple into a billion dollar company. And he did. And he gave up marketshare for that.

    Lots of people agree that the real reason of the Mac slow but sure descent into Hell is Job's elitist vision and its results, overpriced hardware, rumor cult(ure) at Apple, etc.

    Lots of people are uninformed, but that doesn't make them right. Macs aren't overpriced; they're worth every penny you spend on them, the only problem is that you don't have the choice to spend less for things you don't want because Apple doesn't offer those products (like an iMac without the flat panel display and built-in Bluetooth but in an ATX case).

    On the same token, Apple can't charge the same prices that Dell does in order to gain market share; they need to fund their R & D divisions. Dell makes money on volume (quanitity). People buy Macs for quality. Apple has to make higher priced units that will yeild larger profits due to the price, not because of a markup. The reason that Apple can't make money on quantity is Sculley's fault, not Jobs. Apple computers were affordable before Jobs left.

    Steve's company brought the first personal computer (that could plug into a TV screen, with colour graphics and sound) to the masses. Also the first consumer floppy drive (tapes were the thing before that). The first computer with a GUI, and the first laser printers (along with Canon). And again, when Jobs came back, he brought the iMac, the iPod, and the entire iLife suite to the masses (iDVD, iMovie, etc). Those things wouldn't exist without Jobs; the PC industry was declared dead with no future until Jobs announced the iMac and the digital hub.

    Why do so many people worship this one guy?

    He's one of the very few people in the consumer-oriented computer industry that moves it forward. Enterprise computing has their own heros (Oracle and Sun come to mind).

    --
    Moderators should have to take a reading comprehension test.
  21. It's a writer acting like a script kiddie by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just as script kiddies have no innate intelligence and have no clue how all those scripts work, this writer has learned from some rule book somewhere that clauses in a sentence are the preferred way to spiff up boring writing. Rather than try to understand why, he has applied this rule indiscriminately and come up with nonsense.

    It has been ages since I worried about this stuff (6th grade, I think). I think these are called subordinate clauses, and are supposed to clarify the rest of the sentence. Thus if he had said "Jobs, who made his money interviewing famous people, routinely declines interviews requests" or "Jobs, who is worth $1.7 billion, said he cannot afford to finance movies himself" -- either one would have been legitimate.

    Now I hope I've cleared up SOMETHING, for Ifni's sake!

  22. Did Eisner drop Pixar to avoid Comcast? by kwandar · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Given the failed discussions that Disney had with Comcast, and the subsequent hostile takeover offer, dropping Pixar through being unable to reach agreement, may make a lot of sense.

    If the big bad cable company trying to take you over wants content, killing value by dropping an agreement with a major content provider (Pixar) might just be the way to go.

    Anyone else think Eisner would do that to fend off Comcast and keep the keys to the Kingdom to himself?

    1. Re:Did Eisner drop Pixar to avoid Comcast? by painandgreed · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If the big bad cable company trying to take you over wants content, killing value by dropping an agreement with a major content provider (Pixar) might just be the way to go.

      Anyone else think Eisner would do that to fend off Comcast and keep the keys to the Kingdom to himself?

      No, if anything I think it was done by Steve to force Eisner out. Disney loses Pixar, Roy Disney is up in arms about Eisner ruining Disney ( savedisney.com ), and an election of the CEO coming up. Roy says that Eisner is killing Disney and Pixar leaves then board votes. With two films left to go, it seems early for a splitting of the ways (perhaps not as I don't know what they have planned or how long it takes to put it out). We'll see if Eisner gets the boot by shareholders and if Disney and Pixar kiss and make up afterwards.

      What are Steve's plans for Apple? I think he's stickign with the killer app theory and moving into various nitches. He doesn't have to be the best computer all round. he simply has to be the best computer for graphics and video. IF apple puts out the best, that's what people will buy. An extra thousand or so really doesn't matter when it can save you ten thousand in time. Combined with the video apps that Apple has bought and is now making, this seems a the way it's going. The Xserve seems made from day one for cheap render farms. It doesn't matter what Apple's market share is because if Apple can just maintain these two markets, there's plenty of money to keep a computer company afloat.

