Apple today introduced its latest product in the Digital Hub strategy that drives the company:
** iHouse **
Using such open source ideas as "kitchen" and "living room", Apple has created the world's fastest, most advanced habitat, built on a rock-solid foundation of UNIX and white plastic.
No more Edison plugs -- all appliances now plug into Firewire ports built into every movable wall!
The iThermostat automatically detects your body temperature and can spot sweat or goosebumps from 50 feet away, adjusting the temperature accordingly!
New iSafe security cameras record surveillance activity on DVD with SuperDrive!
The house automatically finds the keys to your iCar using Rendezvous technology!
Inkwell technology turns your child's wall scribblings into text instantly!
Control everything via your Bluetooth remote control from any room in the house!
More advanced users will be interested in the PowerHouse, built entirely of Titanium!
"I live in one now," said Mr. Jobs. "It's like living on the set of THX-1138!"
About four years ago, I put together a 70-page final report in PageMaker. The day before it had to go to print, when the bosses found out I had done it in PageMaker, they all freaked out, telling me it had to be done in Word. I tried to explain to them that it will take twice as long to have it printed (ask any printer if they take Word files and brace yourself for the lecture). But because they all wanted to make edits to it themselves -- another nightmare in and of itself -- it had to be in Word. I went without sleep for 36 hours trying to make it look exactly the same in Word as PageMaker to no avail. Wraping text is impossibly difficult. "That chart moved. Why did that chart move?" It was hell. I gave notice two days later. I later heard that it took the printer 3 weeks to print it because every page had to be hand-stripped.
Yeah, that was off-topic, but I had to respond -- I feel your pain.
...but this was published by CNN, a general media outlet, which makes it an interesting news item. Anytime something that *we* think is priviledged (even obvious) information is reported by major media is significant to some degree. This information may not be obvious to Jane Homemaker who uses her iMac to share photos of the new baby with her parents, or to Joe Schmuck down the street who's still writing socialist manifestoes on his TRS-80. Leave your mom's basement once and a while -- there's a whole world of people out there who are DIFFERENT FROM YOU.
With all of the rumors going around that Apple may start using nVidia manufactured chipsets, and with nVidia GPUs being as powerful as they are, and with the CEO of nVidia telling WIRED magazine that he wants nVidia to take over CPUs since the bulk of a computer's work for the average user nowadays is rendering the graphics, and with the advent of QuartzExtreme in Jaguar...well, it seems to me that the next manufacturer of CPU's for Apple could very well be nVidia. And then all you gamers could quit whining about Macs. Hell, OS X or OS XI could come with a Cg compiler.
Hey, it's possible. After all, all we're doing here is throwing around and debating CONJECTURE.
No Outlook v.X. That's one reason why my office hasn't moved the Macs in the art department to OS X yet. (The other reason is no carbonized version of Quark XPress.)
If Apple/Sun or whoever really wants to get market share for a competing Office Suite, they need to have an integrated solution that can connect to Exchange servers and provide the cooperation features that Outlook provides. Then, not only would they have something that can compete with Office v.X but would actually be superior by delivering the functionality that Microsoft has yet to give to OS X.
Further, as a corollary, if Microsoft would provide Outlook v.X, then perhaps they could help their sales problems *AND* spurn more offices to adopt OS X who would upgrade to Office v.X and on and on. Microsoft shouldn't complain that their product is not selling when they won't give it the functionality that would help it sell. (Entourage sucks, most of us agree on that.)
Alas, with the friction between Apple and Microsoft, the chances of seeing Outlook v.X are probably slim. SOMEONE needs to connect OS X to Exchange servers to increase adoption of OS X in offices. And it might as well be part of StarOffice, don't you think?
Jaguar adds iCal (with features to share calendars), a system-wide Address Book, and iSync. Perhaps they're off to a good start to a PIM solution. Connect those and Mail to Exchange servers, and they've got it.
Here in Chicago (I'm not sure how it is elsewhere), I've been to five local mom and pop shops with a list of specs in my hand asking to price out all of the parts, and they've each tended to be $200 or so more than what I've found on-line. Finally it occurred to me why -- they were only pricing retail parts for me. When I went back to one asking for OEM parts, he claimed he didn't have any because he didn't actually manufacture computers. Hmmmmm..... The difference between an OEM Athlon and a Retail one is, like $30, right?
You, too, can look like a crazy homeless person while talking to your stock broker!
It's bad enough when you're on the train coming home from work and some Trixie from Lincoln Park is talking at full volume. Now she won't even be holding a phone. How creepy.
