My guess is that the single processor G5 had a similar price point to the iMac, which has similar specs, plus a built in LCD. MacMall lists the 1.8 Ghz power mac at $1495 and for the same price they offer a 2 Ghz iMac. My feeling is that they want to keep the lines between the iMac and the Power Mac pretty clear to eliminate customer confusion. Plus, dual processor Power Macs have been available for about 4 years and there have been several times that they've only been available in dual processor configurations. I wouldn't read much into it and I think its too early to start thinking about clearing inventory of Power PC chips. Remember that the high end chips are rumored to be transititioned in late 06.
I think if you allow MS to sell what is perceived to be a "stripped down" version of their OS, along side the "full version" of their OS, AT THE SAME PRICE, there is no incentive to want Windows N. If, however, an enterprising company decided to create an incentive, such as providing free media (i.e. if the iTunes Music Store would give 20 free songs if you send in a copy of your UPC [or whatever they use in Europe]), then there would be an incentive to buy Windows N. Otherwise, people are going to question the benefit of buying an OS that MS has argued is a neutered version. IMO, the EU did a half-assed job here by allowing MS to charge the same price. You know that Gates and Balmer were laughing quite a bit when they found that nugget out.
I'm pretty much a fairly sophisticated user but my main tasks are email, web surfing, etc. When I installed Tiger, I wasn't that impressed with most of the new features. Dashboard is cool but not revolutionary and I considered spotlight to be a replacement for the Find command, which I rarely use. Then the other day I wanted to open Photoshop, which is on a firewire drive and nested under a couple of folders. I decided to try to use Spotlight to pull it up. After I typed "P-H-O-T-O-S" I could see photoshop selected as my "top hit." It reduced my interaction with the computer and allowed me to quickly get to work. Personally, I think this should be the goal of all software developers...to reduce interaction with the computer and to allow the user to work. After figuring out this neat trick a few days ago, I really haven't used the finder since, I just start typing the name of a document or application and it pops right up. I described it to someone as the document comes to me....I no longer have to go to the document. I think there's something truly revolutionary about that.
Funny, I cancelled my email accounts, got rid of my computer, cancelled my phone service and moved to a shack in the backwoods of Montana without telling anyone where I went. And yet somehow, I STILL get spam!
Wow, interesting. I wonder how different the Earth would be if humans lived among other species or even other kingdoms of life forms. That's why I love science fiction.
I have to cut this short and go walk my dog.
Apple, as a company, is not stupid. They have obviously known the benefit of the multi-button mouse for quite some time. For many years, however, the Apple death knell has been rumored (though wrongly). Perhaps Apple has held off on getting into the multi-button mouse space to intentionally create a lucrative industry for hardware makers, to keep them developing hardware for the mac. Several things have now changed, however:
1) Apple uses USB which is an industry standard, as opposed to the proprietary ADB that was used until the mid to late 90s, so now any mouse, even mice developed for windows can be used with a mac, thereby reducing the need and the pull on developers to develop mice specifically for the mac.
2) Apple has shifted its strategy to be more aggressive, particularly in retail, to the detriment of individual resellers, and is now doing the same in the hardware space.
3) The iPod is such a phenominal success that apple doesn't need to draw hardware makers to the mac platform anymore.
4) Apple sees cross-over potential. Apple could very well believe that with the iPod's success and the standardization of peripherals, Windows users could want more apple hardware. This could be for the "reluctant switcher," someone who loves apple products, owns an iPod, loves apple's image but doesn't have the guts to make the switch.
5) This could be a considerable gripe of windows users that apple surveys to find out obstacles to get them to switch to a mac. Perhaps this is a sign that apple is making a more aggressive switch campaign.
No matter what, I like the move. I remember trying to use the hockey puck mouse on my first iMac and nearly going insane. At this point I use nothing but kensington mice, but for a first time user, I think it improves the out of box experience considerably.