      From there, it's just a matter of picking another niche and moving into it. They've got some with the ease of use home segment using OS X as a killer app and at the same time sucking in *nix people in the laptops.

      Music seems the next killer app they're moving into. They've bought and are producing apps for music production. They bought Emagic and Logic and have put out music apps from Garageband on up. Eventually they'll be the standard in music as they are in video (and already are depending on who you ask).

      What will Apple do next? Who knows. Look to see what Apple buys next because the problem hasn't been that Apple didn't license out clones but that Apple stopped publishing their own apps. People will use what ever computer does the job. What computer does the job is dependant on the Killer App. From now on, I expect Apple to make both the computer and the Killer App.

  23. It's the vision thing by GrahamCox · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Hmmm, I don't worship Steve Jobs by any stretch, but I do appreciate his vision and his company's products. The world needs more like him. Great designs rarely come from committees - in fact, can you name one? Concorde, maybe. Most "classics" are usually one person's vision.
    As for the drop in market share, that is not SJ's fault, it was John Sculley's, and the cluless mob that followed after him. Apple was about to go tits up when SJ returned and used his vision to put the company back on track. In fact, SJ's biggest error was bringing Sculley over, then making an enemy of him. One can only wonder at the shape of the industry today if that had not happened. I'm sure one Bill Gates would have far less influence, power and money, that's for sure.

  24. Re:Why? by letdownjournals · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Lots of people agree that the real reason of the Mac slow but sure descent into Hell is Job's elitist vision and its results, overpriced hardware, rumor cult(ure) at Apple, etc.

    Why do people still claim Mac is on the verge of bankruptcy? According to some, they've been "on the verge of hell" since the late 80's. Correct me if I'm wrong, but they're doing much better now than they were in 1996...

  25. Why did Pixar split with Disney? by El · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If any of you are still wondering, just sit down and watch Lion King 1 1/2. Then compare it to Finding Nemo. Ask yourself: which is the better movie? Then ask yourself: How would Walt have felt about the character Poomba in the Lion King, whose defining characteristic is that he passes gas? (A LOT of gas). Methinks old Walt would not have approved of fart jokes, and furthermore that when you have to resort to scatalogical humor to intertain kids, it's a symptom that you've completely run out of good ideas. Shrek and Lilo and Stitch weren't as bad, but they too seemed to need to resort to scatalogical humor. The closest Pixar ever comes to scatalogical is in Monsters Inc, where I really cannot figure out where in the middle of the Himalayas the Abominable Snowman is getting lemon juice with which to make yellow snowcones...

    --

    "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

  26. Apple + Pixar = ? by shubert1966 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hardware [check]

    Software [check]

    Content [check]

    Mindshare [check]

    Market [check$]

    In the great race to revolutionize previous services, CableTV, Telephone and Audio are all taking new forms. Seems to me that the Pixar acquisition after iTunes means Job's only needs a portable device with a large enough screen to make the portable, secure, wireless future happen.

    Pixar will produce its own content, and those who seek to distribute their movies through that 'channel' will join in the success. Filling out the market footprint for Jobs' in 2005.

    M$ may suffer from being more than we need with their next release.

    If at the same time indie Musicians and Filmakers could get the gear they could offer great alternatives, but Apple and Pixar are a collossus.

    --
    Stuff that matters.
  27. Here's to the crazy ones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Offtopic

    Here's to the crazy ones.

    The misfits.

    The rebels.

    The troublemakers.

    The round pegs in the square holes.

    The ones who see things differently.

    They're not fond of rules.

    And they have no respect for the status quo.

    You can praise them, disagree with them, quote them,

    disbelieve them, glorify or vilify them.

    About the only thing you can't do is ignore them.

    Because they change things.

    They invent. They imagine. They heal.

    They explore. They create. They inspire.

    They push the human race forward.

    Maybe they have to be crazy.

    How else can you stare at an empty canvas and see a work of art?
    Or sit in silence and hear a song that's never been written?
    Or gaze at a red planet and see a laboratory on wheels?

    We make tools for these kinds of people.

    While some see them as the crazy ones,
    we see genius.

    Because the people who are crazy enough to think
    they can change the world, are the ones who do.