I believe it was Goethe who supposed the three questions one must ask when criticizing a work of art:
1) What goal did the artist set out to achieve? 2) Did the artist achieve their goal? 3) Was that goal worth achieving?
In the case of AotC, Lucas sets out to continue his fantastical space opera, showing how the Dark Side "clouds everything" and is able to take over the Republic. Furthermore, how a young Jedi of extrodinary power becomes one of the most feared figures in the galaxy.
Did Lucas do it? YES. Was it worth doing? YES.
The dialog is wooden. So wooden that normally good actors, including Hayden Christiansen (who was great in LIFE AS A HOUSE) and Natalie Portman (who, from all the chick flicks she's been in, we know she's a competent actress) can't sound natural no matter what they do. But STAR WARS has NEVER been known to have spectacular dialogue. No, there's nothing as sharp and witty as the "scruffy nerferter" scene in ESB, but AotC is not without clever lines -- Obi-Wan's "Why do I get the feeling you'll be the death of me?" still makes me giggle with delight.
But if you weren't so busy squirming in your seat waiting for the next action sequence, you would have seen that the STORY is actually quite intricate and fascinating. The political intrigue is excellent. It's wonderful to see that the Empire happens not just out of the Dark Side's cannoodling but also with deceptive politics, forcing (no pun intended) a situation that even the Jedi get sucked into.
And the love story -- God I'm going to get flamed for this -- is great. The dialogue is not there, and it's unfortunate because with better dialogue, the plausibility of the love story would be more apparent. You're a woman who has been queen for many years and now a senator -- since life as a very young woman, you've been married to political service. In walks a strapping young lad who has the potential of being the most powerful Jedi ever, was ripped away from his mother, and is willing to give up everything he's worked for to love you. What woman in her position isn't going to totally fall in love with this guy?
He kills an entire village of Tusken Raiders -- he's a Jedi, he has the power to do that. And they killed his mother. Co-dependent Padme, who devoted her life to taking care of her people, now wants to take care of Anakin and tell him it will be okay.
And (again, despite the dialog) Anakin came off exactly as he should. His hormones are raging, not to mention his mitichlorians. He's in love with a woman he can't have. He thinks he's better than everyone. He's taken away from his mother, and when he finally sees her again, she dies in his arms. What 19-year-old boy in this situtation WOULDN'T be whiney?
Let's face it -- there's more thought going into a movie like AotC than a piece of fluff like SPIDERMAN. (Which I thought was boring, by the way. Sam Raimi just isn't very good with a huge budget -- DARKMAN, anyone?) Everyone is so ready to start a feeding frenzy on George Lucas, but AotC renewed my faith in him. He's still no good at writing dialogue, but he can concoct a wonderfully intricate story. He's still no good at directing actors, but he can still frame an image unlike any other director. It will never be anything more than a STAR WARS movie, so don't expect anything more than that.
Besides, not only is AotC better than PM, it's also better than RotJ, and don't you try to deny it.
I hate posting this late in the game on a topic -- I worry no one will read it -- I don't think anyone has made this correlation yet.
I agree that Adobe suing Macromedia for cramping their style is and should be a crock. Adobe is playing the same bullying tactics as another large company.
Take, for example, the Photoshop monopoly. Used to be that if you wanted to bevel or automatically add shadows to items, you had to buy a third-party plug-in. Now those features are built in and have been since 5.5
If you wanted to catalog your images, you had to purchase a third-party app like Extensis Portfolio. Photoshop 7 includes those.
Natural media? Used to need Painter. Now Photoshop 7 has that, too.
And somebody must have come up with the idea of slicing images before Adobe did. Hell, before Macromedia did.
Fortunately for us graphic designers, we will use the right tool for the job. We learn that in school when we have to choose between graphite and charcoal in Design 101. Therefore, companies like Alien Skin, Corel, and Extensis aren't hurt dramatically by Adobe pulling the Microsoft "freedom to innovate" integration game.
But my point is that Adobe steals features from everyone else. It's hypocritical of Adobe to sue someone for stealing their feature. And it proves the ignorance of software patents.
Adobe, a company whose products I use every day to pay my bills, a company whose products I enjoy using, abuses their place in the market. Ahh, the idyllic socialist dreams of nerds...
...but everyone's having fun with the Engrish translation, so I thought I'd share this one for a Kyocera Video Phone. Scroll down to the first sample "Answering machines with images".
By the way, neither of these games seem to work on my Handspring Visor Prism. Just a blank white screen that sits there forever and requires a reset. Anyone else having the same problem?
