I kind of doubt it. At worst, PowerPC supplies would have been more constrained.
At best, you might be right - there would have been a steadier supply. I don't think it'd a matter of getting away with it, though - Apple won't be making much profit from this move.
Wow, Mr. 'crApple' strikes again. I must say, that's very very original. You must do standup comedy.
Apple doesn't have a monopoly on the OS side, they provide both the hardware and software. Basically, they provide a single product which is comprised of both hardware and software. In theory, Microsoft is in competition on an open platform which is out of their control, but uses anti-competitive practices to force those other OSes off of that platform. In contrast, Apple sells the hardware and software as a package - they're not pressuring hardware makers with strong-arming tactics, they ARE the hardware makers. Nobody is forcing you to buy a Mac, you have hundreds faceless clone shops willing to slap together a cheap PC and sell it to you for less.
Apple controls the majority of the Mac market using legal techniques - approximately 10% of the desktop computer market. Microsoft controls pretty much the rest using illegal techniques. I believe you need to learn a bit about anti-trust law.
BTW: And no, Apple didn't collect money. They cancelled the orders. It'd suck to be one of those who ordered a G4, but they're not any poorer. But don't think Apple is going to come out rich from this either. Most likely, they're going to lose a substantial amount of cash.
In contrast, Microsoft (assuming they sold complete systems) would have just shipped buggy processors and tried to patch their way out of it over the next year or so - most likely via a $99 upgrade.
'U' should be more careful with your assumptions. I haven't bought a Mac in years - my current main platform is a Mac clone (Power Computer PTP225). My work machine is an Apple, but I didn't pay for it so my 'A#$' is thus-far unreamed.
BTW: Did you come up with 'crApple' yourself? That's really, really quite clever and original.
True enough. I'm still wondering what they were doing there. Apple isn't broke any more, they should have just eaten the loss (next quarter is expected to be a good one, they could afford it).
I have a feeling there's something else here at play.
I'd suggest waiting - I have a feeling the blame should go to Motorola in this case. They've brought in IBM to fill the gaps so hopefully things will be back to normal soon (ie. before the end of the year, or early after).
It probably will - Apple is only 'officially' planning to support G3 and up.
I own a Mac clone (PTP225, a 604e), and since Apple killed cloning, they've been saying that clones are officially unsupported. However, I've had no problems running everything up to MacOS 9. Although you can't call them if you have problems, I have a feeling Apple has a few of these rogue systems for testing purposes. They still make money off of boxed copies, after all. I expect OSX Client to be about the same - probably PCI and up.
Before the flame-Apple-fests begin, keep a couple things in mind:
1. Inventory has been VERY constrained, and they were having a great deal of trouble getting enough PowerPCs. This allows them to ship sometime before the next millenium (literally).
2. This sucks, but don't be too hard on Apple. They're not making any friends, but at least they're getting people G4s this way.
3. On the plus side, they've managed to get IBM to enter back into the fray and take some of the load off of Motorola.
The modern Apple has a tendency to underpromise and overdeliver (sure enough, their recent quarteryly profit beat expectations), so my guess is that this will be 'fixed' soon enough.
>As for Beos, only the kernel is proprietary, >every thing else is completely open.
Really?
Show me the source for:
1. The 'twitcher' 2. The tracker 3. NetPositive 4. Their TCP/IP implementation 5. The underlying code behind replicants
...while you're at it, show me where Be says I could integrate this into my own operating system. I'd love to see Apple take on some of the special benefits behind the BeOS.
Not so open, is it?
As much as I like Be, the whole "Apple is stopping us" argument is tired and dead. First Apple shouldn't be obligated to support a competing OS - even though I personally think it'd be in their best interest in this case. Apple's supposed closed nature hasn't stopped the Linux community (LinuxPPC, Yellow Dog, even MkLinux). Even weirder still, such closed companies rarely release large chunks of their own source code to the public (Darwin).
I have the utmost respect for Be, but their argument is pretty much defunct. I'd much rather they simply outright state that their PowerPC users don't hold the same importance that they used to, and quit shifting the blame. Then again, people might realize that Intel - Be's biggest investor - is being anticompetitive.
>And I don't care how damned spiffy your >developers are, a co-op kernel sucks a >river of shit.
Wow. With such eloquence, I don't know how anyone could disagree with you.
I consider co-op multitasking to be suboptimal as well, but I also consider obfuscated user interfaces the worst thing of all. All the technical prowess in the world can't make up for an interface that sucks 'a river of shit'.
I think the fact that you consider being '313373' as being something to aspire to says it all.
I'll give them a chance - first, I don't give a damn what boxes they've rooted or whatever (that's just childish). What software have they coded? Have they contributed to the Linux kernel or any other open-source projects? Have they created their own project from scratch and had it become moderately successful?
We're waiting. If your friends are as good as you think they are, show us the code.
