You aren't thinking about the long term picture. If Microsoft is going to move everyone to a multi-input, cloud enabled system like Metro that means COM and.NET has to go longer term. Those software packages are Windows' biggest asset and Microsoft's objective to to migrate them to Metro not lose them nor have them stay on COM and NET.
Microsoft has to make COM and NET apps feel less than ideal. And if they execute this correctly it should get worse and worse and worse for those apps. And in precisely the same way the Windows eco system has to fit the old mouse/keyboard worse overtime. If Microsoft plan is successful there won't be desktop user by 2017, they will be Windows user who right now happen to have their mobile device attached to a large display (touch enabled) with keyboard.
Touch is not going to be a disaster, because consumers are going to buy hardware that fits touch. And once they buy the hardware that fits touch they are going to want apps that support touch. And assuming Microsoft's strategy works (which I admit is a big assumption) everything is multi paradigm with users transitioning their means of interacting based on a variety of factors. I'll link this again. This is where Microsoft is heading: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6cNdhOKwi0
Most people do figure it out. There are a couple videos where people had problems. And those people would in real life ask and be shown. Having worked with older people they often don't understand the desktop metaphor now they just have more experience.
Second those videos were not of people using the system on a touch screen. Those videos didn't use a tablet input or even a trackpad. Rather, those videos were Windows 8 on a keyboard & mouse only setup where Windows 8 is an interface downgrade.
Third the users generally were able to do things with metro apps like use internet explorer. What they showed was people thrown into the Metro interface who had to use things from the the classic interface. It is probably good in terms of Microsoft transitioning people that this be uncomfortable. Apple made the classic box successively less comfortable to walk developers from:
a) Only runs in OS9 b) Only runs in the classic box on OSX c) Runs natively using the Carbon API for OSX. d) Runs natively using the Cocoa API for OSX.
I suspect if I took the average Windows/.er and asked them to try and get a classic app to run in 10.4 using the classic box (without access to google) they'd like fail. Conversely in 10.1 it was smooth as silk.
There are 3 major screen ratios on the desktops: 4x3, 16x10, 16x9.
But that's not what I meant. What I meant was that the screens would act different, use an entirely different approach like project onto another surface. Look at the way small monitors act in Microsoft view of the future: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=a6cNdhOKwi0
The other manufacturer focused their campaigns on different issues.
Most of them focused much more heavily on value / price. "We are the best deal for the money" is central to their advertising, far more consumers are highly price conscious than not and most of the others were aiming for market share either in consumer or corporate. Most of the consumer stuff from other manufacturers is focused on their software / hardware actually working a "we get that Windows stuff to work the way it should" meme. Like Toshiba's "no untested software" or HP's Dr. Dre ads. Dell's ads directly target segments of the market without much consideration to how these ads play more broadly: lollypop ads for inspiron, or the "dude you're getting a dell" when they moved into consumer. Conversely when they wanted to push their IT services arm lots of ads showing big server rooms full of Dells.
Ad campaigns are specific to the strategy and the issues facing the companies that create them. In Apple's case it has been: a) Appeal to a demographic willing to pay more (b) Justify the higher price
Apple's problem is that this strategy for computer ads are alienating to large segments of the population. They would like to convert people who are iPhone & iPad users over to Macs but they have to do so in a way that doesn't create a backlash. Its not easy. But that doesn't change what the message had been for 30 years.
OK so on OSX which they see as primary devices you agree they still support freedom. But on devices which are sold exclusively as secondary devices your concerned they don't offer enough diversity? My HP printer's WebOS is even more locked down, guess HP is going fascist too.
Anyway, iPads have a USB device as their primary interface. It isn't an industry standard USB but he's was right the correct way to load a song is loading it into the computer library and syncing the song to the device either physically or remotely. iPads are not designed to self manage.
There are about 200 doc viewers on the App store some free, some cost. Quick look technology is on the iPad so you could just write a 20 line script to view.doc files using the OS level support that exists. I assume the majority of iPad users that want to interact heavily with doc files do so via. Pages, which yes is $10.
You're also clueless if you think that a Mac is present in more vertical application markets than the PC.
I didn't say that, though Linux might be. What I said was the average user had a more diverse set of applications on their device.
I have no idea what this means. I suspect that you don't, either. You mean to say that a room full of Macs cannot be centrally managed, and instead requires some retard to sit in front of 50 different keyboards to add a new user, or deploy an application? And more, you think that's a benefit?
There is OSX server which handled that sort of thing. What's different is the degree to which the system allow for central lockdown. Apple allows for management but is much more hostile towards management control.
Would PowerPC Macs have sold well if they couldn't run any 68K applications? Would Intel Macs have sold well if they couldn't run any PowerPC applications?
