Slashdot Mirror
Apple to 'Switch' to Windows?
JFlex writes "PC Mags writer John C. Dvorak discusses the idea that Apple may dump OS X and 'switch' to running Windows in a recent column: "The idea that Apple would ditch its own OS for Microsoft Windows came to me from Yakov Epstein, a professor of psychology at Rutgers University, who wrote to me convinced that the process had already begun. I was amused, but after mulling over various coincidences, I'm convinced he may be right. This would be the most phenomenal turnabout in the history of desktop computing.""
Wow, a "professor" observed these things, Dvorak? Of psychology, no less? He must be right!
Ok, let's see what you've got...
Epstein made four observations. The first was that the Apple Switch ad campaign was over, and nobody switched.
Um. Wow, okay.
First of all, the Switch campaign was just an ad campaign. Ad campaigns come and go. Even successful ones. (Think "Be all you can be" or "Dude, yer gettin' a Dell!" And yes, those were both very successful campaigns.)
Also, Apple marketshare, unit sales, profits, and revenues are at their highest ever, and growing at a faster rate than, for example, Dell.
So, point 1, wrong.
The second was that the iPod lost its FireWire connector because the PC world was the new target audience.
First of all, this is completely irrelevant to any discussion about whether or not Apple might switch operating systems, which is what I thought we were talking about. FireWire, or the lack of it, has zero to do with Windows. Additionally, since all DV and HDV cameras and decks have FireWire and require its use as the primary - and usually only - means of video transport, FireWire isn't going anywhere on Macs in general anytime soon. Further, since all Macs since the Power Mac G4 (AGP Graphics) support USB booting, and since all new Macs and PCs are universally guaranteed to have USB 2.0, going with USB on the iPod and eliminating additional support chipsets for things like FireWire - especially on a peripheral - seems prudent.
But I'm getting sidetracked by Dvorak, here, because the iPod not having FireWire is completely, utterly unrelated to any discussion about whether or not Apple might be switching to Windows.
Point 2, wrong. Actually, not even wrong...just utterly irrelevant.
Also, although the iPod was designed to get people to move to the Mac, this didn't happen.
Um, no. The iPod was designed to be a product that, you know, sold well. Which it, you know, did. Wildly so.
This whole "iPod was deisgned to sell Macs" business was a fantasy created by press and analysts who attribute that guess to Apple as if it were their sole intent. So we'll just ignore that the iPod is one of the most successful consumer products ever, and at the same time say it failed at some imaginary goal and purpose that there is no solid proof Apple ever created it for.
And on top of it all, most of the anecdotal evidence suggests that the "halo effect", as it were, actually works in some areas, at least marginally. To say nothing of the fact that, as I said before, Apple marketshare, unit sales, profits, and revenues are at their highest ever.
Point 3, wrong in both premise and substance.
And, of course, that Apple had switched to the Intel microprocessor.
Ahh, Dvorak must be feeling emboldened by his decade-plus of wrong predictions that Apple was on the verge of switching to Intel finally coming true.
There are many, many reasons Apple switched to Intel, all discussed ad nauseum elsewhere. "Switching to Windows" isn't one of them. Has Dvorak missed the amount of time, secrecy, and effort Apple has put into keeping it's options open for Mac OS X to run on alternate hardware platforms? Christ, Dvorak.
To say nothing of the fact that if Apple's secret purpose was to start a switch to Windows, you'd think they'd have at least made it possible to, oh, I don't know, RUN WINDOWS on the Intel-based Macs easily, which isn't possible at this time?
Point 4, wrong again. Well, at least Dvorak's consistent, if anything.
Dvorak is also actually missing the biggest play for Apple here: being able to run Windows and other x86 OSes in virtualization . That would be the holy grail for many academics, researchers, scientists, and other users, most of whom use Macs because they don't want to use Windows. With hardware partitio
Or is it only the ridiculous Dvorak articles that get posted on Slashdot?
If apple switched to Windows they would strictly be overpriced hardware.
Period.
Yeah, now that Apple is using x86 chips, they're going to abandon the one main thing that sets them apart (aesthetics aside) from every other box maker out there. As usual, Dvorak is talking out his ass.
Want to give all of us some sort of shock treatment to see how bad we can react?
why doesn't he just go hunting with Dick Cheney?
This is the weirdest idea... the day Apple will be "mainstreamized" this way will be the death of Apple. all other hardware cost less.
America to switch to the metric system and soccer is now America's favorite sport.
I'm about the furthest thing you can get from a Mac lover, but even I think there's no chance in hell. They were overpriced and underpowered even when they were at least unique on G4s. Now if they switched to Windows, there would be absolutely 0 reason to use them instead of buying a Dell, HP, or Gateway. The last thing any company ever wants is to compete in a commodity market, which is exactly what the Windows PC market is. Apple can't compete with Dell on price. It needs to keep its uniqueness, or its computer market is dead.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
Personally, I've always disliked the Mac look'n'feel, from the ugly Chicago fonts of old to the top-of-screen mighty morphin' menu.
But Mac OSX has always had something the PC hasn't -- stability. And that's because it's designed into the OS from the ground up. Windows has always felt like stability was "grafted in" somehow, and it's never been a comfortable fit.
Like most management, he gives no thought to stability or the correctness of the implementation. "As long as it's done, it's good enough." And it's that attitude that placed Windows exactly where it is, and why the Mac exists at all. It's not the "computer for the rest of us" -- it's the computer for the discerning crowd.