I've been dying to own a Mac since I touched one in the computer store in 1985. I've wanted to replace my PC with a Mac ever since I got a 486 for my high school graduation in 1992. When I found designing print and online content was my calling, I pined for a Mac. When I began working freelance two years ago, getting a Mac became a priority. I gave up freelancing because I was starving, and I certainly wasn't saving up enough money for a Mac.
But now I have a job that pays well, and I could start saving. Why would I? Because of these features:
*Beautifully designed hardware, not only cosmetically but functionally
*I love OS X. It provides the stable UNIX standards I need for web development with a lovely GUI. I wouldn't need that old laptop I loaded with Linux so I can test my PERL and PHP scripts without tying up my phone line. My brother loves it -- he's a Java developer and a convert from Linux -- and I trust his advice.
*I start art school next month, and I can get a educational discount on one through your online store.
*Ease of setup -- installing software and hardware are a cinch
However, I have to admit that the more I think about it, switching over to a Mac is looking less and less likely. Here's why:
*You make it hard on us nerds. I currently have a PII-266 with 192MB of RAM. It's doing me okay, but as I get better at what I do, I'm needing more and more power. Why should I spend thousands of dollars on a new Mac when for less than $1,000, I can get a new motherboard, an AMD processor, some DDR memory, and a new video card? Drop in my old case, and in a few hours, I've increased my computing power a hundredfold. I can't do that with a Mac.
*Lack of options (1). As soon as you come out with a faster processor, you drop all of your old items. I often have to use a G4-500 at work, and it's speed is great for me. But I can't buy one unless I go to eBay, and if I'm going to buy, I'm going to buy new or from a reputable dealer, not some sketchy on-line auction.
*Lack of options (2): I can go to, for example, Dell and configure a system that fits my needs and my budget. With Mac, I'm stuck with what you tell me I need.
*I'd have to replace all my software. And why should I, when everything I need and use is also available for Windows?
Obviously, you are soliciting these comments to figure out how to woo Windows users, so I'll speak directly to that.
It seems to me that your new face on Apple has done the strangely paradoxical thing of defining its target market too narrowly and too broadly. On one hand, you sell to content creation professionals who have always used Macs. On the other, you sell to beginners who have tons of air between themselves and the keyboard. And those beginners are rich. But most everybody who uses a computer has been using Windows since the early 90s. There is a whole legion between the two extremes to which you have not marketed because you're working so hard to be so very Apple.
Marketing computers like Volkswagon markets cars just isn't going to work anymore. After all, a Volkswagon can drive on any street just like any other car, and you can show it off in public. A Mac doesn't play with others as well as you claim, and (with the exception of iBooks and PowerBooks), it sits on your desk in your house, sometimes under your desk.
So:
*Have more options available for the budget conscious. If I can get by with an earlier G4 model, let me. If I don't need the fancy case, give me a cheaper option.
*Ship your items faster. Apple is notorious for terrible fulfillment practices.
*Work out deals with software manufacturers to advertise cross-platform upgrade options. (Upgrade Photoshop 6.0 for Windows to Photoshop 7.0 for Mac, for example). Perhaps these options are available, but if it is, it's not well known.
*Quit being so secretive about projects you're working on. Get people excited about the future of Apple computers. If you're working on, for example, a PDA, tell us so folks can start salivating. That marketing model worked with OS X, didn't it? You got us all worked up for an MP3 player? What a let-down.
*Develop more use-specific packages for folks that don't know how to configure a computer or just plain don't want to. Work in an office? Buy this iMac with Office v.X pre-installed! Directing a movie? Buy this dual G4 with Final Cut and DVD Studio pre-installed, and get a $300 rebate on a Canon miniDV camcorder. That's how every other PC company works -- join the game.
*Put your processor in a removable socket so it's easily upgradeable.
*Here's the kicker, and I actually do feel bad for saying this -- include Virtual PC with every Mac, or make it a very inexpensive option.
But if you're committed to being the Cadillac of computers, then quit going half-assed. For example, you're also not going far enough with this digital hub idea, and I think it confuses people. Go ALL THE WAY with it. I should be able to replace an entire rack of television and stereo components with a Mac. Sony already has it. Microsoft's retooling their OS for this very purpose. I want to see the "iCenter", a home entertainment computer with s-video and component video outputs, a Superdrive, a PVR, 5.1 THX sound, a remote control, AirPort, and a wireless keyboard. You can plug in your iPod and sync it with the same music collection you play at your party. You can surf the web from your Lay-Z-Boy. You can record an entire season of Six Feet Under and then archive it to DVD. And because people who could afford something like this love to have folks over to show it off, you can show off that lovely Macintosh hardware. That's worth saving your money up to buy -- I know I would.
