What exactly was so puzzling and cobbled together about Mac OS X's IP settings?
I'm very interested in hearing the details, because I can't picure that. In fact I think you invented that entirely.
Tiger's System Preferences:Network isn't the most amazing design (particularly compared to Leopard), but the IP settings in Windows are no better. Windows doesn't even show you your DHCP IP lease or let your renew it without the command line! WTF.
Perhaps you forgot about the webserver. It was invented on NeXTSTEP by a guy named Tim. It allows remote applications to run from a central server. NeXT built an object oriented web commerce server for Dell using it and WebObjects - the software that now runs Apple's online store and powers the iTunes Store. iTunes is a cross platform, thin client web services app that sells billions of songs. Heard of it?
Except that all the protocols of the web are open and secured by known technologies, not by "ship it!" Microsoft executives with little concern for security and a bad reputation to boot.
Perhaps you've heard of Google? They do stuff with web apps too.
And oh yeah, you're actually soaking in it right now.
Microsoft was so worried about web applications that it devoted a lot of efforts into destroying Netscape, peverting web protocols (IE-only web pages), and recently, attempts to vilify Linux. It failed to snuff out Apache with its Windows -tied IIS.
Once again, you're soaking in that failure right now, too.
--
Beyond that, Apple IS an Enterprise customer.
Seriously, how can you be so ignorant? You're impressed by old technology and think the world is doing well under the thumb of an incompetent monopoly? Wake up, seriously. Windows is not a feature, it's a liability. So is ignorance.
The Start Menu isn't consistant or standard at all. It changes in every version of Windows, it behaves inconsistantly (is that item a folder or a file or a shortcut or some other construct? who knows!), and it is poorly designed to emulate behaviors of the 1980's Program Manager - because the Windows file system and Registry ensurs that users will be hopelessly confused when presented with their actual applications directory.
Warning: users shouldn't even be in this directory! Go way and muddle through the Start Button menus!
Standardizing on Windows has cost the world billions of unneccessary losses every year, and held back the pace of technology.
If standardization is good, why did Vista randomly change the names of control panels?
It takes a user longer to unlearn riduculous Windows crap that it does to learn how to use Mac OS X. Everything mostly works as intuitively expected. Applications are just draged into place, no need to walk through an installer that stuffs crap thoughout the Registry and ensures that uninstallation will also be a nightmare.
Windows is a triangular steering wheel, and a single pedal with two buttons: right brake and left brake (which happens to list accelerate as one of the contextual menu items).
Microsoft sold the non-voting shares 3 years (?) later after the commitment to hold onto the shares expired. Microsoft made a good profit, but not as good as if it had held the stock.
The 150 million in shares was not a loan, and was not essential to Apple's survival, it only made a public show of Microsoft and Apple working together. Microsoft also committed to delivering equal versions of Office for Mac for another 5 years, which was recommitted twice afterward.
It was all about creating faith in Office being available on the Mac, and had no impact on Microsoft's monopoly case. It is still illegal to maintain a monopoly in a market, even if you pay off a market participant. AT&T could not have invested in MCI and maintained its monopoly.
The Mac market has grown substantially, as was stated in the context you took your snippet from: Mac sales across the last two years were nearly 10 million (more if you include the last quarter reported), up from ~6 million in the two years prior.
6 -> 10 is substantial growth, and the majority of that growth came just this last year, when Intel Macs appeared. The iPod helped to build Apple's retail stores, which are selling craploads of new Macs to non-Mac users.
As far as Apple's growth making "no lick of difference to Microsoft," you also missed that every Mac sold is more than one OEM license unsold, because it also means fewer cheap PCs needed to replace to the cheap PC after it quickly goes obsolete in a couple years. Further, Mac users are unlikely to go back to Windows after making the jump.
By "costs that much" you mean the same price as the HTC TyTN, the LG Prada, and the Samsun F700, the phones compared to the iPhone in features?
Or do you mean the miserable Motorola Q, that can't sell in quantity at a $99 price, can't do anything useful, and runs the miserable failure of WinCE?
Pick and choose desperate/disparate facts and try to make the case that the iPhone won't blow away existing smartphones, then complain that Apple has a "monopoly" afterward. It worked so well for Paul Thurrott on the iPod.
Sure throw in subscriptions. 25,000 subscribers = 1 DRM key each. You don't get to count individual songs, because once they stop paying they lose them all.