John
It's just that all of his articles are ridiculous these days...
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Let me explain this to you: Dvorak is what's known in the industry as a "Yellow Journalist". Which is to say that he publishes sensationalist articles designed to elicit a reaction in his readership, despite having little to no facts to support his position. These authors are usually frowned upon by any publication with journalistic integrity. Since PC Magazine has none (and needs the readership), they continue to post his foaming-at-the-mouth drivel.
Every once in awhile, Dvorak manages to hit upon a sensationalist story that's true by pure accident. This then convinces his "fans" that he knows what he's talking about. People then latch onto that single instance of "being right" to accept his pathetically low rate of correct predictions.
Stop listening to this guy. Stop posting his articles. Ban PC Magazine for publishing this nonsense. Otherwise Slashdot becomes just as bad as Dvorak himself.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
That might finally stem some of the tide of people in Astronomy using Macs for everything... they'd then have to seriously consider Linux if they wanted something to be Unix-based.
It would also remove Apple as the "other" platform. Right now, if asked "do you only support Windows," most people will say, "Oh, yeah, we support Macs too, so we support everybody." With Mac down the tubes, there is another obvious "second" desktop platform.... (And, by support, I'm not so much interested in software as I am in Internet hookups, going places and being able to hook in my laptop to a display, etc.)
Too bad the whole thing is just one crack delusion.
-Rob
What did Steve Jobs have to say when John C. Dvorak asked him to confirm this?
Fudwatcher
davecb5620@gmail.com
Wrong answer.
1. This would be a boon to Linux and a bust for Apple. $x % of people want to be different, and Apple would no longer be different. Or different enough. The GUI is not even close, nor the functionality when comparing the two OSs.
2. OS/X is doing great because of the BSD roots, which benefits from Linux (and vice versa). More hardware makers are opening up their drivers. They have momentum already. And their stock price already reflects this.
3. If it was only about "cool" hardware, Alienware would be larger and Dell's decidedly unsexy hardware would make them another mid-sized company. Cool helps, but there is no shortage of "cool" Wintel boxes, just of buyers.
Sorry, but Dvorak must be jonesing for the hits only slashdot/digg can provide by putting out a story like this. Nothing to see, move along...
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
I recently switched from windows to mac. OSX was the primary reason I switched, secondary being quality control/limited hardware sets promote stability and reliability.
I'm a windows developer by trade, I can't imagine going back. I cannot tell you how nice it is to go home to a computer that "just works", works intuitively, and elegantly after a long day FIGHTING with windows systems. Apple would lose a substantial portion of it's customer base and just become a novelty hardware dealer like alienware.
His key points here on how "no one switched/came over because of the ipod" are just wrong. It's true it wasn't a groundswell, but apple's PC marketshare is growing at about 19%. That's pretty fast, and it's better than it was a couple years back.
I'd like to see some of these cameras, since DV over USB isn't standardized and would be vendor-specific.
The proper transport for DV has always been FireWire, and the only transport for HDV is FIreWire.
Sure, you can *make* specialty drivers and software, and capabilities in the camera at the other end, that can let you transport data any way you wish...after all, it's just bits.
But DV and FireWire are intertwined, at least for proper, full quality DV transport, and it will be that way for quite some time.
You know that old expression: "Even a broken clock is right twice a day"? Just a reminder that there are 23 other hours in a day.
This type of article is typical for Dvorak. Throw out a crazy statement with no justification, add some flame-bait ("fanatical users", "crazy"), and sit back smirking. In fact, I feel like we just went through this sort of thing.
(Hey, even that old post mentioned a broken clock. I guess if you cross a broken clock with a broken record, you get Dvorak!)
Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
Story restated
John Dvorak continues to be the biggest idiot in the tech commentator business. He's been making stupid predictions since at least the '80s, and shows no sign of stopping now. Dvorak wishes he had 1/10th of Robert Cringely's wit and insight. We wish that Dvorak would start scorecarding himself the way that Cringely does, and give up so that he can do something else with his time.
Okay, the story summary goes: Apple and Jobs have recently spent multi-tens of millions developing an Intel version of their operating system so that they can use Intel chips. Soon, they will throw away all that development work, infrastructure work, and vendor relationship work and just use Windows, maybe putting a pretty little 'Mac-a-like' face on top of Windows, because, wait for it, because: Steve Jobs wants to be just like Dell and Compaq.
The ignorance beggars comprehension.
As a comparison, Robert Cringely's prediction: free versions of OS X 10.4/intel given away on bootable ipods so that windows users can try mac for free (once 10.5 comes out.)
There's a huge difference.
Switching to the metric system would be smart.
Anybody remember a few years ago, when Apple was circling the bowl? Microsoft was being raked over the coals by DOJ for antitrust issues, remember? That's when Mr. Gates and Company pulled a rabbit out of their hat by investing in (bailing out) Apple. In one stroke, Mr. G. had diversified his portfolio while preserving the one (semi-)serious competitor in the Personal Computer market, thereby giving the DOJ a face-saving way to quietly let the whole thing go (don't believe me? Why aren't there three companies headquartered at the Microsoft campus right now?)!
Gates ain't gonna let Apple go Windoze - that'll land him right back in the hash with DOJ.