My memories of FidoNet link back to one vulnerability - just call the sysop's mom and tell her to make her son use the computer for homework instead of those silly BBSes.
>Our Mac guy told me that part of the deal MS >conviced Apple to agree to forced IE to be >included with recent MacOS cd's in exchange for >the creation of a Macintosh version of MS Office. >Can anyone verify this?
Yep. This has come out in the anti-trust trial. MS basically said that they had a mostly functional version of Office 98 ready and waiting, and they'd only release it if Apple agreed to drop their lawsuits against them (I believe for the whole Quicktime code stealing thing, maybe some of the UI theft things, etc). As a show of goodwill - heh - Microsoft would also make an investment in Apple (not much) and release O98. I believe Microsoft also wanted Apple to simply GIVE UP on QuickTime and let them have that market. Obviously, Apple didn't give in on that. However, it was only after this deal that Apple started bundling IE as the 'default browser'.
Testimony in the case by Avie Tevanian (head engineer at Apple) and yet another revealing email between MS execs show Microsoft at guilt. I believe the quote from the email was that witholding Office 98 would be 'the perfect club' to use against Apple.
Grr. Luckly, unlike Windows users, we can toss IE into the trash.
Re:Why Mozilla 5.0 will die. (At least on the Mac)
on
Whither Netscape 5.0?
·
· Score: 1
That sucks.
What's weird is, the Mac version's UI isn't all that hot from my perspective, either. Kind of sad, as Metacreations has done cool stuff in the UI department in the past (Painter comes to mind).
On the Mac side of things, games have been the worst. It's funny how much artwork used in popular PC games is done on the Mac, but the actual Mac version of the game either:
1. Sucks (lame PC port, nonstandard UI, etc)
...or...
2. Never appears.
It's getting better, though, as the Mac becomes an actual consumer product again.
Re:Why Mozilla 5.0 will die. (At least on the Mac)
on
Whither Netscape 5.0?
·
· Score: 1
>one word : QT4. Now explain to me exactly why >apple changed the interface w/o even a whimper.
Let me guess - you're not a Mac user?
If you had looked around on the Mac sites, there has been far more than a 'whimper'. In fact, there has been quite an outcry over it - Mac users hate it. Sure, it's very pretty, but from a UI perspective it sucks hardcore. Apple really foobar'd on QT4's interface (which they've also used in Sherlock 2, albeit not quite as badly).
Hopefully Apple will reconsider.
Perhaps next time you'll *gasp* see what Mac users think before you make a blanket statement on our behalf? Thanks...
Actually I recall a few years back that Microsoft somehow 'ended up' with 3000 lines of key Quicktime code in one of their products. A lawsuit occured, and they were forced to pull the product off the shelf and rewrite certain portions of it (why they didn't receive a harsher punishment, I don't know).
Whether or not it's there is a moot point - they're very much capable of the practice, assuming they won't get caught.
>While we have done a great >job of spreading democracy >throughout the world, this >expansion has come through >rampant abuse of third world >nations.
In the form of what, billions of dollars of foreign aid?
So what's the reznor.com connection? Is there a Reznor I don't know about?
The only thing I can think of is Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails fame (www.nin.com), but I kind of doubt he'd give a damn about some random site bearing his last name (there is a industrial strength heater company bearing the 'Reznor' name, founded by one of his distant relatives, that might have a problem though - a Reznor heater played a large part in 'The Rock', I believe).
So who is complaining about that domain? 'Thomas and Betts'? Who is that?
Re:Only a matter of time before Apple dies.
on
New iMac Rolled Out
·
· Score: 1
Crouchy -
You'll receive some flak for this, but I think you're right. Don't listen to the naysayers, they're just in denile.
I mean, Apple has been going out of business since they were founded in '76. They were going out of business when IBM jumped into the PC market, when the Mac was introduced, when they created the Newton. They were REALLY going out of business when they seamlessly transferred everything over to the PowerPC processor. I was really worried when they came out with the iMac that they were going out of business to, and was proven right - they've only sold a couple million since the thing was introduced. The G4 and multiple profitable quarters were yet another nail in the coffin. I'm afraid that MacOS X will be the last step.
Things are very grim indeed for those of us who bleed 6 colors.
I'm sad to say, I'm willing to bet that Apple will STILL be going out of business in another 10, maybe 15 years. I've never seen a company go out of business as long as Apple has been...
But, thank you for your support - we Mac users need it in these hardest of times.
Slashdot Mirror
I kind of doubt it. At worst, PowerPC supplies would have been more constrained.
At best, you might be right - there would have been a steadier supply. I don't think it'd a matter of getting away with it, though - Apple won't be making much profit from this move.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
...and Sherlock 2, and Final Cut.