No. But
1) What was being emulated was close to native. I wasn't around for the 68K -> PPC transition but I used Rosetta everyday for a while. It was seamless. And that's because the apps had been written for 10.3 and 10.3 was close enough to 10.5....
2) It was transitional. There never was any claim this was long term.
3) The system being emulated was slower than the system doing the emulation.
Just in case anyone is reading this and believing it. Libre Office runs fine on OS X. As does Open Office and there is a Mac interface specific version Neo Office, which is what I'd generally recommend all things being equal. Pages has a strong doc import, Mellel which is a layout based muli lingual word processor which many Mac people have has one as well.... And of course there is also Office for Mac.
Apple has become the very thing that they despised, back then. One True Way of doing things, and if you don't like it, hit the highway.
Nonsense. There is far more application and usage diversity among Mac users than among PC users. We don't have anything like standard corporate images.
Dude you're getting a Dell was an incredibly successful ad campaign for what Dell thought they wanted. They had to break out of their boring office / corporate image and make themselves players in consumer. They needed something non corporate and the pot head skateboarder worked wonderfully.
The fact that a decade later people still know the campaign...
Yep and Apple ads for 30 years have been appealing to the smug and condescending. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYP1Tjgt1Ao Coke doesn't run a 30 year campaign that the only reason someone would drink Pepsi is because they are unenlightened about the advantages of Coke.
That being said... SGI users put Apple users to shame in the smug and condescending department.
Deciding to buy an iphone 5 before they've been announced is stupidity in the extreme. It might be fucking shit.
Come on. How likely is that? How often are Apple's products shit? One of the wonderful things about Apple is that you can trust them and not have to be careful and skeptical. I bought the rMBP the day after the announcement, I would have bought the day of but had trouble figuring if I wanted the 512g hd + CPU upgrade for $600 or not. I didn't have to wait for all the detailed reviews, I'd been waiting for something like this for almost 2 years.
Well one area where Jobs wasn't involved was manufacturing logistics. At NeXT Jobs sucked at it. And when he came back to Apple they had problems. So he handed it of to Cook whose run with it. The fact that Apple has cool products and the fact that Apple can sell them may not be Cook. The fact that they can actually make them fast enough and get them to stores and customers in those quantities....
I think Cook is trusted, just not for the same things.
The "I'm a Mac" ads drove the high value customers to Apple. By the time Apple was at 8% by volume they represented almost 90 of the profits. I think the purpose of Apple ads is to reaffirm people's choices and their brand identity. Apple has had mostly the same ad for 30 years they hit one of these themes:
-- Apples are better -- Apples are easier -- The only reason people would choose a PC is because they are brainwashed lemmings
I had forgotten about that. Point to you. That is much worse than GDI/.NET. I don't think Microsoft is going to be able to maintain that discipline. Apple which has a cult like following offers the App Store as an option on OSX and is still having trouble finding the right balance. That's interesting it is likely to keep.NET alive for a long long time unless Windows 9 breaks.NET compatibility
Re:Most Enterprise use is moving to 7 now with XP
on
Windows 8 Is Ready
·
· Score: 2
I don't think most companies will go the Windows 8 route. Windows 9, will be difficult for corporate America. They might have to do real honest to god training.
8 isn't aimed for business. The business community has mostly not shifted to 7 and all the features on Microsoft's server products that are specific to later versions of Windows and Office.
There is no question Microsoft lost the battle for tablets and phones, they know that. That's why they are taking drastic action in consumer desktop. They (rightly IMHO) believe they are going to get knocked out of consumer by 2020 unless they push through rather radical changes. And losing consumer by 2020 will make enterprise desktop look very different by 2030.
The 10% can flip interfaces pretty easily. Windows has always been skin-able. OS X has all sorts of productivity extensions like: http://qsapp.com/ and http://cocoatech.com/pathfinder/ . And of course there is KDE on Linux regardless of where Gnome goes KDE is designed for that 10%.
You'll be fine.
Re:Let the bitching begin....
on
Windows 8 Is Ready
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Apple doesn't make much money from the App store, even on iOS where it is mandatory. The cost of the App store covers the cost Apple overseeing and supervising the apps. What it does do, is make customers feel comfortable installing anything. And that allows for direct comparisons which drive the cost of software way down, which makes the hardware more valuable.
Interestingly its seem to have had that impact on high end apps as well, driving the cost of Apple's software down about 80%. Logic is down from $1k to $200, Aperture from $500 to $80, etc..
Slashdot Mirror
You aren't thinking about the long term picture. If Microsoft is going to move everyone to a multi-input, cloud enabled system like Metro that means COM and .NET has to go longer term. Those software packages are Windows' biggest asset and Microsoft's objective to to migrate them to Metro not lose them nor have them stay on COM and NET.