Gil Amelio got pretty far along in high-level talks with M$ about using NT as the future platform for the Mac. Apple engineers even met with M$ engineers to discuss the details of what that switch would entail. Luckily, Amelio ended up not doing this, and the rest is history.
and a hack writer like Dvorak believes it.
Must be true then.
A message from our sponsor
It's a bit early yet isn't it? Is this just setup for a really good one on 4/1?
Since USB 2.0 and firewire are roughly (within an order of magnitude) comparable in performance, why would a product developer choose to use the far more expensive firewire chipset? Especially when that presents difficulties breaking into the low-end PC market, where firewire is far from ubiquitous? That's even the reason we assume the iPod went to USB, was to break into the PC market.
I think firewire is the Betamax of local connectivity. It may be technically superior, more convenient, [insert other advantages here] but it never had the industry backing of USB. Firewire will still hang around for a while because of the large amount of legacy video hardware using it, but it's only going to be present on higher-end PCs, kind of like a technologist's version of a VTEC sticker on a ricer. It's already a niche player, and the niche is growing smaller instead of larger.
John
"How Apple is going to Screw Up Again" ...if you didn't get it by now, Dvorak's only point is to get you to CLICK ON HIS ARTICLE. It really doesn't matter if he makes any sense or not, he just wants you to click on the article to increase his hits. Don't feed the trolls.
"OS X: The Worst Interface on Earth"
"The iPod's Coming Disaster"
"Why Linux will fail"
"Why AMD Sucks"
etc.
Yes. Dvorak, wrong again. Who would have thunk it. The guy has come to his pseudo-fame by making outlandish tech predictions for decades. He probably started out as a decent writer who couldn't set himself apart from the 94083094583094853098509834905 other tech writers out in the late 80s. Then he realized that if he started making counter-intuitive predictions that would take two sides of a polarized debate in technology and make them go into a flame war about it, people would read his stuff.
... Except stop paying attention.
This is his job we're talking about. He's not some sort of tech-prophet. He's a writer. He sells words, regardless of their truth and even more so, regardless of his belief in their truth. The more people read his stuff, the more influence he gets, the more his predictions carry any weight, the more money he makes.
If 2 billion people read Dvorak and all disagreed, he wouldn't care. He'd still get paid. As it stands, since all he is doing is predicting, he can't be wrong in the traditional sense, because he can simply say "Just you wait. You'll see!" And there's nothing we can do about it....
An even stronger argument is comparing the iPod's loss of Firewire to the desktop loss of SCSI. If you remember, all old macs were SCSI only. Then the G3s came along, and they went IDE (standard config). Interfaces come and go. Products need contant review and revision to determine what will be most effective both in sales and performance. Apple's done this before, and they didn't switch to Windows then.
The US switched to the metric system in 1893.
Unfortunately they apparently aren't aware of the fact.
May contain traces of nut.
Made from the freshest electrons.
Apple used to always insist that they had a superior OS and hardware platform.
Then they dropped the OS they had written in-house for one based on BSD, and they are abandoning Classic support.
And now they have dropped the PPC platform and gone to "what everyone else is using".
So do tell, what is it exactly that "sets Apple apart" now? Aside from the price tag, a particular style of GUI and the big logos on pretty cases?....
So they switch their OSX to x86 going through a ton of work only to come out and say we did this for nothing???
I am on the next rocket off this planet
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
"Proper?" That's pretty shortsighted thinking there. One addition to the USB standard combined with a software driver release et voila! USB 2.0 would suddenly be the digital video transport of choice. All accomplished with no hardware changes to the vast majority of consumers' computers.
Here's the conversation at Ritz Photo to imagine: "Sure, I could sell you this digicam with firewire, but you'll need to have a firewire card installed into your computer. I also have this digicam that comes with USB, which your PC already has."
I'm not talking about cinematographers or television studios, or even the "prosumers" here. I'm talking about the 90% of camcorder buyers, Joe Sixpack out there buying a camcorder so he can tell people he's recording Junior's birthday, but really intends to shoot himself and the missus knockin' uglies.
To make lots of money, you build your hardware to sell lots of units at Best Buy. Firewire doesn't entice Joe Sixpack -- to him, it's a computer-geeky negative; especially when there's a known alternative.
John
this article is full of non-sequiturs. It shocks me that it even gets a spot light.
"The theory explains several odd occurrences, including Apple's freak-out and lawsuits over Macintosh gossip sites that ran stories about a musicians' breakout box"
How does it explain it? No it doesn't. Where is the logical jump? Apple sues because it wants to keep its upcoming products from hurting sales (and hype) of their current products. That's the most reasonable and simple (and thus probably correct) explanation.
"the iPod was designed to get people to move to the Mac, this didn't happen."
What? Hasn't apple been gaining market share non-stop due to the halo effect? Didn't they just pass Dell in the educational market not even a week ago?
"This switch to Windows may have originally been planned for this year and may partly explain why Adobe and other high-end apps were not ported to the Apple x86 platform when it was announced in January"
Yeah, that makes sense. Everybody is buying a new version of the OS that will, for once, require new versions of software. Adobe is going to ignore this great opportunity to sell a upgrades. Yeah. That makes sense. Not. Sounds more like they simply got blind sided by the news and haven't finished porting yet.
"Apple OS x86 could gravitate toward the PC rather than Windows toward the Mac, I have to be realistic. It boils down to the add-ons."