So those are just my thoughts. I'm not a marketing executive with a 6-figure salary. I'm just a guy who can't afford a Macintosh with not enough reasons to start saving his money. I believe in the Macintosh "religion" that you're preaching, but sinning, i.e, using Windows, is more affordable, has more options, and gets the job done, even if I do deserve to go to hell for it.
If you want to call for, as you put it on your Web site, "a follow-up question or two," feel free, but only if you call me personally, Steve. Otherwise, e-mail me.
Anything can be too big if it's designed by a moron. I get more pissed off at a site which has an ugly 100k JPEG image map for a header than I do a well-made, intuitive Flash file.
Yeah, Flash cartoons and movies are pretty big because they are full of sound and bitmap images and the like. But when you're just talking about content and some ActionScript, the file sizes aren't irredeemable.
And a GOOD Flash developer knows to loadMovie() whenever possible so the user is only seeing the content they need to.
I like Flash, I always have. I've used it to develop some interactive CD-ROMs for some budget-conscious client. What I hate are stupid, uneducated Flash developers. Just like I hate stupid, uneducated HTML developers. Or otherwise good Open Source software with a terrible UI.
When a porch collapses and kills a dozen people, is the problem the hammer and nails? Sometimes, but more often than not, it's the idiot who built the porch. Don't blame the tool when the problem is the people using it.
A glittering generality -- I'm a Linux geek but a graphic designer by day -- but you do make a valid point.
There's a reason why the content creators, the graphic designers, and the programmers are most often different people. And it's a good example of how to approach a Web design.
* CONTENT CREATORS -- what are you going to say? * GRAPHIC DESIGNERS -- How are you going to say it? * PROGRAMMERS -- How am I going to make sure people can hear the message?
The Graphic Designers want to go first. The Programmers want to go first. But NEITHER should.
Lots of folks are completely dissing Flash, and I think that's unfair. ANY Web technology can be used inappropriately -- how many browser-freezing DHTML effects have you run into today? But everything can be used well as long as the message and purpose is clearly defined first. Flash to enhance a user experience for a dynamic site can be done very well. Flash for sake of showing off that you successfully pirated a copy of Flash is wrong.
Form follows function. It's a cliche because it's true.
Can I use PayPal to buy PayPal stock? Or is that just asking for trouble?
Re:Apple doesn't make their products for everybody
on
Apple releases iPod
·
· Score: 1
Oops. Martin Luther promulgated 95 Theses, not 42. Guess I should know my history before making historical references, a mistake akin to US involvement in Vietnam, after seeing how the French fared there.... Okay, I'll shut up.
Apple doesn't make their products for everybody...
on
Apple releases iPod
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
...they make their products for Mac users. Period. And I don't see this as a problem.
Apple places itself in the market to be the *prestigious* computer company, the Bang and Olfsen of PCs. Apple owners (which I will be when I start school next year and can get an educational discount) treat their computers as sacred. Apple may have a small market share, but their market share is fervently adamant about their products. (And justifiably so -- I think they make great hardware, and they make it easy enough for novices and powerful enough for nerds, not to mention stylish as hell.)
It's much akin to the religious fanaticism Open Source folks have toward spreading the Word about Linux and praising Linus Torvalds as a Jesus. I get as much criticism from Apple owners for begrudingly using Windoze as I do from Linux users. To keep this religion metaphor going as long as possible: it's one thing to oppose the evil Satan of Microsoft, but Linux-users and Apple-users arguing at this point is like the Pope arguing with Martin Luther over the 42 Theses -- you're both worshiping the same God, just one has more money than the other.
Okay, so that made very little sense, but it certainly sounded good.
This is what it boils down to, folks:
Apple has made a fairly smart business decision with iPod, saying to themselves, if we can't earn more market share, then let's give the market share we do have more items to buy. And they will becuase they're freaking crazy about our stuff. For Mac users, the iPod is most likely a super convienent, super cool MP3 player.
Those of you complaining that you can't use it on your PC or your Linux box or your TRS-80, go buy a Nomad because that's the market share you're in.
And good luck fitting that Nomad in your pocket. (Ha-ha!)
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you for defending my post. Next time I post something even remotely satirical, I'll be sure to surround it with .
Apple today introduced its latest product in the Digital Hub strategy that drives the company:
** iHouse **
Using such open source ideas as "kitchen" and "living room", Apple has created the world's fastest, most advanced habitat, built on a rock-solid foundation of UNIX and white plastic.