:>
Oy, someone in Cupertino needs to be slapped. I have a feeling it's a certain Mr. Jobs.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
Wow, Mr. 'crApple' strikes again. I must say, that's very very original. You must do standup comedy.
Apple doesn't have a monopoly on the OS side, they provide both the hardware and software. Basically, they provide a single product which is comprised of both hardware and software. In theory, Microsoft is in competition on an open platform which is out of their control, but uses anti-competitive practices to force those other OSes off of that platform. In contrast, Apple sells the hardware and software as a package - they're not pressuring hardware makers with strong-arming tactics, they ARE the hardware makers. Nobody is forcing you to buy a Mac, you have hundreds faceless clone shops willing to slap together a cheap PC and sell it to you for less.
Apple controls the majority of the Mac market using legal techniques - approximately 10% of the desktop computer market. Microsoft controls pretty much the rest using illegal techniques. I believe you need to learn a bit about anti-trust law.
BTW: And no, Apple didn't collect money. They cancelled the orders. It'd suck to be one of those who ordered a G4, but they're not any poorer. But don't think Apple is going to come out rich from this either. Most likely, they're going to lose a substantial amount of cash.
In contrast, Microsoft (assuming they sold complete systems) would have just shipped buggy processors and tried to patch their way out of it over the next year or so - most likely via a $99 upgrade.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
'U' should be more careful with your assumptions. I haven't bought a Mac in years - my current main platform is a Mac clone (Power Computer PTP225). My work machine is an Apple, but I didn't pay for it so my 'A#$' is thus-far unreamed.
BTW: Did you come up with 'crApple' yourself? That's really, really quite clever and original.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
True enough. I'm still wondering what they were doing there. Apple isn't broke any more, they should have just eaten the loss (next quarter is expected to be a good one, they could afford it).
I have a feeling there's something else here at play.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
So, does this alter the practice of creating a 'first post' post?
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
Actually, I believe they already have. I haven't been following it much though.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
I'd suggest waiting - I have a feeling the blame should go to Motorola in this case. They've brought in IBM to fill the gaps so hopefully things will be back to normal soon (ie. before the end of the year, or early after).
:|
This does suck, though.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
It probably will - Apple is only 'officially' planning to support G3 and up.
I own a Mac clone (PTP225, a 604e), and since Apple killed cloning, they've been saying that clones are officially unsupported. However, I've had no problems running everything up to MacOS 9. Although you can't call them if you have problems, I have a feeling Apple has a few of these rogue systems for testing purposes. They still make money off of boxed copies, after all. I expect OSX Client to be about the same - probably PCI and up.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
Before the flame-Apple-fests begin, keep a couple things in mind:
1. Inventory has been VERY constrained, and they were having a great deal of trouble getting enough PowerPCs. This allows them to ship sometime before the next millenium (literally).
2. This sucks, but don't be too hard on Apple. They're not making any friends, but at least they're getting people G4s this way.
3. On the plus side, they've managed to get IBM to enter back into the fray and take some of the load off of Motorola.
The modern Apple has a tendency to underpromise and overdeliver (sure enough, their recent quarteryly profit beat expectations), so my guess is that this will be 'fixed' soon enough.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
>As for Beos, only the kernel is proprietary,
>every thing else is completely open.
Really?
Show me the source for:
1. The 'twitcher'
2. The tracker
3. NetPositive
4. Their TCP/IP implementation
5. The underlying code behind replicants
...while you're at it, show me where Be says I could integrate this into my own operating system. I'd love to see Apple take on some of the special benefits behind the BeOS.
Not so open, is it?
As much as I like Be, the whole "Apple is stopping us" argument is tired and dead. First Apple shouldn't be obligated to support a competing OS - even though I personally think it'd be in their best interest in this case. Apple's supposed closed nature hasn't stopped the Linux community (LinuxPPC, Yellow Dog, even MkLinux). Even weirder still, such closed companies rarely release large chunks of their own source code to the public (Darwin).
I have the utmost respect for Be, but their argument is pretty much defunct. I'd much rather they simply outright state that their PowerPC users don't hold the same importance that they used to, and quit shifting the blame. Then again, people might realize that Intel - Be's biggest investor - is being anticompetitive.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
>And I don't care how damned spiffy your
>developers are, a co-op kernel sucks a
>river of shit.
Wow. With such eloquence, I don't know how anyone could disagree with you.
I consider co-op multitasking to be suboptimal as well, but I also consider obfuscated user interfaces the worst thing of all. All the technical prowess in the world can't make up for an interface that sucks 'a river of shit'.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
The same arguments could be said about other technologies - those that haven't done so well.
Circa 1994
"With this network computer, also known as an 'NC', we will revolutionize the world. With your funding, we'll be in every household in 5 years!"
"Great, I'm sold! To who do I write the check...?"
...
"With betamax, your videos will be much cleaner and clearer. This will blow VHS away!"
...