NO it doesn't. Microsoft is a software company, thus they don't build their own laptops or desktops. They focus on licensing out their OS. Apple is a hardware company that creates their own boxes and does not license their OS. Since Apple controls the hardware and software, they can gravitate toward the PCs, but Windows will never move to Macs, even if they wanted to. Macs are proprietary to Apple. What a garbage speculation.
"Apple has always said it was a hardware company, not a software company. Now with the cash cow iPod line, it can afford to drop expensive OS development and just make jazzy, high-margin Windows computers to finally get beyond that five-percent market share and compete directly with Dell, HP, and the stodgy Chinese makers."
Don't you mean Apple can finally afford to invest even more into their OS, bundle it even better with iPods and iTunes, and use the halo effect to grab an even larger market share away from Dell, HP and stodgy Chinese makers? So you're saying Apple will become Alienware PCs? Yeah, and we can see how dominant those guys are in the market.
"To preserve the Mac's slick cachet, there is no reason an executive software layer couldn't be fitted onto Windows to keep the Mac look and feel. Various tweaks could even improve the OS itself."
So Apple would be selling a windows skin? It would be slower, buggier, assumes MS would be okay with a complete rebranding of their OS (good luck!), and yet he expects them to be able to directly compete with the biggest PC sellers in the world despite this hinderance? Let's not forget MS won't be giving Apple any coding documentation on core inner workings of the OS. And Apple is going to somehow be able to fix the security vulnerabilities and bugs that native MS developers have been struggling for years to do. And what happens if a MS patch breaks one of the "upgrades" Apple made to the OS? And doesn't this directly contradict the quote about dropping "expensive OS development?"
Sometimes I can read speculation and think, "Hm, that IS interesting." But this time the complete lack of logical progression makes this "theory" worthless even to someone who'd want to believe it.
Active Server Pages error 'ASP 0126'
/article2/0,1895,1923151,00.asp, line 377
/ 0,1460,a=171069,00.asp' was not found.
Are they absolutely sure they want to switch to Windows?Include file not found
The include file '/component/util_generate_article_discussion_info
Now with the x86 chips I think you will see the move to Windows but with Apple selling their own interface to run on top of Windows. The software also no longer be restricted to Apple hardware.
The benefit to users will be that they will have the best of both worlds being able to run MS business applications, PC gaming and MAC gui based applications.
Dude, USB2 does not have the sustained data rate needed for DV.
simply prove it with an Ipod. transfer via firewiare then again via usb2 usb2 sucks horribly compared to firewire.
Joe sixpack would be pissed if his camera was always dropping rames or simply stopping during a capture.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Oh man, where to begin. Let's ignore the four points, they're not his and garbage anyway. As for his personal analysis, well that's garbage too.
"But if Apple's saber-rattling was done to scare the community into backing off so it wouldn't discover the Windows stratagem, then the incident makes more sense."
What does rumors about a breakout music production box have to do with that? Hey Dvorak, there's rumors of a REAL video iPod...but BACK OFF, you might uncover their plan to switch over to Windows!
"This switch to Windows may have originally been planned for this year and may partly explain why Adobe and other high-end apps were not ported to the Apple x86 platform when it was announced in January." Yeah, Adobe is always first to have their apps completely ported. They had PPC support right away, and were the first with Altivec support. If Adobe hasn't updated their apps for OS X on Intel, then there must be a conspiracy.
"At Macworld, most observers said that these new Macs could indeed run Windows now."
And since then, it's been proven that it won't work out of the box. This has been pretty well known since Macworld, shouldn't Dvorak be a little more on top of things? Did he even attend Macworld, or did he ask the janitor emptying the garbage what looked neat?
"Another issue for Apple is that the Intel platform is wide open, unlike the closed proprietary system Apple once had full control over."
Where did Apple say they were going to support every piece of hardware, nowhere that I've seen. Hmmm, there's even restrictions in OS X to allow it to only run on sanctioned hardware (until it get's hacked). Looks like from OS X's commercial standpoint, they're still only need to support a closed system.
"As someone who believed that the Apple OS x86 could gravitate toward the PC rather than Windows toward the Mac, I have to be realistic. It boils down to the add-ons. Linux on the desktop never caught on because too many devices don't run on that OS. It takes only one favorite gizmo or program to stop a user from changing."
Oh where to begin. No one ever thought Windows would really run on a Mac, did they? What does that have to do with anything? Linux on the desktop, maybe it never caught on because it isn't installed in people computers when they got them. Maybe it's because there isn't a great consistent easy to use/configure/maintain/whatever desktop environment yet. Is there a point to these sentences?
"To preserve the Mac's slick cachet, there is no reason an executive software layer couldn't be fitted onto Windows to keep the Mac look and feel. Various tweaks could even improve the OS itself."
Right, let's skin Windows to look like OS X, that's useful. And I'm sure MS will give them all the code needed to tweak the OS. That's almost as funny as "Windows, as crappy as many believe it to be, actually thrives in this mishmash architecture."
Sure, I quoted half the article here, but only cuz I was too lazy to mock every single sentence.
I think people are missing the fact that the interface would not have to go but run as a layer on top of Windows. Apple could market the interface to all users and no longer be limited by their own hardware.
I'm convinced he may be right.
...what a prediction.
The logic that they switched to Intel, so why not Windows lacks any business sense whatsoever.
They switched to Intel because it made business sense and aligned with their underlying value proposition as a company.
Becoming another WinTel vendor, however, is completely antithetical to their business model.