Surely you realize that Microsoft's PFS and Zune are not making money because of ultra low revenues? That's why all the stores are tanking, and none of them brag about how many subscribers they have or songs they are selling.
Subscription/Rental DRM is harder to manage; it makes the player a less attractive product. And it's far more onerous.
Apple had eaten up market share long before the iTunes Store opened. Most iPod users aren't even using the iTS to a great extent - 25 songs on average is not holding people to the iPod. Outside regions with a store, there are plenty of people still buying iPods.
Leave it to ArsTechnica to suggest that number of exploits or number of licensees somehow relates to the complexity of managing DRM across multiple vendors.
Microsoft is also better suited to handle multiple vendors, as it already licenses OEM Windows, WinCE and various other products. Apple has only ever tried to license the Mac OS and Newton, license FireWire, and franchise iPods though HP, and license ad campaigns like Made for iPod. Apple isn't set up to license FairPlay, nor is it within its core competency.
A riddle of warfare between Apple and Microsoft: Steve Jobs and the iTunes DRM Threat to Microsoft presents DRM as a shot across the bow of Microsoft's flagship, but suggests that, beyond DRM, "Apple is targeting another Microsoft mainstay with a missile that may cause far more damage than the iPod and iTunes together." 2007 - Apple Strikes Back chronicles the recovery of Apple over the last decade, and Apple's Open Source Assault hints at how Apple will engage Microsoft. What is Apple up to?
PDA was actually coined by Apple's John Sculley in the late 80s.
When comparing the 1997 Newton MessagePad 2100 with a brand new 2006 Origami device by Samsung (Q1?), the UK Cnet site rated the decade older Newton as a better and more practical device.
Microsoft started into Pen Computing in 1991, and started work on its handheld PCs in 1992. By 1998, Microsoft was still struggling to deliver a sellable product. Microsoft had to license its technology from General Magic, an Apple spin off, to catch up at all. Its WinCE devices weren't even comparable to Palm's until 2002, and nobody would say that today's WinCE devices are years ahead of the old Newton.
Between 2001-2006, Bill Gates got up at every CES and rolled out another batch of silly products based on WinCE that never went anywhere. That's not leadership.
Re:Biggest problem: No Push Email
on
iPhone Roundup
·
· Score: 1
The phone doesn't do the pushing; it's a server that pushes content to it. Enterprise users don't care what server does the pushing. If you're gushing about Exchange, surely you know that "contacts, calendar and tasks" are just specially formatted emails on Exchange.
You might also be aware of both Bluetooth headsets and Apple's headphone with an integrated mic. No need to bring the phone to your face if you have greasy skin problems.
The TyTN is twice as thick as the iPhone, so if you're concerned about size, you might want to consider swapping out your clunky WinCE phone and its chicklet joke of a keyboard for one that is useful.
It sounds like you've made up your mind though, and I sure don't need anyone in line ahead of me.
Re:Biggest problem: No Push Email
on
iPhone Roundup
·
· Score: 1
Well the Keynote specifically pointed to Yahoo! offering push mail service for it, so it's odd you got that on your list of OMG's.
What's really interesting is how the press has responded to the iPhone, particularly in comparison to their reporting on the Zune from Microsoft:
Thanks for artfuly pulling very short quotes out of context, then conflating ideas that are not related in an attempt to smear the article and glaze a personal attack on top.
And by "nothing but substantiated," you are stating that it is substantiated. I don't think you were trying to be complmentary.
The rest of your screed is just typical of the tired analysts with nothing interesting to say: rag on details that don't matter, spin arguements that are not true, misquote anyone who disagrees with you, and... oh wait, your forgot to use the word "fanboy" several times.
Apple also refers to the 5G iPod as a "closed platform," despite offering 3rd party games and the availability of 3rd party systems including an entire Linux distro and platform (with apps like Wikipedia), and the Rockbox.
That's far more "open" and "3rd party available" than the Xbox or the Zune, which both have signed bootloaders to prevent alternative development. So perhaps you've been mislead by all the FUD.
-
RoughlyDrafted has written a series of articles looking "Inside the iPhone," exploring why Apple didn't target faster 3G networks in EDGE, EVDO, HSUPA, 3G, and WiFi, a substantiated look at how the iPhone is indeed running OS X (contrary to reports that it isn't), what it means to users and developers, and how ARM is involved, in Mac OS X, ARM, and iPod OS X, and why the supposedly "closed system" Apple describes for the iPhone won't preclude third party development in Third Party Software.