A few years back, Steve Jobs proclaimed that Apple would emerge from the recession in a strong market position by innovating through the economic downturn. I wonder how that turned out.
a huge 80's style boom box/cell phone that the kids could carry on their shoulders and they could blast their newly purchased music or their phone call, so be thankful I only floated the first idea.:-P
It does make sense that the media companies (i.e. MS, Apple, Napster, etc.) are trying to lock up license agreements with cell phone makers but why wouldn't these companies go after the cell phone providers instead? I mean, if Apple came up with an agreement with Verizon to be their exclusive provider of music, wouldn't it force the cell phone makers to engineer apple's DRM and iTunes into their future phones? And put another way, if I were a cell phone carrier, wouldn't I want a piece of the action and the opportunity to control media standards?
When the original Xbox came out, I rushed out to buy it. Unfortunatley, my console had a lot of quality control problems including scratching my games and then refusing to play them. I had heard a number of reports of similar problems but when I called tech support, they would not admit that there were design defects or manufacturing defects. They did fix it but it was an annoying ordeal that I should not have gone through (I was without the console for quite some time). Hopefully this time, they have all the bugs worked out.
Re:Shouldn't Apple put something like this out?
on
MythTV 0.17 Released
·
· Score: 1
Thanks for the heads up, I haven't run the program, I just checked out the website so I don't know much about the set up. While the project is no where near groundbreaking, it does look interesting. Perhaps the developer could provide the technology and Apple could provide the refinement (including the graphical installer)needed. Apple seems to do well when they acquire smaller companies and developers, like when they brought in the developer of Soundjam MP to create iTunes, although they have also screwed developers by copying programs and putting them standard in the OS (like the Sherlock/Watson or Dashboard/Konfabulator).
Not that I should respond to my own post but...
on
MythTV 0.17 Released
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
After I posted, I remembered that way back Steve Jobs said something to the effect of "People want their computers and TVs to be 2 distinct experiences." Although the mac mini certainly represents several shifts in apple's business model so you never know.
Shouldn't Apple put something like this out?
on
MythTV 0.17 Released
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Cool program. This looks like a perfect compliment to the digital lifestyle. If this were part of the iLife suite, I bet a lot of people would jump at it. If Apple had put it in iLife 05, it definitely would have justified the $20 increase in price, and it probably would have sold better and could draw more people to the platform.
If you want to supply free internet access for all, then you should at the same time provide some sort of computer access. If I were a low income family living paycheck to paycheck and I read about this initiative, I would be irate. For some, spending $100 is the difference between eating for a week or going hungry. If I were in this category, and I saw that my tax dollars were subsidizing a program like this, I would be more than upset. Perhaps if you charged each person who wishes to use this service a few dollars each month, it could pay for itself through that. Otherwise, this is an issue of stealing from the poor to give to the rich by providing for those with money and access but charging all for the service.
You bought a Tesla album. Ok, I'm kidding, but seriously, why would apple want to entangle itself in a subscription based model with another company reaping those rewards when it doesn't even want a subscription model on its own music store? Satelite radio would mark a fundamental shift in the iPod's use and I'm pretty sure Apple is happy with the way the iPod is selling, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Now if sirius approaches another mp3 player company, perhaps creative, it could have some real value for the mp3 player company since it could add a feature that could deter buyers of the iPod.
How could apple counter such a move? How about launching its own satelite and starting its own satelite radio company? Crazy you say? Imagine Apple integrating.mac so that you could copy your mp3s onto their server and stream them to your iPod? The iPod-SR (satelite radio), they could stream internet radio or your own mp3s from home to your own player. It could work.
Apple, for example, comes out with security fixes virtually every month, and many times they fix multiple security problems. So the sheer number of patches matter very little. If we're judging security strictly on the number of patches, then Microsoft should come out with one patch each year that addresses every issue that is known, this way they've "only" needed to release one security patch for the year.
The more security patches released, the better I feel about my OS of choice. It means they're keeping up with all known vulnerabilities. If I were Microsoft, given all the bad press about their poor security record these days, I wouldn't be bragging about releasing only 15 patches, IMO
I couldn't wait to buy EA's new baseball series this year, MVP baseball. Unfortunately it really wasn't so good. I don't think that baseball translates well to video games because the live action isn't as gripping as football or hockey. For whatever reason, baseball and basketball games seem to lag behind football and hockey in terms of exciting game play.
Anyway, we as consumers know that competition is always better than exclusive deals like this. I think MLB and the NFL are feeling pressured because if they spread their licenses too thin, other developers will stop licensing the video games because there is too much competition for a finite number of video game dollars. Rather than having their license revenue stream risk drying up, they'll accept exclusive agreements as a known source of income over the long term.