Their business model is based on differentiating the experiential components of computer use. The CPU is not a mechanism by which they can provide differentiation; the OS is. OS X is generally considered a better user experience than any Windows version.
Why on earth would they switch?
They would not. The fact is, Dvorak makes money off getting people to click to that stupid page, and he does it by saying stupid things. If he had the first clue about Apple, he might actually have had a correct prediction about the company in the past decade. How many times has he proclaimed the company dead?
Let's not forget that Apple doesn't make money without both their hardware and their OS. People buy Mac hardware (where Apple makes their money) for the OS (on which Apple make no money) To make money at software, you must either: a) Sell a retarded amount of it like MS. The upfront cost of writing software is huge. The cost for the first copy is the entire development cost plus one blank cd. The cost for the second copy is the entire development cost plus 2 blank cd's. You see where this goes right? Sell enough and it costs you nothing per copy to make. However, to sell this much, you must either have huge marketing costs (now you're not making money any more) or a locked in market (like MS). b) Sell is to one person _for_ a retarded amount. Think custom IT solutions for someone like the military, or a company the size of Merril Lynch. Software is a weird business. Hardware is much more traditional in terms of the relationships of cost of production and sales. What all this means is that Apple uses the popularity and quality of the OS, which makes no money, to sell the hardware, which makes lots of money. That's the trade off. Apple abandoning the Mac OS would be economic suicide and CAN NEVER HAPPEN.. unless the laws of economics change.. which they can't.
Honestly, this isn't Digg. Slashdot is supposed to suppress trolling, but that's all this article is. OS X and its extensive software suites are Apple's competitive advantage, and the only reason for customers to pay more for hardware than they have to. Nobody could be so ignorant as to seriously suggest this, so he's only rattling our cages for more clicks to his site.
Sadly, I see just realized that this huge thread is in Slashdot's economic interest as well. Expect more of the same.
Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others. -Groucho Marx
Lois: You're drunk again.
Peter: No, I'm just exhausted 'cause I've been up all night drinking & dreaming up a dumber Apple story than finding a mac virus in the wild.
Sig Hansen?
It's been clear for many years that Dvorak is little more than a troll, who the world somehow never stops feeding.
Just ignore the guy.
Ipod went USB for one reason only: it's cheaper. When you want to hit a $99 price point and still have a decent margin, you don't start by using the most expensive of your possible engineering choices.
This comment is my opinion and does not represent an official position of Donald Trump or others I do not work for
It makes no sense to leave a profitable and comfortable niche and compete in an oversaturated Windows market. It especially makes no sense now that Apple is on an upswing and is being quite successful in increasing their market share and brand name recognition with iPod, selling their laptops to geeks and causal users. And Apple manages to appeal to them both: geeks get a shiny BSD system to play with, and casual users get a system that "just works".
I am no Apple fanboy. In fact I've never owned an Apple system in my life and never had any desire to own one. But if Apple keeps it up, I just might have to reconsider. If Apple could port their Cocoa shell to Linux and to offer a Linux based OS X, in addition to BSD based one, I will definitely switch, considering that their hardware is no longer lagging behind in performance. I may switch for some other reason as well -- for example, if for some reason Window has more Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) in it than OS X, and it really starts to step on my toes, then I will also switch.
Are you talking about the "Thanks, Bill" moment in 1998 when MSFT announced Mac Office 98 + 5 years of continued support for the platform + an investment of about $200M of non-voting AAPL stock?
I believe that was partially due to a court settlement, but it was also a big PR stunt for both companies. It got the DOJ off of MSFT's back, it renewed faith in the Apple/Mac platform, and it was a hell of an advertisement for Mac Office 98 (believe it or not, MSFT makes good money from Mac Office).
Apple has *always* had a lot of money in the bank. $Billions ever since their IPO in the early 1980s. At their lowest point they still had over a billion dollars in cash in the bank. Compare this to Silicon Graphics who is now down to a few tens of millions in the bank, dwindling from about $500M about 5 years ago. Even if Apple would have continued bleeding money, they would have remained in business for a long time, even without this so-called MSFT bailout.
That name is 'Troll'.
-- Too lazy to get a lower UID.
I'm gonna be blunt, and let the moderators do as they will. Dvorak is a fucking moron. Let me repeat that for those that may be hard of hearing. DVORAK IS A FUCKING MORON. He's the Pat Robertson of the computer world, a veritable wellspring of idiocy, who, for reasons no mere mortal can explain, still gets media coverage, despite continually demonstrating just how off-the-nut and invalid his predictions and opinions are. You know, nobody talks about SCO any more. They have no credibility, and thus no one gives a shit. But we still sit around going "Dvorak said this, Dvorak predicts that" when he's been about as reliable as SCO.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Yes Dvorak can be full of sh**, and more often than not he is just that, full of sh**. However, he did predict Apple's move to Intel when everyone thought he was again full of sh**, and it did happen, eventually.
That being said, in this case there are a couple additional things to consider:
*developing/maintaining OS is a significant overhead for a company
*currently, even though the sales of computers in Apple generate a large portion of profits, they also amount to a large portion of expenditures (r & d, hardware, software etc.)