Not only is the iPhone's FairPlay DRM the same story as the iPods, but its software model should also follow the model of 5G iPod games: cheap, high volume, decent quality... vs. the overpriced or hit and miss shareware stuff that offers developers little reason to do anything really interesting for the Palm Treo.
I have a Treo, and am aware of the various things that are around for it, but iv'e also discovered what a crappy sync/update/install system it offers, and how it's unlikely that apps, once installed, will continue to work past two sync cycles. Vindigo refuses to sync all the time. Palm's own HotSync for photos is simply brain dead. A hack to support Google Maps required tracking down and installing a problematic Java VM, another library, and a flakey shareware app that never worked quite right. Most users don't want a toy box to hack on, they want a friggen phone that just works.
Part of the Treo's problem is shoddy 3rd party programming, part is the minimal memory available on the Treo, and part is simply the difficulty of managing a random assortment of apps installed on a platform with minimal regard for security (the Palm OS running a phone is like the classic Mac OS running a webserver - yes it can happen, but it's far beyond anything it was ever inteded to do).
RoughlyDrafted has a series of articles looking "Inside the iPhone," exploring why Apple didn't target faster 3G networks in EDGE, EVDO, HSUPA, 3G, and WiFi, a substantiated look at how the iPhone is indeed running OS X (contrary to yesterday's uninformed reports that it isn't), what it means to users and developers, and how ARM is involved, in Mac OS X, ARM, and iPod OS X, and why the supposedly "closed system" Apple describes for the iPhone won't preclude third party development in Third Party Software.
ADC was only DVI, power, and USB together in one plug. Anyone wanting to use a standard DVI monitor only needed an adapter. Mini-DVI is just a another example of the same pins in a different connector to save space. Of all the real examples of standards, those two are the best you could come up with?
Mark Stephens (who writes under the Cringely name) was wrong in the score he gave himself. Read any of his articles from a few months ago to get a taste of how absurd they actually are. It's one thing to write speculation as entertainment, but Stephens just doesn't understand basic tech principles or the industry. Grading himself on accuracy is something like Bush rating himself as an effective president.
Consider two examples:
- Stephens wrote plenty about the Red Box Myth (the idea that Apple would bring Windows native compatibly in Mac OS X using something like WINE). Technically wrongheaded, and strategically absurd for Apple. Myth 8: Mac OS X Red Box Myth
- Stephens compared Amazon's Unbox (remember that?) with movie sales in Apple's iTunes Store, relating a soap opera about how Steve Jobs held up Amazon's efforts for half a year so that Apple would have time to line up more studios than just Disney. Not only an absurd idea, but factually wrong. It's made up bullshit presented as insider information.
In that same article, Stephens announced Apple would begin selling flat panel displays. It is unlikely Apple would ever start selling low profit, heavy and large TV displays. It has enough competition in the area of pricey Cinema displays, why would it confuse and cheapen its offerings by selling big 1024x768 TVs?
Referring to "corporate clients" in one broad, sweeping generalization is the error in thinking I attempted to point out.
You only speak for the ultra low profit cubes market, which is not only already owned and difficult for Apple to enter, but also the least attractive route for Apple to use as it expands.
One could also say that "corporate clients" don't need the bells and whistles of "MS Office [latest version]," and will be content running the Windows and Office from 5 years ago, or using an NC, or a Sun JavaStation, or a Linux install with OpenOffice. However, in reality, corporate clients have been dutifully buying new PCs they don't need to run the lastest Microsoft OS and suite for years. They buy what seems to work, and are not at all as price conscious as Linux administrators seem to think "they" are. If they were, we'd see Linux on the desktop in corporate use far more often, no?
Apple isn't trying to position its stuff as mid-low corporate fodder; it sells to education and creative professionals. But there's a reason why everyone from indie bloggers to corporate analysts are schlepping around Mac OS X based MacBooks. Bill Gates was surprised to find his blogger audience all had Macs when he issued his recent "DRM is not ready yet!" line to Michael Arrington, and HP CEO Mike Hurd was similarly bent out of shape to see so many business analysts using MacBook Pros, not HP laptops, at HP meetings.