  28. Re:Why? by MacDaffy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Why?

    1) He helped popularize the personal computer;
    2) He helped popularize the user interface that the majority of those computers now use;
    3) He helped revolutionize the computer, industrial and product design industries with the iMac (and made USB truly "universal");
    4) He helped revolutionize the way people acquire, manipulate and experience music (and stopped Microsoft's bid for domination dead in its tracks);
    5) He heads an animation studio that is the undisputed leader of what is becoming a new "Golden Age" in animation;
    6) He financed the most successful television commercial ever produced;
    7) He brought Apple back from the brink of extinction...

    And each of the organizations he heads is obsessed with producing the best quality products possible. There's a lot of crowing here in Slashdot and elsewhere when Apple slips, but the people there put more time, effort, intelligence and care into what they do than just about any organization you could name.

    And, yes, I worked there.

  29. Pixarland by solprovider · · Score: 4, Interesting

    it'd cost you several hundred dollars to get in, everything would be stark white with accents of brushed steel and a few aqua bubbles. There would only be 3 rides, and they'd be the really old ones "ported" from Magic Mountain, and before you entered the park, there'd be a little tutorial demonstrating how powerful and intuitive everything is.

    So you've been to Epcot?

    The Innovation buildings are SO EXCITING. Their "future" of computer hardware is stuff most Slashdotters already have.

    ---
    Given Steve Job's ability to create great usable interfaces, Pixarland may be the first themepark that would not require a map to find your way. It would keep the lines down to 10 minutes even on weekends. It might cost "several hundred dollars", but you would spend all the times on rides rather than waiting in line. At that price, your fast-food concessions can be buffet-style, eliminating the overhead of cashiers inside the park. The justification is that if you are eating, you are not making the lines for rides longer.

    Would you pay twice the ticket price for the Magic Kingdom if the lines were half as long? You could see every attraction in fewer days so you could keep the trip shorter and save on hotel nights. And remove the boredom of standing on line for an hour for a 2-minute ride.

    ---
    Pixarland will not happen soon. Since all the past and current movie releases were for Disney, Pixar will have to wait untill it has a few hits on its own. Then buy land. Design rides to fit the land and the movies. Build the rides. Hire people to run everything. Safety tests. Usability testing. Fix anything confusing. Repeat until anybody from 5 to 95 can understand the layout. Finally we mortals are allowed to enter.

    I guess they need 5 great movies (at one movie per year) before even starting. Another 5 years to design, build and test the first 10 rides. (I am assuming one adult and one child per movie.) So Pixarland opens in 2015. The grand opening will do well, and adding a few rides each year to match the latest movies would keep people going back.

    --
    I spend my life entertaining my brain.
  30. Zilla, NeXT renderman and new apple Pixlet codec by goombah99 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Remember how last october Job introduced the new codec called "pixlet" or something like that? He said it was the number one requested feature designed for Pixar to be able to exchange compressed 24 frame per second movies. So they came up with a new high quality compression format.

    Second back when I had my NeXT it came with Renderman which was I beleive the Pixar developed shader for 3-d rendering. It was very slick and blow-your-socks off fast on a 486 computer.

    NeXT also came with Zilla, the predecessor to all grid computing that let the Zilla project steal unused cycles on all volunteer NeXT computers in the world. Among its feats was part of the four-color-map theorem proof (an exhaustive proof), and the early CGI movie rendering.

    So the convergence of Jobs computer platforms and Pixar in not a new thing. The fact that its running on Intel hardware is also no suprise since NeXTstep and Renderman ran on INTEL hardware.

    but it seems that with pixlet, Xgrid, Xraid, and the new rackmount G5 all the peices are in place to go back to an all apple platform if he chooses too. But circumstantially they probably will wait till their next movie is done. But presumably with Pixlet, and finalcut pro they can do all the desktop work on apples now.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  31. Re:Why? by subtillus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    16) Apple made a computer that doesn't crash, one that I can use, and I'm just some guy.

    17) Apple gets that while functional is good, functional and stylish is better.

    18) Apple made a computer that I'm proud to bring with me.