*if we compare the cost/performance ratio of iPod/iTunes business, this is really where Apple's bread and butter are
*recently, there have been a lot of rumors that Steve Jobs has gotten more and more disinterested in the Apple, especially around the time he was battling a cancer. This could be in part due to the fact that he is getting more and more involved with Pixar/Disney. See: this and this
*there are signs that OSX is increasingly becoming a mess (somewhat outdated but worth a look, although don't put too much weight into it: click here)
If we consider previous statements, dropping OS may actually free-up a significant portion of Apple's budget to do other things which appear to be more profitable and will definitely become more profitable as they become more dominant on other platforms. So, this does not seem so far-fetched, although I do admit that even I doubt this will happen anytime soon, if at all. On the other hand, whether you like hearing this or not, Microsoft in all likelihood hopes for Apple to stay independent as that is the last excuse they have to prevent the government from proclaiming them a monopoly (which they arguably already are).
The largest downside to MS is that they have to support all the really good hardware out there as well as the really really really crappy stuff. This inhibits their options as far as making sucurity changes patches and all the rest. The only reason they survive is companies like Dell and HP put in the effort to make sure that their software runs well on their hardware. Apple is not trying to support the universe of hardware avaialble, just their own. This allows a more intergrated solution which could potentially have less problems for the user since they have the options to solve problems in either the hardware or software.
Apple is highly unlikely to give up what it considers its only competetive advantage.
Dovorak is a dummy and never listen to a psycologist about anything, especiall the computer industry.
. . .so I can filter out his crap.
Seriously though, I've never seen a Dvorak column posted to Slashdot that could have any use to anyone. That man is a waste of everyone's time.
Uh, you totally fail to understand how that conversation at Ritz Camera (or anyplace else) would go:
... I think my computer has that. That's good, right?"
Consumer: "How about that camera there? It's $499."
Salesperson: "Sure. It's not bad. But you have to be careful, it's USB."
C: "Oh
S: "USB is really for hooking up keyboards. If your computer isn't really fast, it'll drop frames, and suffer compression artifacts."
C: "Drop....frames?"
S: "It'll look bad."
C: "Oh. Well, that's not good. What else can I buy?"
S: "This one right here is only $699, and it comes with the card for your computer so you don't get dropped frames..."
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Let's go to the math:
USB 2.0 effective bandwidth: 320Mbps
Required bandwidth for DV: 59 Mbps
USB 2.0 bandwidth remaining: 261 Mbps
This isn't to say that transferring something over Firewire 800 isn't faster, just that USB is more than fast enough to handle DV capturing duties.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
Make wild, unfounded claims on scant, irrational chains of thought no would dare call "logic."
Publish it.
Get people talking about what a moron you are and how absurd your predictions are.
Collect your royalty fees and advertising revenue from all the page hits your absurdity got. In other words, Profit!
Here's my prediction: Underpants Gnomes to hire Dvorak as their new business consultant.
"Live Free or Die." Don't like it? Then keep out of the USA
Apple won't switch to Windows, not while Jobs is still at the helm.
Remember, years ago, Apple was developing a new OS, Copland (if I remember right), while being headed by Gil Amelio. Jobs was at NeXT, then. Then, Jobs comes back to Apple (billowing S-emblemed cape and all), ousts Amelio, throws out the bathwater AND the baby of the Copland project, and replaces it all with OS X, whose other parent besides BSD is NeXTStep.
So, replacing OS X with Windows would be tantamount to admitting that the heroic rescuscitation of Apple was, I dunno, not worth the effort or something.
Little Debian: America's #1 Snack Distro!
So easily the dumbest slashdot story ever.
I mean, seriously, haven't you guys learned that Dvorak is just a useless turd of the industry yet?
110100 1101000 1101000 1100110 0 1101111 1101000 1100011 1
Huh? What are you talking about, almost every single camera on that page lists IEEE 1394.
The ones that don't have it listed probably almost all HAVE it, it's just such a standard feature that they don't bother giving it top billing anymore. It's practially assumed on anything that's MiniDV.
Many of them have, in addition to FireWire, USB connections, usually for downloading still pictures using proprietary software or drivers. It's what I would consider a completely useless feature, but it fills space on the outside of the box I guess, and apparently somebody thinks it's a good idea. I'm not sure whether you can actually download the full-quality DV stream through the USB port, but I doubt it. On the cameras I've used (mostly small Sonys) they have a built in DV-to-MPEG converter, and they put the MPEG stream out the USB port, so you can have pre-shrunk movies for email or webcam use.
Just as an example from that list, the Canon Optura 600 isn't listed as having IEEE1394 or FireWire, it just says USB 2.0. But if we go to the Amazon page for the same item, we read: "Otherwise known as Firewire or iLink, the Optura 600's IEEE 1394 DV Terminal is a high-speed digital interface that ensures virtually no loss of video or audio quality when transferring videos to a computer. Simply use a DV cable to connect the camcorder to your computer's DV Terminal and you can be sure that your favorite, recorded moments retain their pristine image and sound." Furthermore, in regards to the USB port: "Quickly transfer images from the Optura 600 to a computer with the USB 2.0 High Speed Terminal."
So basically, the USB capabilities on there are just fluff -- they're for transferring still photos that are taken onto the memory cards to your computer, and on the higher end cameras they'll sometimes do video. But the real video transport is FireWire/IEEE1394, and probably always will be for MiniDV. The whole 1394 system was designed as an interconnect for DV equipment, and I don't think you're going to get all the players in USB together and invent an alternative, with all the stuff that's already in existence.
The only exception I can think of are the DVD based camcorders down at the bottom of the page, which really aren't "DV" at all, they're MPEG2. And as you'll find out if you read some of the owner comments from people who've bought them, there isn't a particularly good way of getting the video into your PC anyway -- basically you have to rip it off the DVD.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Be careful of jumping to conclusions.