Microsoft has to make COM and NET apps feel less than ideal. And if they execute this correctly it should get worse and worse and worse for those apps. And in precisely the same way the Windows eco system has to fit the old mouse/keyboard worse overtime. If Microsoft plan is successful there won't be desktop user by 2017, they will be Windows user who right now happen to have their mobile device attached to a large display (touch enabled) with keyboard.
Touch is not going to be a disaster, because consumers are going to buy hardware that fits touch. And once they buy the hardware that fits touch they are going to want apps that support touch. And assuming Microsoft's strategy works (which I admit is a big assumption) everything is multi paradigm with users transitioning their means of interacting based on a variety of factors. I'll link this again. This is where Microsoft is heading: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6cNdhOKwi0
Most people do figure it out. There are a couple videos where people had problems. And those people would in real life ask and be shown. Having worked with older people they often don't understand the desktop metaphor now they just have more experience.
Second those videos were not of people using the system on a touch screen. Those videos didn't use a tablet input or even a trackpad. Rather, those videos were Windows 8 on a keyboard & mouse only setup where Windows 8 is an interface downgrade.
Third the users generally were able to do things with metro apps like use internet explorer. What they showed was people thrown into the Metro interface who had to use things from the the classic interface. It is probably good in terms of Microsoft transitioning people that this be uncomfortable. Apple made the classic box successively less comfortable to walk developers from:
a) Only runs in OS9
b) Only runs in the classic box on OSX
c) Runs natively using the Carbon API for OSX.
d) Runs natively using the Cocoa API for OSX.
I suspect if I took the average Windows /.er and asked them to try and get a classic app to run in 10.4 using the classic box (without access to google) they'd like fail. Conversely in 10.1 it was smooth as silk.
There are 3 major screen ratios on the desktops: 4x3, 16x10, 16x9.
But that's not what I meant. What I meant was that the screens would act different, use an entirely different approach like project onto another surface. Look at the way small monitors act in Microsoft view of the future: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=a6cNdhOKwi0
The other manufacturer focused their campaigns on different issues.
Most of them focused much more heavily on value / price. "We are the best deal for the money" is central to their advertising, far more consumers are highly price conscious than not and most of the others were aiming for market share either in consumer or corporate.
Most of the consumer stuff from other manufacturers is focused on their software / hardware actually working a "we get that Windows stuff to work the way it should" meme. Like Toshiba's "no untested software" or HP's Dr. Dre ads.
Dell's ads directly target segments of the market without much consideration to how these ads play more broadly: lollypop ads for inspiron, or the "dude you're getting a dell" when they moved into consumer. Conversely when they wanted to push their IT services arm lots of ads showing big server rooms full of Dells.
Ad campaigns are specific to the strategy and the issues facing the companies that create them. In Apple's case it has been:
a) Appeal to a demographic willing to pay more (b) Justify the higher price
Apple's problem is that this strategy for computer ads are alienating to large segments of the population. They would like to convert people who are iPhone & iPad users over to Macs but they have to do so in a way that doesn't create a backlash. Its not easy. But that doesn't change what the message had been for 30 years.
OK so on OSX which they see as primary devices you agree they still support freedom. But on devices which are sold exclusively as secondary devices your concerned they don't offer enough diversity? My HP printer's WebOS is even more locked down, guess HP is going fascist too.
Anyway, iPads have a USB device as their primary interface. It isn't an industry standard USB but he's was right the correct way to load a song is loading it into the computer library and syncing the song to the device either physically or remotely. iPads are not designed to self manage.
There are about 200 doc viewers on the App store some free, some cost. Quick look technology is on the iPad so you could just write a 20 line script to view .doc files using the OS level support that exists. I assume the majority of iPad users that want to interact heavily with doc files do so via. Pages, which yes is $10.
You're also clueless if you think that a Mac is present in more vertical application markets than the PC.
I didn't say that, though Linux might be. What I said was the average user had a more diverse set of applications on their device.
I have no idea what this means. I suspect that you don't, either. You mean to say that a room full of Macs cannot be centrally managed, and instead requires some retard to sit in front of 50 different keyboards to add a new user, or deploy an application? And more, you think that's a benefit?
There is OSX server which handled that sort of thing. What's different is the degree to which the system allow for central lockdown. Apple allows for management but is much more hostile towards management control.
I don't have huge fingerprint problems with my iPhone or iPad now. And when the screen gets dirty, you wipe it.
Would PowerPC Macs have sold well if they couldn't run any 68K applications? Would Intel Macs have sold well if they couldn't run any PowerPC applications?
No. But
1) What was being emulated was close to native. I wasn't around for the 68K -> PPC transition but I used Rosetta everyday for a while. It was seamless. And that's because the apps had been written for 10.3 and 10.3 was close enough to 10.5....