Slashdot Mirror
My guess is that the single processor G5 had a similar price point to the iMac, which has similar specs, plus a built in LCD. MacMall lists the 1.8 Ghz power mac at $1495 and for the same price they offer a 2 Ghz iMac. My feeling is that they want to keep the lines between the iMac and the Power Mac pretty clear to eliminate customer confusion. Plus, dual processor Power Macs have been available for about 4 years and there have been several times that they've only been available in dual processor configurations. I wouldn't read much into it and I think its too early to start thinking about clearing inventory of Power PC chips. Remember that the high end chips are rumored to be transititioned in late 06.
It looks like they're giving away the store
I think if you allow MS to sell what is perceived to be a "stripped down" version of their OS, along side the "full version" of their OS, AT THE SAME PRICE, there is no incentive to want Windows N. If, however, an enterprising company decided to create an incentive, such as providing free media (i.e. if the iTunes Music Store would give 20 free songs if you send in a copy of your UPC [or whatever they use in Europe]), then there would be an incentive to buy Windows N. Otherwise, people are going to question the benefit of buying an OS that MS has argued is a neutered version. IMO, the EU did a half-assed job here by allowing MS to charge the same price. You know that Gates and Balmer were laughing quite a bit when they found that nugget out.
I'm pretty much a fairly sophisticated user but my main tasks are email, web surfing, etc. When I installed Tiger, I wasn't that impressed with most of the new features. Dashboard is cool but not revolutionary and I considered spotlight to be a replacement for the Find command, which I rarely use. Then the other day I wanted to open Photoshop, which is on a firewire drive and nested under a couple of folders. I decided to try to use Spotlight to pull it up. After I typed "P-H-O-T-O-S" I could see photoshop selected as my "top hit." It reduced my interaction with the computer and allowed me to quickly get to work. Personally, I think this should be the goal of all software developers...to reduce interaction with the computer and to allow the user to work. After figuring out this neat trick a few days ago, I really haven't used the finder since, I just start typing the name of a document or application and it pops right up. I described it to someone as the document comes to me....I no longer have to go to the document. I think there's something truly revolutionary about that.
Funny, I cancelled my email accounts, got rid of my computer, cancelled my phone service and moved to a shack in the backwoods of Montana without telling anyone where I went. And yet somehow, I STILL get spam!
Wow, interesting. I wonder how different the Earth would be if humans lived among other species or even other kingdoms of life forms. That's why I love science fiction. I have to cut this short and go walk my dog.
But can it autonomously go through a McDonald's Drive Thru and bring me a value meal?
1) Apple uses USB which is an industry standard, as opposed to the proprietary ADB that was used until the mid to late 90s, so now any mouse, even mice developed for windows can be used with a mac, thereby reducing the need and the pull on developers to develop mice specifically for the mac.
2) Apple has shifted its strategy to be more aggressive, particularly in retail, to the detriment of individual resellers, and is now doing the same in the hardware space.
3) The iPod is such a phenominal success that apple doesn't need to draw hardware makers to the mac platform anymore.
4) Apple sees cross-over potential. Apple could very well believe that with the iPod's success and the standardization of peripherals, Windows users could want more apple hardware. This could be for the "reluctant switcher," someone who loves apple products, owns an iPod, loves apple's image but doesn't have the guts to make the switch.
5) This could be a considerable gripe of windows users that apple surveys to find out obstacles to get them to switch to a mac. Perhaps this is a sign that apple is making a more aggressive switch campaign.
No matter what, I like the move. I remember trying to use the hockey puck mouse on my first iMac and nearly going insane. At this point I use nothing but kensington mice, but for a first time user, I think it improves the out of box experience considerably.
It was sort of a rhetorical question
A few years back, Steve Jobs proclaimed that Apple would emerge from the recession in a strong market position by innovating through the economic downturn. I wonder how that turned out.
a huge 80's style boom box/cell phone that the kids could carry on their shoulders and they could blast their newly purchased music or their phone call, so be thankful I only floated the first idea. :-P
It does make sense that the media companies (i.e. MS, Apple, Napster, etc.) are trying to lock up license agreements with cell phone makers but why wouldn't these companies go after the cell phone providers instead? I mean, if Apple came up with an agreement with Verizon to be their exclusive provider of music, wouldn't it force the cell phone makers to engineer apple's DRM and iTunes into their future phones? And put another way, if I were a cell phone carrier, wouldn't I want a piece of the action and the opportunity to control media standards?