That chart shows the Canon Optura 600 as having USB2 but does not mention 1394. One might assume that means it does not have 1394 support, and if I'm reading your reply correctly, you did assume that.
However, checking Canon's site shows that the Optura 600 does have 1394 support.
So, clearly, just because Steve's Digicams doesn't show 1394 support, that doesn't mean it's not there.
I'll leave checking the other cameras for you, but please rely on something a bit more accurate than that page, as it is demonstrably incomplete and inconsistent on feature lists.
USB is simply not useable for high bandwidth connections. While the burst speed (the number that everyone talks about) is higher than FireWire 400, the actual thoroput is much lower, and you cannot reserve bandwidth on the buss for an application. These two factors make USB of any form unusable for DV video.
The reason you don't find FireWire on many low end PC's is that it has not been a part of Intel's reference designs for motherboards, since Intel is not a member of the patent consortium that profits from FireWire. Now that Apple is a high-profile customer there is a chance this will change.
burst speed != throughput
He's "convinced" that they guy "may" be right. I've seen stronger positions in Jello.
Several friends of mine switched. They like the good engineering and the 'Just works' thing. They have jobs to do on the computer and can't be bothered with whacky programs, virus etc. Their iPods Just Work (TM), and then they look to the Mac for a similar stable computing experience. The 'Halo' effect is certainly working, and they would have nothing to gain by becoming just another Windows platform.
Dvorak is off a tangent again, but this time it's so obvious, it reveals his lack of insight and reflection for anyone to see. It's just embarrasing. Someone point him to this thread, please :)
I'm in a Unix state of mind.
Who said it was? I didn't quote you the burst speed, I quoted the effective sustained bandwidth as measured by current USB connected hard drives.
The total bandwidth of the bus is 480 Mbps. Had I used that number, you would have a somewhat more legitimate gripe, although it would be misleading. As it is, you've said nothing.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
What a dumbass. First of all, he's about a month and a half early. (check the calendar)
He's basing this on the ideas of someone else who thinks that removing Firewire from iPods means anything about the operating system Apple will use, never mind that Windows supports FireWire just fine, it's just that PCs have been slow to adopt it. And Apple wants to switch to Windows because because they switched CPUs? You mean to one they had already been making sure for years that their own OS would run on? The one with a much faster update schedule than Microsoft could ever dream of?
Wow. He's one of the oldest and biggest trolls out there in the computer-related press, and he's still trolling. Remember, his target audience is PC Magazine, read by the kind of folks who don't want to believe that it's a mistake for them to still be using Windows. So he's just providing more comfort to them that mean ol' Apple won't take their tattered, filthy, stinking, virus-laden security blanket away. Hey, switch my keyboard already, I'm writing just like Dvorak!
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
Baloney. That may have been true in 2002 but not now. There are plenty of DV cameras that let you use either USB or IEEE 1394 (or FireWire(TM) if you must).
Since the vast, vast, vast majority of PCs have USB connectors and don't have 1394 connectors guess what people who own these cameras use? Vast. And since it's DV, the quality is exactly the same over the USB connection as the 1394 one. Perhaps it's not "proper" since it's not an open standard and required drivers. Some users would still be better off with 1394 for the short term since DV over USB isn't yet very well supported by Linux.
Perhaps you're confused with cameras a couple of generations ago that would capture low-resolution low-frame-rate video to an SD card which was transferred to PC via USB mass storage emulation.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
Software is and has been a part of Apple's brand since the beginning of time, and it also is for Microsoft. This decision is not even Apple's to make.
If you think Microsoft is going to private label a version of Windows for Apple, think again. If anyone could get a private label version of Windows, it would be Dell, and they can't get it. So certainly Apple could not.
This is my sig.
Sample of Apple customer policies/problems I've run into:
I won't even begin to get into the illegal price fixing and racketeering against independent dealers.
Please help metamoderate.
Anyone who knows anything about marketing will tell you that you have two extremes:
...etc.).
...etc.).
...etc.) as well cheap no namers.
...
1. Commodity products that you sell a lot of at rock bottom prices, and make your money on volume (think no name PCs, computer parts, GM and Ford cars,
2. Expensive unique products that you sell a few of at high prices, and make your money on margin (think Rolex, Ferrari, Porsche, Apple Mac,
Think if an inverted bell curve with price and quantity as the axes, and you get the idea. The former is on the far left, the latter is on the far right.
The best place to be is closer to the left as possible, or closer to the right as possible. Being in the middle is the toughest spot.
Apple is already differentiated and sought after. By going Windows, they will lose a lot:
1. Their hardware will be expensive, while the user interface will be the same as one from Dell or a no name PC.
2. They lose revenue by giving a piece of every sale of a PC to their arch-rival Microsoft.
3. They become undifferentiated, and compete with well established PC vendors (Dell,
4. Their user base will be pissed off and will defect to cheaper PCs, since they lose the most unique part of the deal: OS X.
There is nothing going for this line of thinking. Or rather lack of thinking
2bits.com, Inc: Drupal, WordPress, and LAMP performance tuning.
The funniest part of TFA, for me, was when Dvorak invoked Apple's 5% market share. Obviously he's making the point that it's time for little Apple to grow up and go get the big market shares of Dell and HP.