    Example: The other night I was at a screening of a foreign movie on some sort of esoteric VCD format that the language lab computer (running XP pro) couldn't play under RealOne, WMP9 or the other DVD software installed. Soooo, just as the professor was about to send everyone home, I offered to try it out on my ibook.

    I put in the disc, "DVD Player" started up, the movie started, I plugged in the projector cable, the controller faded away subtly and seemlessly and we watched the movie. I sat back with a grin, as if it was me who did something right... As if I was the one who fixed the movie player with my Apple.

    So what's my point again?

    Apple is great because it makes my life easier, my computer does the work I want it to when I want it to and I'm proud when it does so.

  32. Re:Why? by melatonin · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Where are my unexpensive Macs?

    If you read, I wrote:

    Apple has to make higher priced units that will yeild larger profits due to the price, not because of a markup

    Apple's no longer in a position to afford profiting by quantity. The first step is to make the public want Macs. In 1997, the public didn't care. In 2004, finally, Apple is associated with Cool. The public wants Macs.

    The thing I find is, whenever I tell someone how much an entry level iMac costs, they're always shocked because it's less than they expected. Step 2 is to make the public decide to buy Macs. That's what the Apple stores and the iPods are for.


    --
    Moderators should have to take a reading comprehension test.
  33. Re:Actually, it is farfetched. by Moofie · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If I had to handicap the animation industry, I'd bet on Pixar because they have five mega-hits under their belts, and zero flops.

    Dreamworks has been much more spotty.

    --
    Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  34. Re:Why? by melatonin · · Score: 4, Insightful
    And oddly enough, consumers are choosing Linux over MacOS. Is everyone stupid, or are there other mitigating factors that you didn't cover in your sermon?

    Consumer's aren't choosing Linux, enterprises are choosing Linux for desktops. Mom and Pop aren't formatting their hard drives and installing Linux distros on their 'box' at home. If anything, Microsoft has to worry about the loss of enterprise desktop share, not Apple, who's not in enterprise.

    Enterprise takes what's cheap and what works. That's why they buy thousands of identical, feature-less Dell boxes. And that's why they'll install Linux on those boxes instead of Windows XP Pro if Linux does what they need it to do. I mean seriously, why would you install XP in the enterprise? The reasons keep diminishing.


    --
    Moderators should have to take a reading comprehension test.
  35. Where is the Pixlet codec??? by goombah99 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Aha, I found it!..Pixelt seems to have vanished from view. Here's the description of Pixlet from apple's website.

    Pixlet, the first studio-grade codec for filmmakers that was developed in conjunction with Pixar to deliver breathtaking HD-quality video on the Mac that is free from visual artifacts.

    "High-end Video Codec
    Pixlet is the first studio-grade codec for filmmakers. Pixlet provides 20-25:1 compression, allowing a 75MB/sec series of frames to be delivered in a 3MB/sec movie, similar to DV data rates. Or a series of frames that are over 6GB in size can be contained within a 250MB movie. Pixlet lets high-end digital film frames play in real time with any 1GHz G4 or faster Panther Mac, without investing in costly, proprietary hardware."

    You may recall Jobs demoed it in october. He showed in particular how you could use the scrubber to move through the film in faster than real time to any place and the codec kept up with the presentation. And the quality was near DVD. very impressive.

    So where is it? it vanished off Apple's main web pages though you can find it in their archives. It vanished about the same time as "home-on-ipod" vanished. I assume panther, ilife and ipod ate its brain share. Perhaps its going to be held back as a premium product to differentiate final cut pro. any guesses

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:Where is the Pixlet codec??? by bursch-X · · Score: 4, Informative

      And the quality was near DVD.

      I bet it is far better than DVD, otherwise it wouldn't be a studio-grade codec for filmmakers. DVD quality is inacceptable for professional editing work.

      --
      There are two rules for success:
      1. Never tell everything you know.
    2. Re:Where is the Pixlet codec??? by SideshowBob · · Score: 4, Informative

      Its been shipping for awhile now. Open a movie in QuickTime Player Pro and choose export, open options, click on the settings button in the video pane, and look at the popup that contains the list of codecs. Its there.

    3. Re:Where is the Pixlet codec??? by byolinux · · Score: 3, Informative

      Um...