2) It was transitional. There never was any claim this was long term.
3) The system being emulated was slower than the system doing the emulation.
Just in case anyone is reading this and believing it. Libre Office runs fine on OS X. As does Open Office and there is a Mac interface specific version Neo Office, which is what I'd generally recommend all things being equal. Pages has a strong doc import, Mellel which is a layout based muli lingual word processor which many Mac people have has one as well.... And of course there is also Office for Mac.
Apple has become the very thing that they despised, back then. One True Way of doing things, and if you don't like it, hit the highway.
Nonsense. There is far more application and usage diversity among Mac users than among PC users. We don't have anything like standard corporate images.
Dude you're getting a Dell was an incredibly successful ad campaign for what Dell thought they wanted. They had to break out of their boring office / corporate image and make themselves players in consumer. They needed something non corporate and the pot head skateboarder worked wonderfully.
The fact that a decade later people still know the campaign...
ingratiating, smug and condescending
Yep and Apple ads for 30 years have been appealing to the smug and condescending. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYP1Tjgt1Ao
Coke doesn't run a 30 year campaign that the only reason someone would drink Pepsi is because they are unenlightened about the advantages of Coke.
That being said... SGI users put Apple users to shame in the smug and condescending department.
Deciding to buy an iphone 5 before they've been announced is stupidity in the extreme. It might be fucking shit.
Come on. How likely is that? How often are Apple's products shit? One of the wonderful things about Apple is that you can trust them and not have to be careful and skeptical. I bought the rMBP the day after the announcement, I would have bought the day of but had trouble figuring if I wanted the 512g hd + CPU upgrade for $600 or not. I didn't have to wait for all the detailed reviews, I'd been waiting for something like this for almost 2 years.
Well one area where Jobs wasn't involved was manufacturing logistics. At NeXT Jobs sucked at it. And when he came back to Apple they had problems. So he handed it of to Cook whose run with it. The fact that Apple has cool products and the fact that Apple can sell them may not be Cook. The fact that they can actually make them fast enough and get them to stores and customers in those quantities....
I think Cook is trusted, just not for the same things.
Apple stores provide training. They regularly run courses on Apple software. I'm not sure which employees do them, but they have them.
The "I'm a Mac" ads drove the high value customers to Apple. By the time Apple was at 8% by volume they represented almost 90 of the profits. I think the purpose of Apple ads is to reaffirm people's choices and their brand identity. Apple has had mostly the same ad for 30 years they hit one of these themes:
-- Apples are better
-- Apples are easier
-- The only reason people would choose a PC is because they are brainwashed lemmings
Why? What goes wrong once people have say a good quality laptop with a capacitive touchscreen, a good quality trackpad ...? What doesn't work?
I had forgotten about that. Point to you. That is much worse than GDI/.NET. I don't think Microsoft is going to be able to maintain that discipline. Apple which has a cult like following offers the App Store as an option on OSX and is still having trouble finding the right balance. That's interesting it is likely to keep .NET alive for a long long time unless Windows 9 breaks .NET compatibility
I don't think most companies will go the Windows 8 route. Windows 9, will be difficult for corporate America. They might have to do real honest to god training.
Exactly. A unified platform approach.
They do understand what they are doing. For the first time in over a decade really leading the x86 platform. Honestly I like seeing the old Microsoft.
End users who are used to a moribund platform are going to be shocked how fast Microsoft can change the game when their profits are threatened.
8 isn't aimed for business. The business community has mostly not shifted to 7 and all the features on Microsoft's server products that are specific to later versions of Windows and Office.
There is no question Microsoft lost the battle for tablets and phones, they know that. That's why they are taking drastic action in consumer desktop. They (rightly IMHO) believe they are going to get knocked out of consumer by 2020 unless they push through rather radical changes. And losing consumer by 2020 will make enterprise desktop look very different by 2030.
There is nothing superficial about the UI changes.
As for the "cloud bullshit", well yeah that's a major direction in the industry.
What were you expecting?
The 10% can flip interfaces pretty easily. Windows has always been skin-able. OS X has all sorts of productivity extensions like: http://qsapp.com/ and http://cocoatech.com/pathfinder/ . And of course there is KDE on Linux regardless of where Gnome goes KDE is designed for that 10%.
You'll be fine.
Apple doesn't make much money from the App store, even on iOS where it is mandatory. The cost of the App store covers the cost Apple overseeing and supervising the apps. What it does do, is make customers feel comfortable installing anything. And that allows for direct comparisons which drive the cost of software way down, which makes the hardware more valuable.
Interestingly its seem to have had that impact on high end apps as well, driving the cost of Apple's software down about 80%. Logic is down from $1k to $200, Aperture from $500 to $80, etc..