No more Edison plugs -- all appliances now plug into Firewire ports built into every movable wall!
The iThermostat automatically detects your body temperature and can spot sweat or goosebumps from 50 feet away, adjusting the temperature accordingly!
New iSafe security cameras record surveillance activity on DVD with SuperDrive!
The house automatically finds the keys to your iCar using Rendezvous technology!
Inkwell technology turns your child's wall scribblings into text instantly!
Control everything via your Bluetooth remote control from any room in the house!
More advanced users will be interested in the PowerHouse, built entirely of Titanium!
"I live in one now," said Mr. Jobs. "It's like living on the set of THX-1138!"
About four years ago, I put together a 70-page final report in PageMaker. The day before it had to go to print, when the bosses found out I had done it in PageMaker, they all freaked out, telling me it had to be done in Word. I tried to explain to them that it will take twice as long to have it printed (ask any printer if they take Word files and brace yourself for the lecture). But because they all wanted to make edits to it themselves -- another nightmare in and of itself -- it had to be in Word. I went without sleep for 36 hours trying to make it look exactly the same in Word as PageMaker to no avail. Wraping text is impossibly difficult. "That chart moved. Why did that chart move?" It was hell. I gave notice two days later. I later heard that it took the printer 3 weeks to print it because every page had to be hand-stripped.
Yeah, that was off-topic, but I had to respond -- I feel your pain.
...but this was published by CNN, a general media outlet, which makes it an interesting news item. Anytime something that *we* think is priviledged (even obvious) information is reported by major media is significant to some degree. This information may not be obvious to Jane Homemaker who uses her iMac to share photos of the new baby with her parents, or to Joe Schmuck down the street who's still writing socialist manifestoes on his TRS-80. Leave your mom's basement once and a while -- there's a whole world of people out there who are DIFFERENT FROM YOU.
I agree. This review is very balanced and full of journalistic integrity. How refreshing.
My vote for funniest line: " iChat, iTunes, iMovie, iPhoto, iDVD, iCal, iSync, iProbablyForgotSomething"
You want to run The Gimp on your iBook? Then do it. [http://openosx.com/gimp/]
With all of the rumors going around that Apple may start using nVidia manufactured chipsets, and with nVidia GPUs being as powerful as they are, and with the CEO of nVidia telling WIRED magazine that he wants nVidia to take over CPUs since the bulk of a computer's work for the average user nowadays is rendering the graphics, and with the advent of QuartzExtreme in Jaguar...well, it seems to me that the next manufacturer of CPU's for Apple could very well be nVidia. And then all you gamers could quit whining about Macs. Hell, OS X or OS XI could come with a Cg compiler.
Hey, it's possible. After all, all we're doing here is throwing around and debating CONJECTURE.
Anyone who buys a Mac that ships with 10.1 before October 31 can get Jaguar for $19.95.
http://www.apple.com/macosx/uptodate/
No Outlook v.X. That's one reason why my office hasn't moved the Macs in the art department to OS X yet. (The other reason is no carbonized version of Quark XPress.)
If Apple/Sun or whoever really wants to get market share for a competing Office Suite, they need to have an integrated solution that can connect to Exchange servers and provide the cooperation features that Outlook provides. Then, not only would they have something that can compete with Office v.X but would actually be superior by delivering the functionality that Microsoft has yet to give to OS X.
Further, as a corollary, if Microsoft would provide Outlook v.X, then perhaps they could help their sales problems *AND* spurn more offices to adopt OS X who would upgrade to Office v.X and on and on. Microsoft shouldn't complain that their product is not selling when they won't give it the functionality that would help it sell. (Entourage sucks, most of us agree on that.)
Alas, with the friction between Apple and Microsoft, the chances of seeing Outlook v.X are probably slim. SOMEONE needs to connect OS X to Exchange servers to increase adoption of OS X in offices. And it might as well be part of StarOffice, don't you think?
Jaguar adds iCal (with features to share calendars), a system-wide Address Book, and iSync. Perhaps they're off to a good start to a PIM solution. Connect those and Mail to Exchange servers, and they've got it.
In his keynote, Steve Jobs said that Rendezvous would be an open standard, and it might as well be -- it's just an extension of TCP/IP, basically.
See me. Hear me. Spell me.
Here in Chicago (I'm not sure how it is elsewhere), I've been to five local mom and pop shops with a list of specs in my hand asking to price out all of the parts, and they've each tended to be $200 or so more than what I've found on-line. Finally it occurred to me why -- they were only pricing retail parts for me. When I went back to one asking for OEM parts, he claimed he didn't have any because he didn't actually manufacture computers. Hmmmmm..... The difference between an OEM Athlon and a Retail one is, like $30, right?