The way to get into corporate business is not from the basement up, it's to sell independant contractors, managers, and executives on the superiorities of the Mac as a platform. Recall that that tactic enabled Macs to stick around far longer in corporate circles than was reasonable in the 1995-2000 timeframe.
And as for "no Macs in server rooms," well, clearly you don't understand much about price differences. Not only are Apple's Enterprise servers and RAID very competitive, but there's no Microsoft CAL tax, which costs small and medium businesses far more than any hardware differences. Linux based servers are a better option in many environments, but many small and medium businesses can't afford to maintain a Linux admin, and can incorporate Mac servers, because its easy to find people who can run them.
Linux, Microsoft, and Apple all target very different markets on the server side, and comparing them head to head is about as pointless as comparing a pickup, a van, and a dumptruck as the "ideal vehicle for business use." It really depends a lot on what you're trying to do.
---
MacWorld 2007 is just days away. Here's a look at what's likely to be revealed, some promising ideas that are less likely to get delivered, and things that have no chance of happening, with the iPod, Phone and iTV, Macs and MacBooks, and in Software.
You seem to have confused Apple with Microsoft. Apple isn't a software company, its a hardware company that differentiates its products with tightly integrated software.
Mac OS X has been expressly designed over the last half decade to cater to Apple's existing Mac buyers in education, graphic design, and home users. It does not aspire to be a clone of Windows. Now that Apple has defended its platform from losses, its in the perfect position to start expanding. You noticed the first step in moving to Intel Macs.
The strongest play Apple now has in the Enterprise is in the Xserve RAID, which offers a platform neutral SAN solution that is far cheaper than the majority of competing offerings. It obviously doesn't require Mac OS X.
The Xserve line is also expanding into broadcast TV and video and film development, markets Apple has targeted with its Final Cut Pro suite. That is a high dollar market. Apple is also targeting biotech and entry level high performance computing, and offers a fine low cost super computer option.
If you only equate Enterprise and corporate markets with the ditto head IT idiots running office operations on the cheap, well then I'll agree that Apple isn't desperate to compete over the ultra low profit sales which HP and Dell are curently scrapping over. However, Apple is picking up a lot of interest and increasing its sales in key business markets where real money is involved.
It's not like Apple doesn't run some of the largest successful online retail operations itself on Xserves running Mac OS X: ever heard of the Apple Store and iTunes? You might also check into major Universities and school districts that manage thousands of Macs integrated into existing Kerberos and Active Directory infrastructures. If you haven't noticed, Apple isn't still selling System 7. It's selling a POSIX based OS that makes Windows look obsolete.
It's not that Apple can't be like Microsoft and run on is software Dell PCs; the company doesn't have any desire to. Recall that it was Michael Dell expressing an interest in selling Mac OS X on Dells, not Steve Jobs.
Apple is worth twice as much as it was just last year, and sales have jumped from 800,000 per quarter to 1.6 million in the last two years. This last quarter, Apple will sell close to 2 million Macs, and next year it will sell around 9 million. Apple has no intention of copying HP or Dell; the company is outperforming Dell despite selling only a tenth of the machines. As its sales increase, Apple will make a lot of money without ever needing to match Dell's sales to the cubicle.
Apple has software products, a services business, retail stores, and a music business. Apple sure as hell isn't wishing it was a PC vendor pushing undistinguished, cheap boxes to corporate drones under the thumb of Microsoft.
Corporations who think they need Microsoft can stay in the 90s while their competitors outpace them running whatever platforms they find more suitable, economical, and productive. Do you think businesses need multiple hardware vendors for their corporate automotive fleets, or do they buy from one maker?
Most corporations I've worked for have standardized on a vendor; they are not in any better shape standardizing on Dell than if they were to standardize on Apple. There are no other hardware vendors selling Dell PCs either.
I pay $1100 a month to share a basic 2 BR flat in SF, and going out to eat somewhere basic typically costs $20/person unless drinks are involved. If my motorcycle gets ticketed for being parked on the sidewalk, it's $100. People commonly pay $200 a month for a garage, or being careful, you can park on the street and pay the inevitable $250 in tickets every quarter.
WiFi won't be free in SF until the City approves the plan and it actually gets built. While the plan drags along, I pay $50/ month for 1.5 Mbit ADSL.