      Unless I'm going crazy, it's on:-

      http://www.apple.com/macosx/

  36. good business sense by zpok · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do you really think Jobs would change Pixars Hardware/Software setup to please his Apple side?

    And why should he have to explain it? The fact that most of that software comes straight from the NeXT days should be "explanation" enough on the techie front. But go ahead and raise your fist for Linux dominance ;-)

    It's only very recent that Apple's making serious servers and raid solutions, and while they're very cool and cost effective, an established business will wait just a bit longer and see where it goes before switching the most processor-intensive part of their work to G5's.

    OTOH, when there's a proven advantage and a clear cut in cost, you'll see them switch in no time, especially now that Linux and Windows Server have been certified to run on the Xservers.

    I'd never expect a serious CEO to have to think about that in other terms than cost-reduction, productivity and quality.

    --
    I think, therefore I am...I think.
  37. Re:Why? by Surlyboi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    When tell people I prefer working on a Mac than on anything else, people look at me as if I were a perfect ass. Some of my friends don't speak of computers with me anymore, they just think I've become some kind of extremist who can't see how Macs are doomed.

    Sounds to me like your friends are the extremists if the simple mention of a Mac makes them stop talking to you. Jobs has done a bunch of dumb things, sure. To hold him responsible for your friends not talking computers with you is kinda silly though.

    --
    Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine...
  38. Re:Actually, it is farfetched. by damiam · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Shrek vs. Toy Story 1/2, A Bug's Life, Monsters Inc., and Finding Nemo. That's one hit against five. I'd bet on Pixar.

    --
    It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
  39. Re:Why? by MoneyT · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It seems to me that Apple is greatly expanding. The X Serves are actualy selling fairly well (and those can't all be going to schools) and many of the markets that started to drop Apple have started moving back, for example, 2 years ago, my highschool decided it was going all Dell. They had given us a great deal and they were cheap computers, so we started pulling machines for Dells. Now the school is probably about 90% Dell, and we're rapidly back pedling and trying to get new macs. The teachers want them because they were less of a hassle, the sys admins want them because the dell rackmounts have been nightmares (and they want something that will play nice with the linux boxes and the old macs that are still being used) and the repair techs want them so that they can sit down for longer than 5 minutes at a time. Similarly my college was considering a year ago to standardize all computers across the campus as x86 windows machines. Just 2 weeks ago, the IT department sent out a campus wide email to all staff that the school had just negotiated a bulk order from apple, and anyone who wanted a machine should order now. To top it off, they just recently opened a mac tech position to support the influx of new macs into the campus.

    I realize these are anecedotes, but going on what I've seen, I think Apple is slowly creeping back.

    --
    T Money
    World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
  40. Re:I wouldn't mind Apple if it wasn't for ... by MoneyT · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1) Woz was a genius yes, but Woz was the Apple. Steve and his team was the Mac.

    2) And yet for all of that, no one did anything like it until Apple did it.

    3) No matter where you go, there will be fan boys

    4) It's not that the single button itself is better, it's the philosophy that you should be able to do everything with a single mouse button. Just for fun, try to create a new folder on your desktop of your windows machine with only the left click.

    That and when you really think about it. If you're hard set in teh 2 button ways, you already own a 2 button mouse, so just plug it into your mac and be done with it.

    --
    T Money
    World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
  41. Re:My major concern with this deal... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't think movie theater chains would kill an incredible revenue source like Pixar. How much leverage does Disney have at this point anyways? What if they threatend to halt distribution to theater chains that didn't do as told? I'm sure that would frighten some theater chains into compliance (not showing Pixar films and such), but are Disney's current box offices draws really worth it? Why not get on board with Pixar instead?

    Pixar has consistently delivered a string of hits that continue to bring bodys to the theaters. Disney, on the other hand, has a solid, but shrinking box office draw. Do you go with Pixar and dump Disney, or do you place it safe and stick by Disney?

    Of course Disney could jump into the theater chain business. But that doesn't seem likely since they're hurting right now. I'm not saying they're going away any time soon, but even big companies struggle. Pixar sees the potential of manuvering around and utilizing Disney's current weakness.

    Wouldn't a power shift be fun to watch over the coming years?