You, too, can look like a crazy homeless person while talking to your stock broker!
It's bad enough when you're on the train coming home from work and some Trixie from Lincoln Park is talking at full volume. Now she won't even be holding a phone. How creepy.
I believe it was Goethe who supposed the three questions one must ask when criticizing a work of art:
1) What goal did the artist set out to achieve?
2) Did the artist achieve their goal?
3) Was that goal worth achieving?
In the case of AotC, Lucas sets out to continue his fantastical space opera, showing how the Dark Side "clouds everything" and is able to take over the Republic. Furthermore, how a young Jedi of extrodinary power becomes one of the most feared figures in the galaxy.
Did Lucas do it? YES. Was it worth doing? YES.
The dialog is wooden. So wooden that normally good actors, including Hayden Christiansen (who was great in LIFE AS A HOUSE) and Natalie Portman (who, from all the chick flicks she's been in, we know she's a competent actress) can't sound natural no matter what they do. But STAR WARS has NEVER been known to have spectacular dialogue. No, there's nothing as sharp and witty as the "scruffy nerferter" scene in ESB, but AotC is not without clever lines -- Obi-Wan's "Why do I get the feeling you'll be the death of me?" still makes me giggle with delight.
But if you weren't so busy squirming in your seat waiting for the next action sequence, you would have seen that the STORY is actually quite intricate and fascinating. The political intrigue is excellent. It's wonderful to see that the Empire happens not just out of the Dark Side's cannoodling but also with deceptive politics, forcing (no pun intended) a situation that even the Jedi get sucked into.
And the love story -- God I'm going to get flamed for this -- is great. The dialogue is not there, and it's unfortunate because with better dialogue, the plausibility of the love story would be more apparent. You're a woman who has been queen for many years and now a senator -- since life as a very young woman, you've been married to political service. In walks a strapping young lad who has the potential of being the most powerful Jedi ever, was ripped away from his mother, and is willing to give up everything he's worked for to love you. What woman in her position isn't going to totally fall in love with this guy?
He kills an entire village of Tusken Raiders -- he's a Jedi, he has the power to do that. And they killed his mother. Co-dependent Padme, who devoted her life to taking care of her people, now wants to take care of Anakin and tell him it will be okay.
And (again, despite the dialog) Anakin came off exactly as he should. His hormones are raging, not to mention his mitichlorians. He's in love with a woman he can't have. He thinks he's better than everyone. He's taken away from his mother, and when he finally sees her again, she dies in his arms. What 19-year-old boy in this situtation WOULDN'T be whiney?
Let's face it -- there's more thought going into a movie like AotC than a piece of fluff like SPIDERMAN. (Which I thought was boring, by the way. Sam Raimi just isn't very good with a huge budget -- DARKMAN, anyone?) Everyone is so ready to start a feeding frenzy on George Lucas, but AotC renewed my faith in him. He's still no good at writing dialogue, but he can concoct a wonderfully intricate story. He's still no good at directing actors, but he can still frame an image unlike any other director. It will never be anything more than a STAR WARS movie, so don't expect anything more than that.
Besides, not only is AotC better than PM, it's also better than RotJ, and don't you try to deny it.
I hate posting this late in the game on a topic -- I worry no one will read it -- I don't think anyone has made this correlation yet.
I agree that Adobe suing Macromedia for cramping their style is and should be a crock. Adobe is playing the same bullying tactics as another large company.
Take, for example, the Photoshop monopoly. Used to be that if you wanted to bevel or automatically add shadows to items, you had to buy a third-party plug-in. Now those features are built in and have been since 5.5
If you wanted to catalog your images, you had to purchase a third-party app like Extensis Portfolio. Photoshop 7 includes those.
Natural media? Used to need Painter. Now Photoshop 7 has that, too.
And somebody must have come up with the idea of slicing images before Adobe did. Hell, before Macromedia did.
Fortunately for us graphic designers, we will use the right tool for the job. We learn that in school when we have to choose between graphite and charcoal in Design 101. Therefore, companies like Alien Skin, Corel, and Extensis aren't hurt dramatically by Adobe pulling the Microsoft "freedom to innovate" integration game.
But my point is that Adobe steals features from everyone else. It's hypocritical of Adobe to sue someone for stealing their feature. And it proves the ignorance of software patents.
Adobe, a company whose products I use every day to pay my bills, a company whose products I enjoy using, abuses their place in the market. Ahh, the idyllic socialist dreams of nerds...