When I go on vacation, my biggest expense is paying my rent while I'm away, but it's almost worth it to be able to come home from vacation and know I'm still somewhere people travel to visit. Oh, by the way, it's fairly expensive to be a tourist here, too.
Yes I have that problem too because I go through Macs so often that I can't keep the five I'm using authorized at once.
I have lots of iTunes songs I bought, but don't seem to recall to authorize the machines, so they just sit around with tracks they can't play until I get a new iPod, and then have all sorts of troubles.
But its problably just you and I with that problem, since its such a perfect storm of improbability that causes the dilemma.
Well if I go to Amazon and the server doens't respond, I might shop around and enventually place an order elsewhere. However, if I'm cashing in an iTunes gift card, and the iTS doesn't respond, I'm going to try it again later until I get my $20 of music.
Note that Apple's brick and mortar stores are so busy right now that they frequently use roaming people with WinCE handhelds to place credit card orders. I expected the Apple Store to be slowing down after the holidays, but it was crazy busy with people buying stuff. Apparently, the people who got non-iPods took them back and set out to buy an iPod.
Which is why Creative is losing huge amounts of money. While DIVX might be popular among people who don't pay for things, it's not something that NORMAL people use. And by that I mean people who don't sit on slashdot all day wondering why everyone else isn't building robots.
Creative stuff is generally big and bulky - not exactly the mass market stylish and simple product that Apple's been churning out with the iPod.
Oops! You edited out the bits of the CNET article that were relevant to set up a strawman of your own. I didn't misinterpret anything Kanellos wrote; I didn't "interpret" anything, I just pointed out how aburd it all was.
The article and website isn't a revenue creator, its shared ideas that I've found that I thought were interesting. Yahoo ads bring in less than a couple dollars in a day of high traffic, and only help to cover part of the hosting expense. Amazon and iTS ads don't earn anything unless people buy things.
But enough about me. What's your motivation for posting things you know are a lie in an effort to discredit obvious facts? Shill, troll, astroturf, or just bitter?
Slashdot Mirror
What exactly was so puzzling and cobbled together about Mac OS X's IP settings?
I'm very interested in hearing the details, because I can't picure that. In fact I think you invented that entirely.
Tiger's System Preferences:Network isn't the most amazing design (particularly compared to Leopard), but the IP settings in Windows are no better. Windows doesn't even show you your DHCP IP lease or let your renew it without the command line! WTF.
So yes, I am accusing you being full of crap.
Microsoft invented the "Virtualized Desktop"?
Perhaps you forgot about the webserver. It was invented on NeXTSTEP by a guy named Tim. It allows remote applications to run from a central server. NeXT built an object oriented web commerce server for Dell using it and WebObjects - the software that now runs Apple's online store and powers the iTunes Store. iTunes is a cross platform, thin client web services app that sells billions of songs. Heard of it?
Except that all the protocols of the web are open and secured by known technologies, not by "ship it!" Microsoft executives with little concern for security and a bad reputation to boot.
Perhaps you've heard of Google? They do stuff with web apps too.
And oh yeah, you're actually soaking in it right now.
Microsoft was so worried about web applications that it devoted a lot of efforts into destroying Netscape, peverting web protocols (IE-only web pages), and recently, attempts to vilify Linux. It failed to snuff out Apache with its Windows -tied IIS.
Once again, you're soaking in that failure right now, too.
--
Beyond that, Apple IS an Enterprise customer.
Seriously, how can you be so ignorant? You're impressed by old technology and think the world is doing well under the thumb of an incompetent monopoly? Wake up, seriously. Windows is not a feature, it's a liability. So is ignorance.
Apple's Open Source Assault
The Start Menu isn't consistant or standard at all. It changes in every version of Windows, it behaves inconsistantly (is that item a folder or a file or a shortcut or some other construct? who knows!), and it is poorly designed to emulate behaviors of the 1980's Program Manager - because the Windows file system and Registry ensurs that users will be hopelessly confused when presented with their actual applications directory.
Warning: users shouldn't even be in this directory! Go way and muddle through the Start Button menus!
Standardizing on Windows has cost the world billions of unneccessary losses every year, and held back the pace of technology.
If standardization is good, why did Vista randomly change the names of control panels?
It takes a user longer to unlearn riduculous Windows crap that it does to learn how to use Mac OS X. Everything mostly works as intuitively expected. Applications are just draged into place, no need to walk through an installer that stuffs crap thoughout the Registry and ensures that uninstallation will also be a nightmare.