When the original Xbox came out, I rushed out to buy it. Unfortunatley, my console had a lot of quality control problems including scratching my games and then refusing to play them. I had heard a number of reports of similar problems but when I called tech support, they would not admit that there were design defects or manufacturing defects. They did fix it but it was an annoying ordeal that I should not have gone through (I was without the console for quite some time). Hopefully this time, they have all the bugs worked out.
....when MS addresses the problem
I would tend to agree with you
Thanks for the heads up, I haven't run the program, I just checked out the website so I don't know much about the set up. While the project is no where near groundbreaking, it does look interesting. Perhaps the developer could provide the technology and Apple could provide the refinement (including the graphical installer)needed. Apple seems to do well when they acquire smaller companies and developers, like when they brought in the developer of Soundjam MP to create iTunes, although they have also screwed developers by copying programs and putting them standard in the OS (like the Sherlock/Watson or Dashboard/Konfabulator).
After I posted, I remembered that way back Steve Jobs said something to the effect of "People want their computers and TVs to be 2 distinct experiences." Although the mac mini certainly represents several shifts in apple's business model so you never know.
Cool program. This looks like a perfect compliment to the digital lifestyle. If this were part of the iLife suite, I bet a lot of people would jump at it. If Apple had put it in iLife 05, it definitely would have justified the $20 increase in price, and it probably would have sold better and could draw more people to the platform.
If you want to supply free internet access for all, then you should at the same time provide some sort of computer access. If I were a low income family living paycheck to paycheck and I read about this initiative, I would be irate. For some, spending $100 is the difference between eating for a week or going hungry. If I were in this category, and I saw that my tax dollars were subsidizing a program like this, I would be more than upset. Perhaps if you charged each person who wishes to use this service a few dollars each month, it could pay for itself through that. Otherwise, this is an issue of stealing from the poor to give to the rich by providing for those with money and access but charging all for the service.
...that understanding the robot holds the key to robot design.
You bought a Tesla album. Ok, I'm kidding, but seriously, why would apple want to entangle itself in a subscription based model with another company reaping those rewards when it doesn't even want a subscription model on its own music store? Satelite radio would mark a fundamental shift in the iPod's use and I'm pretty sure Apple is happy with the way the iPod is selling, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Now if sirius approaches another mp3 player company, perhaps creative, it could have some real value for the mp3 player company since it could add a feature that could deter buyers of the iPod. How could apple counter such a move? How about launching its own satelite and starting its own satelite radio company? Crazy you say? Imagine Apple integrating .mac so that you could copy your mp3s onto their server and stream them to your iPod? The iPod-SR (satelite radio), they could stream internet radio or your own mp3s from home to your own player. It could work.
Apple, for example, comes out with security fixes virtually every month, and many times they fix multiple security problems. So the sheer number of patches matter very little. If we're judging security strictly on the number of patches, then Microsoft should come out with one patch each year that addresses every issue that is known, this way they've "only" needed to release one security patch for the year. The more security patches released, the better I feel about my OS of choice. It means they're keeping up with all known vulnerabilities. If I were Microsoft, given all the bad press about their poor security record these days, I wouldn't be bragging about releasing only 15 patches, IMO
ahhh...crap...forget it
Oh....crap....forget it
I couldn't wait to buy EA's new baseball series this year, MVP baseball. Unfortunately it really wasn't so good. I don't think that baseball translates well to video games because the live action isn't as gripping as football or hockey. For whatever reason, baseball and basketball games seem to lag behind football and hockey in terms of exciting game play. Anyway, we as consumers know that competition is always better than exclusive deals like this. I think MLB and the NFL are feeling pressured because if they spread their licenses too thin, other developers will stop licensing the video games because there is too much competition for a finite number of video game dollars. Rather than having their license revenue stream risk drying up, they'll accept exclusive agreements as a known source of income over the long term.