...but everyone's having fun with the Engrish translation, so I thought I'd share this one for a Kyocera Video Phone. Scroll down to the first sample "Answering machines with images".
By the way, neither of these games seem to work on my Handspring Visor Prism. Just a blank white screen that sits there forever and requires a reset. Anyone else having the same problem?
Dear Mr. Jobs:
I've been dying to own a Mac since I touched one in the computer store in 1985. I've wanted to replace my PC with a Mac ever since I got a 486 for my high school graduation in 1992. When I found designing print and online content was my calling, I pined for a Mac. When I began working freelance two years ago, getting a Mac became a priority. I gave up freelancing because I was starving, and I certainly wasn't saving up enough money for a Mac.
But now I have a job that pays well, and I could start saving. Why would I? Because of these features:
*Beautifully designed hardware, not only cosmetically but functionally
*I love OS X. It provides the stable UNIX standards I need for web development with a lovely GUI. I wouldn't need that old laptop I loaded with Linux so I can test my PERL and PHP scripts without tying up my phone line. My brother loves it -- he's a Java developer and a convert from Linux -- and I trust his advice.
*I start art school next month, and I can get a educational discount on one through your online store.
*Ease of setup -- installing software and hardware are a cinch
However, I have to admit that the more I think about it, switching over to a Mac is looking less and less likely. Here's why:
*You make it hard on us nerds. I currently have a PII-266 with 192MB of RAM. It's doing me okay, but as I get better at what I do, I'm needing more and more power. Why should I spend thousands of dollars on a new Mac when for less than $1,000, I can get a new motherboard, an AMD processor, some DDR memory, and a new video card? Drop in my old case, and in a few hours, I've increased my computing power a hundredfold. I can't do that with a Mac.
*Lack of options (1). As soon as you come out with a faster processor, you drop all of your old items. I often have to use a G4-500 at work, and it's speed is great for me. But I can't buy one unless I go to eBay, and if I'm going to buy, I'm going to buy new or from a reputable dealer, not some sketchy on-line auction.
*Lack of options (2): I can go to, for example, Dell and configure a system that fits my needs and my budget. With Mac, I'm stuck with what you tell me I need.
*I'd have to replace all my software. And why should I, when everything I need and use is also available for Windows?
Obviously, you are soliciting these comments to figure out how to woo Windows users, so I'll speak directly to that.
It seems to me that your new face on Apple has done the strangely paradoxical thing of defining its target market too narrowly and too broadly. On one hand, you sell to content creation professionals who have always used Macs. On the other, you sell to beginners who have tons of air between themselves and the keyboard. And those beginners are rich. But most everybody who uses a computer has been using Windows since the early 90s. There is a whole legion between the two extremes to which you have not marketed because you're working so hard to be so very Apple.
Marketing computers like Volkswagon markets cars just isn't going to work anymore. After all, a Volkswagon can drive on any street just like any other car, and you can show it off in public. A Mac doesn't play with others as well as you claim, and (with the exception of iBooks and PowerBooks), it sits on your desk in your house, sometimes under your desk.
So:
*Have more options available for the budget conscious. If I can get by with an earlier G4 model, let me. If I don't need the fancy case, give me a cheaper option.
*Ship your items faster. Apple is notorious for terrible fulfillment practices.
*Work out deals with software manufacturers to advertise cross-platform upgrade options. (Upgrade Photoshop 6.0 for Windows to Photoshop 7.0 for Mac, for example). Perhaps these options are available, but if it is, it's not well known.
*Quit being so secretive about projects you're working on. Get people excited about the future of Apple computers. If you're working on, for example, a PDA, tell us so folks can start salivating. That marketing model worked with OS X, didn't it? You got us all worked up for an MP3 player? What a let-down.
*Develop more use-specific packages for folks that don't know how to configure a computer or just plain don't want to. Work in an office? Buy this iMac with Office v.X pre-installed! Directing a movie? Buy this dual G4 with Final Cut and DVD Studio pre-installed, and get a $300 rebate on a Canon miniDV camcorder. That's how every other PC company works -- join the game.
*Put your processor in a removable socket so it's easily upgradeable.
*Here's the kicker, and I actually do feel bad for saying this -- include Virtual PC with every Mac, or make it a very inexpensive option.