Windows is a triangular steering wheel, and a single pedal with two buttons: right brake and left brake (which happens to list accelerate as one of the contextual menu items).
Apple Takes On Exchange Server
Microsoft sold the non-voting shares 3 years (?) later after the commitment to hold onto the shares expired. Microsoft made a good profit, but not as good as if it had held the stock.
The 150 million in shares was not a loan, and was not essential to Apple's survival, it only made a public show of Microsoft and Apple working together. Microsoft also committed to delivering equal versions of Office for Mac for another 5 years, which was recommitted twice afterward.
It was all about creating faith in Office being available on the Mac, and had no impact on Microsoft's monopoly case. It is still illegal to maintain a monopoly in a market, even if you pay off a market participant. AT&T could not have invested in MCI and maintained its monopoly.
2007: Apple Strikes Back
The Mac market has grown substantially, as was stated in the context you took your snippet from: Mac sales across the last two years were nearly 10 million (more if you include the last quarter reported), up from ~6 million in the two years prior.
6 -> 10 is substantial growth, and the majority of that growth came just this last year, when Intel Macs appeared. The iPod helped to build Apple's retail stores, which are selling craploads of new Macs to non-Mac users.
Watch what happens in 2007.
As far as Apple's growth making "no lick of difference to Microsoft," you also missed that every Mac sold is more than one OEM license unsold, because it also means fewer cheap PCs needed to replace to the cheap PC after it quickly goes obsolete in a couple years. Further, Mac users are unlikely to go back to Windows after making the jump.
By "costs that much" you mean the same price as the HTC TyTN, the LG Prada, and the Samsun F700, the phones compared to the iPhone in features?
Or do you mean the miserable Motorola Q, that can't sell in quantity at a $99 price, can't do anything useful, and runs the miserable failure of WinCE?
Pick and choose desperate/disparate facts and try to make the case that the iPhone won't blow away existing smartphones, then complain that Apple has a "monopoly" afterward. It worked so well for Paul Thurrott on the iPod.
Zune vs. iPhone: Five Phases of Media Coverage
A GSM phone wouldn't be much use in Japan, would it?
www.roughlydrafted.com
Sure throw in subscriptions. 25,000 subscribers = 1 DRM key each. You don't get to count individual songs, because once they stop paying they lose them all.
Surely you realize that Microsoft's PFS and Zune are not making money because of ultra low revenues? That's why all the stores are tanking, and none of them brag about how many subscribers they have or songs they are selling.
Subscription/Rental DRM is harder to manage; it makes the player a less attractive product. And it's far more onerous.
Apple had eaten up market share long before the iTunes Store opened. Most iPod users aren't even using the iTS to a great extent - 25 songs on average is not holding people to the iPod. Outside regions with a store, there are plenty of people still buying iPods.
FairPlay = 2 Billion songs, 10 million movies
MS PFS DRM = 100,000 songs sold?
MS Zune DRM = 250 songs sold?
Leave it to ArsTechnica to suggest that number of exploits or number of licensees somehow relates to the complexity of managing DRM across multiple vendors.
Microsoft is also better suited to handle multiple vendors, as it already licenses OEM Windows, WinCE and various other products. Apple has only ever tried to license the Mac OS and Newton, license FireWire, and franchise iPods though HP, and license ad campaigns like Made for iPod. Apple isn't set up to license FairPlay, nor is it within its core competency.
A riddle of warfare between Apple and Microsoft: Steve Jobs and the iTunes DRM Threat to Microsoft presents DRM as a shot across the bow of Microsoft's flagship, but suggests that, beyond DRM, "Apple is targeting another Microsoft mainstay with a missile that may cause far more damage than the iPod and iTunes together." 2007 - Apple Strikes Back chronicles the recovery of Apple over the last decade, and Apple's Open Source Assault hints at how Apple will engage Microsoft. What is Apple up to?
PDA was actually coined by Apple's John Sculley in the late 80s.
When comparing the 1997 Newton MessagePad 2100 with a brand new 2006 Origami device by Samsung (Q1?), the UK Cnet site rated the decade older Newton as a better and more practical device.
Ten years is a long time.
Apple spent 1988-1998 on the Newton.