Etc. etc.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
Communism is an ideology, not a race.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
The thing is, if these guys allowed themselves to be raped by the MTV conglomerate for the sake of ratings, they deserve whatever they get.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
I think the fact that you consider being '313373' as being something to aspire to says it all.
I'll give them a chance - first, I don't give a damn what boxes they've rooted or whatever (that's just childish). What software have they coded? Have they contributed to the Linux kernel or any other open-source projects? Have they created their own project from scratch and had it become moderately successful?
We're waiting. If your friends are as good as you think they are, show us the code.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
FidoNet? Are you serious?
My memories of FidoNet link back to one vulnerability - just call the sysop's mom and tell her to make her son use the computer for homework instead of those silly BBSes.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
>Our Mac guy told me that part of the deal MS
>conviced Apple to agree to forced IE to be
>included with recent MacOS cd's in exchange for
>the creation of a Macintosh version of MS Office.
>Can anyone verify this?
Yep. This has come out in the anti-trust trial. MS basically said that they had a mostly functional version of Office 98 ready and waiting, and they'd only release it if Apple agreed to drop their lawsuits against them (I believe for the whole Quicktime code stealing thing, maybe some of the UI theft things, etc). As a show of goodwill - heh - Microsoft would also make an investment in Apple (not much) and release O98. I believe Microsoft also wanted Apple to simply GIVE UP on QuickTime and let them have that market. Obviously, Apple didn't give in on that. However, it was only after this deal that Apple started bundling IE as the 'default browser'.
Testimony in the case by Avie Tevanian (head engineer at Apple) and yet another revealing email between MS execs show Microsoft at guilt. I believe the quote from the email was that witholding Office 98 would be 'the perfect club' to use against Apple.
Grr. Luckly, unlike Windows users, we can toss IE into the trash.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
That sucks.
What's weird is, the Mac version's UI isn't all that hot from my perspective, either. Kind of sad, as Metacreations has done cool stuff in the UI department in the past (Painter comes to mind).
On the Mac side of things, games have been the worst. It's funny how much artwork used in popular PC games is done on the Mac, but the actual Mac version of the game either:
1. Sucks (lame PC port, nonstandard UI, etc)
...or...
2. Never appears.
It's getting better, though, as the Mac becomes an actual consumer product again.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
>one word : QT4. Now explain to me exactly why
>apple changed the interface w/o even a whimper.
Let me guess - you're not a Mac user?
If you had looked around on the Mac sites, there has been far more than a 'whimper'. In fact, there has been quite an outcry over it - Mac users hate it. Sure, it's very pretty, but from a UI perspective it sucks hardcore. Apple really foobar'd on QT4's interface (which they've also used in Sherlock 2, albeit not quite as badly).
Hopefully Apple will reconsider.
Perhaps next time you'll *gasp* see what Mac users think before you make a blanket statement on our behalf? Thanks...
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
Actually I recall a few years back that Microsoft somehow 'ended up' with 3000 lines of key Quicktime code in one of their products. A lawsuit occured, and they were forced to pull the product off the shelf and rewrite certain portions of it (why they didn't receive a harsher punishment, I don't know).
Whether or not it's there is a moot point - they're very much capable of the practice, assuming they won't get caught.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
>While we have done a great
>job of spreading democracy
>throughout the world, this
>expansion has come through
>rampant abuse of third world
>nations.
In the form of what, billions of dollars of foreign aid?
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
So what's the reznor.com connection? Is there a Reznor I don't know about?
The only thing I can think of is Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails fame (www.nin.com), but I kind of doubt he'd give a damn about some random site bearing his last name (there is a industrial strength heater company bearing the 'Reznor' name, founded by one of his distant relatives, that might have a problem though - a Reznor heater played a large part in 'The Rock', I believe).
So who is complaining about that domain? 'Thomas and Betts'? Who is that?
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
Crouchy -
You'll receive some flak for this, but I think you're right. Don't listen to the naysayers, they're just in denile.
I mean, Apple has been going out of business since they were founded in '76. They were going out of business when IBM jumped into the PC market, when the Mac was introduced, when they created the Newton. They were REALLY going out of business when they seamlessly transferred everything over to the PowerPC processor. I was really worried when they came out with the iMac that they were going out of business to, and was proven right - they've only sold a couple million since the thing was introduced. The G4 and multiple profitable quarters were yet another nail in the coffin. I'm afraid that MacOS X will be the last step.
Things are very grim indeed for those of us who bleed 6 colors.
I'm sad to say, I'm willing to bet that Apple will STILL be going out of business in another 10, maybe 15 years. I've never seen a company go out of business as long as Apple has been...
But, thank you for your support - we Mac users need it in these hardest of times.
(note: tongue firmly lodged in cheek)
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
I'm all for it. Then October 6th can be 'Cancel the account of a known spammer' day.
:>
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net