But if you're committed to being the Cadillac of computers, then quit going half-assed. For example, you're also not going far enough with this digital hub idea, and I think it confuses people. Go ALL THE WAY with it. I should be able to replace an entire rack of television and stereo components with a Mac. Sony already has it. Microsoft's retooling their OS for this very purpose. I want to see the "iCenter", a home entertainment computer with s-video and component video outputs, a Superdrive, a PVR, 5.1 THX sound, a remote control, AirPort, and a wireless keyboard. You can plug in your iPod and sync it with the same music collection you play at your party. You can surf the web from your Lay-Z-Boy. You can record an entire season of Six Feet Under and then archive it to DVD. And because people who could afford something like this love to have folks over to show it off, you can show off that lovely Macintosh hardware. That's worth saving your money up to buy -- I know I would.
So those are just my thoughts. I'm not a marketing executive with a 6-figure salary. I'm just a guy who can't afford a Macintosh with not enough reasons to start saving his money. I believe in the Macintosh "religion" that you're preaching, but sinning, i.e, using Windows, is more affordable, has more options, and gets the job done, even if I do deserve to go to hell for it.
If you want to call for, as you put it on your Web site, "a follow-up question or two," feel free, but only if you call me personally, Steve. Otherwise, e-mail me.
Do you think it can pass the Voight-Kampff empathy test?
Anything can be too big if it's designed by a moron. I get more pissed off at a site which has an ugly 100k JPEG image map for a header than I do a well-made, intuitive Flash file.
Yeah, Flash cartoons and movies are pretty big because they are full of sound and bitmap images and the like. But when you're just talking about content and some ActionScript, the file sizes aren't irredeemable.
And a GOOD Flash developer knows to loadMovie() whenever possible so the user is only seeing the content they need to.
I like Flash, I always have. I've used it to develop some interactive CD-ROMs for some budget-conscious client. What I hate are stupid, uneducated Flash developers. Just like I hate stupid, uneducated HTML developers. Or otherwise good Open Source software with a terrible UI.
When a porch collapses and kills a dozen people, is the problem the hammer and nails? Sometimes, but more often than not, it's the idiot who built the porch. Don't blame the tool when the problem is the people using it.
A glittering generality -- I'm a Linux geek but a graphic designer by day -- but you do make a valid point.
There's a reason why the content creators, the graphic designers, and the programmers are most often different people. And it's a good example of how to approach a Web design.
* CONTENT CREATORS -- what are you going to say?
* GRAPHIC DESIGNERS -- How are you going to say it?
* PROGRAMMERS -- How am I going to make sure people can hear the message?
The Graphic Designers want to go first. The Programmers want to go first. But NEITHER should.
Lots of folks are completely dissing Flash, and I think that's unfair. ANY Web technology can be used inappropriately -- how many browser-freezing DHTML effects have you run into today? But everything can be used well as long as the message and purpose is clearly defined first. Flash to enhance a user experience for a dynamic site can be done very well. Flash for sake of showing off that you successfully pirated a copy of Flash is wrong.
Form follows function. It's a cliche because it's true.
Can I use PayPal to buy PayPal stock? Or is that just asking for trouble?
Oops. Martin Luther promulgated 95 Theses, not 42. Guess I should know my history before making historical references, a mistake akin to US involvement in Vietnam, after seeing how the French fared there.... Okay, I'll shut up.
...they make their products for Mac users. Period. And I don't see this as a problem.
Apple places itself in the market to be the *prestigious* computer company, the Bang and Olfsen of PCs. Apple owners (which I will be when I start school next year and can get an educational discount) treat their computers as sacred. Apple may have a small market share, but their market share is fervently adamant about their products. (And justifiably so -- I think they make great hardware, and they make it easy enough for novices and powerful enough for nerds, not to mention stylish as hell.)
It's much akin to the religious fanaticism Open Source folks have toward spreading the Word about Linux and praising Linus Torvalds as a Jesus. I get as much criticism from Apple owners for begrudingly using Windoze as I do from Linux users. To keep this religion metaphor going as long as possible: it's one thing to oppose the evil Satan of Microsoft, but Linux-users and Apple-users arguing at this point is like the Pope arguing with Martin Luther over the 42 Theses -- you're both worshiping the same God, just one has more money than the other.
Okay, so that made very little sense, but it certainly sounded good.
This is what it boils down to, folks:
Apple has made a fairly smart business decision with iPod, saying to themselves, if we can't earn more market share, then let's give the market share we do have more items to buy. And they will becuase they're freaking crazy about our stuff. For Mac users, the iPod is most likely a super convienent, super cool MP3 player.
Those of you complaining that you can't use it on your PC or your Linux box or your TRS-80, go buy a Nomad because that's the market share you're in.
And good luck fitting that Nomad in your pocket. (Ha-ha!)