Microsoft started into Pen Computing in 1991, and started work on its handheld PCs in 1992. By 1998, Microsoft was still struggling to deliver a sellable product. Microsoft had to license its technology from General Magic, an Apple spin off, to catch up at all. Its WinCE devices weren't even comparable to Palm's until 2002, and nobody would say that today's WinCE devices are years ahead of the old Newton.
Between 2001-2006, Bill Gates got up at every CES and rolled out another batch of silly products based on WinCE that never went anywhere. That's not leadership.
Stop making excuses for bullshit.
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/
Actually the server is running Linux. It's just that the hardware GoDaddy throws at the site isn't up to the task.
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/
The phone doesn't do the pushing; it's a server that pushes content to it. Enterprise users don't care what server does the pushing. If you're gushing about Exchange, surely you know that "contacts, calendar and tasks" are just specially formatted emails on Exchange.
You might also be aware of both Bluetooth headsets and Apple's headphone with an integrated mic. No need to bring the phone to your face if you have greasy skin problems.
The TyTN is twice as thick as the iPhone, so if you're concerned about size, you might want to consider swapping out your clunky WinCE phone and its chicklet joke of a keyboard for one that is useful.
It sounds like you've made up your mind though, and I sure don't need anyone in line ahead of me.
Well the Keynote specifically pointed to Yahoo! offering push mail service for it, so it's odd you got that on your list of OMG's.
What's really interesting is how the press has responded to the iPhone, particularly in comparison to their reporting on the Zune from Microsoft:
Inside the iPhone: Five Phases of Media Coverage
dfghjk,
Thanks for artfuly pulling very short quotes out of context, then conflating ideas that are not related in an attempt to smear the article and glaze a personal attack on top.
And by "nothing but substantiated," you are stating that it is substantiated. I don't think you were trying to be complmentary.
The rest of your screed is just typical of the tired analysts with nothing interesting to say: rag on details that don't matter, spin arguements that are not true, misquote anyone who disagrees with you, and... oh wait, your forgot to use the word "fanboy" several times.
Apple also refers to the 5G iPod as a "closed platform," despite offering 3rd party games and the availability of 3rd party systems including an entire Linux distro and platform (with apps like Wikipedia), and the Rockbox.
That's far more "open" and "3rd party available" than the Xbox or the Zune, which both have signed bootloaders to prevent alternative development. So perhaps you've been mislead by all the FUD.
-
RoughlyDrafted has written a series of articles looking "Inside the iPhone," exploring why Apple didn't target faster 3G networks in EDGE, EVDO, HSUPA, 3G, and WiFi, a substantiated look at how the iPhone is indeed running OS X (contrary to reports that it isn't), what it means to users and developers, and how ARM is involved, in Mac OS X, ARM, and iPod OS X, and why the supposedly "closed system" Apple describes for the iPhone won't preclude third party development in Third Party Software.
Not only is the iPhone's FairPlay DRM the same story as the iPods, but its software model should also follow the model of 5G iPod games: cheap, high volume, decent quality ... vs. the overpriced or hit and miss shareware stuff that offers developers little reason to do anything really interesting for the Palm Treo.
I have a Treo, and am aware of the various things that are around for it, but iv'e also discovered what a crappy sync/update/install system it offers, and how it's unlikely that apps, once installed, will continue to work past two sync cycles. Vindigo refuses to sync all the time. Palm's own HotSync for photos is simply brain dead. A hack to support Google Maps required tracking down and installing a problematic Java VM, another library, and a flakey shareware app that never worked quite right. Most users don't want a toy box to hack on, they want a friggen phone that just works.
Part of the Treo's problem is shoddy 3rd party programming, part is the minimal memory available on the Treo, and part is simply the difficulty of managing a random assortment of apps installed on a platform with minimal regard for security (the Palm OS running a phone is like the classic Mac OS running a webserver - yes it can happen, but it's far beyond anything it was ever inteded to do).
RoughlyDrafted has a series of articles looking "Inside the iPhone," exploring why Apple didn't target faster 3G networks in EDGE, EVDO, HSUPA, 3G, and WiFi, a substantiated look at how the iPhone is indeed running OS X (contrary to yesterday's uninformed reports that it isn't), what it means to users and developers, and how ARM is involved, in Mac OS X, ARM, and iPod OS X, and why the supposedly "closed system" Apple describes for the iPhone won't preclude third party development in Third Party Software.