The funny part is that Dell leads all computer manufacturers world wide with only about an 18% market share (in desktops). In fact in desktops Apple is the 9th largest computer maker in the world by desktop market share. In the U.S. they rank 5th (Dell is first with ~35% share).
It's not like Apple is some small fry. They are one of the 10 biggest computer makers in the world, and top 5 in the U.S. And this IS the proper way to rank them--against other computer manufacturers. It's stupid to rank Apple against Windows because it's apples (pun) and oranges. It's like ranking Mercedes against Delphi--they're at different layers in the industry.
Anyway there are many ways in which Dvorak is mis- or uninformed in that article. I just thought I'd point that one out. I agree with the parent--Apple is right where they want to be--big enough, but still commanding significant margins.
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
The simple formula is
Profit = Margin * Volume
You have to have at least one of the terms high
to get a high profit.
It's not April first yet ... this must just be a typo
Dvorak is the Rush Limbaugh of the computer industry. He has made a career out of being controversial, and it doesn't really matter that he is almost always wrong, because he is an entertainer, not a pundit.
But even a stopped clock is on time once in a while. And in this case, he may be close. Of course, there is zero chance that Apple is actually switching to Windows. On the other hand, Apple could do almost the same thing by supporting Windows applications under OS X. At one stroke, the major advantage of Windows--its large software library would be eliminated.
Not only would it be a great strategic move for Apple, but it is hard to see how they could pass up developing such a product, if only because they could give it such a great name.
After all, who could resist a product called AppleWINE?
Have you ever experienced this first hand? At least the telephone support. Sure, they SAY they only give 90 days of telephone support to non-Apple Care customers. But try it sometime, they always say something like, "if it's not something huge, I'll see what I can do." And usually they'll give me a good 15 minutes or so, which is phenominal... have you ever dealt with Dell?
Bullshit. My first PowerBook, I bought from a place that sold both Macs and PCs was one of the unfortunate 2% that, because of a faulty screen, could be pronounced DOA. The thing had been sitting in the store for over a month. The store clerk (not an apple dealer by default), went on and on about how great apple was about returned products. If Apple hadn't been, he probably would have tried to get me to buy a PC instead, or at least told me that they were having problems, since it would be HIS loss.
Okay, now this is ludicrus. I've never heard Apple say ANYTHING about upgrading existing orders, in fact, no company has ever had free upgrades for HARDWARE. Never-the-less, Apple has been known to do it on occation. My parents bought a MacMini a few months back, and Apple had secretly switched up a few, oh, hundred thousand orders with the newer generation, for free, without telling anyone. I saw an article about it, and sure enough, ours had twice the VRAM and a faster processor. Show me the part where Apple makes any claims about doing this on a regular basis. They will sometime do it if they upgrade the product line while you're order is being processing, sure, that makes sense. But after it ships, it's a done deal. I don't understand how you expect to hold any company to that. If done regularly, it's just a bad business practice.
And how is this Apple's fault? So the store clerk didn't live up to your expectations... although I probably would have done the same thing if it had I been in his shoes. Sure, I guess it would have been nice, had he gone the extra mile and actually tightened the bolts himself... wait, how is Apple to blame for this, again?
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
A windows compatibility layer ala Wine will likely come out of Apple fairly soon. Dvorak's twisted vision is close, but a little off in this case.
;)
Apple would not survive a move to Windows. It's users would never make the move. If Dvorak really thinks this will happen he's seriously out to lunch as Mac users are fundamentally different beasts than Windows users. Apple users tend to be very tied to their machines, and won't give up the ghost as easily as the OS/2 crowd did.
Besides, Mac users tend to actually have souls.
GJC
Gregory Casamento
## Chief Maintainer for GNUstep
Dvorak thinks like a conspiracy theorist, amplifying and artificially conjoining irrelevant trivia beyond all common sense.
Still, there may be some grain of truth here. I would look at the following argument instead:
dual-bootPoint 1: Apple makes essentially all of its revenue (and profit) from hardware. They make money by shipping hardware, NOT by promoting OS X or beating Windows or selling songs on the iTMS.
Point 2: Apple has become a very good hardware manufacturer, in particular since Tim Cook joined. This is one of the most under-reported Apple stories of the last several years. In terms of cost and efficiency, these guys can beat HP easily and go toe-to-toe with Dell. Case in point: Calculate their inventory turns from recent SEC filings; Apple is getting 50+ turns per year, roughly comparable to Dell.
Point 3: Apple has to be thinking about the fact that most iPods have been sold to PC owners. This proves there is a huge pool of people out there who don't want to use Macs for whatever reason, but will pay premium prices for Apple products because they are "cool" (i.e. they value the Apple brand, but not the Mac). Apple has sold lots of iPods to these people; they must be looking to sell computers to the same.
Point 4: The rabid-loyal Mac fan base is a huge strategic asset to Apple, and one they would never ditch. Moving to Intel is irrelevant to most users because it doesn't change the user experience (indeed, very few would even notice). Moving to Windows would represent a complete sell-out. Apple would never do this knowingly. It would be like The Grateful Dead telling their fans they are losers for going to their concerts over and over.
Given all of the above, a logical course for Apple would be to ship machines that can run both OS X and Windows. This achieves two objectives:The only real downside risk to this "dual boot" strategy is that developers may decide to stop developing OS X versions of products. (If everyone can run Windows software, why develop for OS X?). Over time OS X might become increasingly marginalized.