  42. Steve Jobs and Pixar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Pixar is run by some very bright computer graphics legends. They make Renderman, the best and basically only production renderer in the movie industry.

    They don't tell Jobs how to do his job, he doesn't tell them how to do theirs.

  43. Counterpoint by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Interesting

    1. the whole personality cult surrounding Steve Jobs (face it - Steve Wozniak is the real genius)

    I would agree that Wozniac is the greater technical genius. I have not been that impressed with Jobs in the past, but to discount what he has done over the last few years is to fail to recognize real talent. You cannot deny he has brought Apple a huge amount of mindshare and given them a great technical direction over the last few years

    2. a futuristic vision that only about 40 years out of date. Take the ipod - it looks like it came straight out of the movie '2001', which was released in 1968

    Related to the aforementioned skill of product design above is knowing when retro will sell, and when to move away from it. You'll note that they don't sell candy-colored computers anymore (though they are starting to sell colored iPods).

    3. rabid myopic fanboys. Yes, I am aware of the irony of posting this on Slashdot.

    They exist for any platform.

    4. product deficiencies that are actually features. For a great example of this, bring up the single mouse button thing to a bunch on Mac fanatics. You will be informed that a single button is better, that you can compensate by doing this and that and this, and that you don't really need more than a single button anyway.

    I've never heard anyone argue that. I use a three (or more) button mouse for an external mouse, but I do have to say that I personally prefer a single button on a laptop as I am always accidentally hitting the right one on most PC laptops. Since my hands are on the keys all the time anyway I find chording to work better on laptops and two buttons to be very inefficient.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  44. Re:steve jobs vision needs glasses! by wfolta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What Apple borrowed from PARC and others before them they improved and innovated. For example, pull-down menus (Mac) are simpler to use then pop-up (pre-Mac) because they're always visible. Previous systems did bit-blits only of rectangular regions, Apple introduced non-rectangular, non-contiguous region blits. Etc.

    MS, on the other hand, has slavishly followed and usually dis-improved. Or been way late to the party. For example, Apple added Quartz Extreme a couple of years ago: use OpenGL and the today's opwerful graphics cards to improve and accelerate the Mac UI. MS will bring this to Longhorn in a couple of years.

    Heck, MS so copies Apple that they even use the same color schemes and desktop patterns for their advanced UI previews. They can't even come up with their own.

    And THAT is the difference between Jobs and Gates.

    Not that Gates hasn't innovated. He has. But in the business/marketing realm, not design or technology. Most of us geeks admire tech/design innovators over marketing innovators.

  45. Re:I wouldn't mind Apple if it wasn't for ... by Rimbo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "1. the whole personality cult surrounding Steve Jobs (face it - Steve Wozniak is the real genius)"

    What, exactly, do you mean by "Real?"

    There is more than one kind of genius, and all kinds are very real. There is genius in mathemeticians who focus only on esoteric theories, there is genius in engineers who only solve real problems they can feel, and there is genius in Ella Fitzgerald's singing.

    The genius of Dali's art is very different in kind from the genius of a certain Finnish student coming up with the right code for the world, but who would say that Linus Torvalds is no genius?

    Not all genius is necessarily what you might consider to be good. There is a genius in Bill Gates' domination of markets, in George W. Bush's political mastery, in Osama Bin Laden's sheer survival skills and leadership abilities.

    Both Wozniak and Jobs are geniuses, in their own way. Wozniak is the engineering genius, and Jobs is the marketing and management genius.

    And neither one is really less of a genius than the other.

  46. Re:Malibu Stacy touched my junk by Rimbo · · Score: 3, Insightful
    excellent meaning "supports my views"
    article meaning "editorial"


    Although I agree with the article's point of view, you're dead-on about the submitter's bias. Of course, the submitter's bias is probably why the submitter noticed the article in the first place, and if the submitter didn't like the article, he/she probably wouldn't have submitted it.

    This is clearly an opinion piece, not so much a report.
  47. Re:Why? Rebuttal. by mgahs · · Score: 5, Informative

    Why do so many people worship this one guy? Is this because he is such an egomaniacal elitist control freak?

    Yes! He has the balls to do what some people dream of. He's a guy who will go ALL IN on a 4-5 off-suit because he KNOWS that he'll make a straight on the flop. (Yes, i'm a Hold-em fan). He can push USB and FireWire and make it mainstream. He can push a UNIX-based OS and have people use it.

    Since 1984 he has done some good things (NeXT, the first iMac, OS X), but a lot of really bad ones.

    Thanks for making my job easier and naming the good things, but you failed to mention the bad things! Like what, killing the Newton? The Cube was a technological marvel, but was overpriced... Name a few more! C'mon!

    In the meantime, the Mac's marketshare fell below 2% and has been overtaken by Linux Desktop's share.

    MARKET SHARE is not the same as INSTALLED BASE. Market Share is a percentage of computers sold in a quarter / year. i.e. of every 100 computers sold, 2 are Macs. Installed Base is just that, how many computers are Macs? The numbers float around 11-13 percent.

    As for Linux overtaking the Mac, you word it in such a way that Linux users are switching from Mac, whereas Linux and the Mac are about even when it comes to market share. The word "overtaking" is deceptive. Just because I "overtake" you in traffic doesn't mean you're driving slower than you already were. It just means i'm driving faster. Just because Linux has a larger market share, it doesn't mean the Mac is losing ground to Linux.

    Lots of people agree that the real reason of the Mac slow but sure descent into Hell is Job's elitist vision and its results, overpriced hardware, rumor cult(ure) at Apple, etc.

    Let me take a minute and digest what you said....wait..not done...okay.

    What people? If anything Jobs' vision has made the Mac what it is today (compared to 3, 5, even 7 years ago). Think of it this way. You're not paying for overpriced hardware. You're paying up-front for some incredible software that is already pre-loaded onto the Mac (Simple, junk-filtering threaded eMail, pop-up blocking Safari, vCal-reading iCal, System-wide Address Book, iLife++)

    Today the guy seems more interested in selling online muzak than selling less-than-$2000 computers. iMac's and eMac 's used to be nice

    He's selling music to sell iPods! There's no money in selling music online.

    As for your comment about $2000 computers, Apple currently has 5 product lines, and a total of 16 "stock" machines within those lines. Of those 16, *5* are over $2,000 (7 if you count the ones at $1,999).

    Only ONE consumer-based product is over $2,000: the 20" iMac. ALL iBooks and eMacs are under $1,500. Hell the eMacs START AT $800.

    Wow. That was fun. My first troll-rebuttal!

  48. Re:Why? by John+Carmack · · Score: 5, Informative

    Someone that has done "some good things (NeXT, the first iMac, OS X)" in their career gets my respect.

    Most of the negative tales about Jobs probably have some grounding in truth -- it was almost amusing watching him berate the stage people before a show for glitches in the prop moving systems: "What the hell is this??? Did you guys pick up these parts at Home Depot???". However, he did always listen when I was talking about a technical issue, even when I was saying something that didn't sit with his current understanding of graphics cards / APIs / gaming.

    When I was considering setting up to demo Doom 3 at macworld, all of the Apple people were going on about how we needed to sanitize it because "Steve won't let there be any blood or killing". I finally went to him directly, and he replied "If you think you can make it great, then let's do it. I trust you, so you'll have to decide." Not quite the overbearing micromanager he is sometimes portrayed as.

    I'm not a regular mac user, but I'm glad Steve Jobs is still around.

    John Carmack

  49. Re:$1 dollar salary. by Trurl's+Machine · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He only gets a 1 dollar check per year but his stock optins and bills that Apple picks up for him are worth millions.

    No, they aren't. His stock options allow him to purchase Apple shares for $43.56. AAPL is currently at around $20.00. Right now, Steve Jobs stock options are worth exactly nada point null. And frankly, in the foreseable future they will rather keep this value. Jobs even once offered a journalist who was estimating their worth at some millions to buy them at half the estimated price. Obviously, the journalist declined. Even if Jobs was half-joking then, he had a valid point - it will take ages for AAPL to break through the $40.00 level and actually it's not even likely for it to ever happen.

    Of course, the company pay for his semi-private jet and his powerbook. But even that is not exactly his own salary - if he quits from Apple, another CEO will fly "his" gulfstream jet.