ADC was only DVI, power, and USB together in one plug. Anyone wanting to use a standard DVI monitor only needed an adapter. Mini-DVI is just a another example of the same pins in a different connector to save space. Of all the real examples of standards, those two are the best you could come up with?
Mark Stephens (who writes under the Cringely name) was wrong in the score he gave himself. Read any of his articles from a few months ago to get a taste of how absurd they actually are. It's one thing to write speculation as entertainment, but Stephens just doesn't understand basic tech principles or the industry. Grading himself on accuracy is something like Bush rating himself as an effective president.
Consider two examples:
- Stephens wrote plenty about the Red Box Myth (the idea that Apple would bring Windows native compatibly in Mac OS X using something like WINE). Technically wrongheaded, and strategically absurd for Apple.
Myth 8: Mac OS X Red Box Myth
- Stephens compared Amazon's Unbox (remember that?) with movie sales in Apple's iTunes Store, relating a soap opera about how Steve Jobs held up Amazon's efforts for half a year so that Apple would have time to line up more studios than just Disney. Not only an absurd idea, but factually wrong. It's made up bullshit presented as insider information.
In that same article, Stephens announced Apple would begin selling flat panel displays. It is unlikely Apple would ever start selling low profit, heavy and large TV displays. It has enough competition in the area of pricey Cinema displays, why would it confuse and cheapen its offerings by selling big 1024x768 TVs?
The Apple iTMS vs Amazon Unbox Rivalry Myth
So yeah, 69% accuracy would be great, but Stephens is actually wrong about pretty much everything he writes, even his own appraisals of his accuracy.
Referring to "corporate clients" in one broad, sweeping generalization is the error in thinking I attempted to point out.
You only speak for the ultra low profit cubes market, which is not only already owned and difficult for Apple to enter, but also the least attractive route for Apple to use as it expands.
One could also say that "corporate clients" don't need the bells and whistles of "MS Office [latest version]," and will be content running the Windows and Office from 5 years ago, or using an NC, or a Sun JavaStation, or a Linux install with OpenOffice. However, in reality, corporate clients have been dutifully buying new PCs they don't need to run the lastest Microsoft OS and suite for years. They buy what seems to work, and are not at all as price conscious as Linux administrators seem to think "they" are. If they were, we'd see Linux on the desktop in corporate use far more often, no?
Apple isn't trying to position its stuff as mid-low corporate fodder; it sells to education and creative professionals. But there's a reason why everyone from indie bloggers to corporate analysts are schlepping around Mac OS X based MacBooks. Bill Gates was surprised to find his blogger audience all had Macs when he issued his recent "DRM is not ready yet!" line to Michael Arrington, and HP CEO Mike Hurd was similarly bent out of shape to see so many business analysts using MacBook Pros, not HP laptops, at HP meetings.
The way to get into corporate business is not from the basement up, it's to sell independant contractors, managers, and executives on the superiorities of the Mac as a platform. Recall that that tactic enabled Macs to stick around far longer in corporate circles than was reasonable in the 1995-2000 timeframe.
And as for "no Macs in server rooms," well, clearly you don't understand much about price differences. Not only are Apple's Enterprise servers and RAID very competitive, but there's no Microsoft CAL tax, which costs small and medium businesses far more than any hardware differences. Linux based servers are a better option in many environments, but many small and medium businesses can't afford to maintain a Linux admin, and can incorporate Mac servers, because its easy to find people who can run them.
Linux, Microsoft, and Apple all target very different markets on the server side, and comparing them head to head is about as pointless as comparing a pickup, a van, and a dumptruck as the "ideal vehicle for business use." It really depends a lot on what you're trying to do.
---
MacWorld 2007 is just days away. Here's a look at what's likely to be revealed, some promising ideas that are less likely to get delivered, and things that have no chance of happening, with the iPod, Phone and iTV, Macs and MacBooks, and in Software.
Well that's not a technical problem, is it?
You seem to have confused Apple with Microsoft. Apple isn't a software company, its a hardware company that differentiates its products with tightly integrated software.
Mac OS X has been expressly designed over the last half decade to cater to Apple's existing Mac buyers in education, graphic design, and home users. It does not aspire to be a clone of Windows. Now that Apple has defended its platform from losses, its in the perfect position to start expanding. You noticed the first step in moving to Intel Macs.
The strongest play Apple now has in the Enterprise is in the Xserve RAID, which offers a platform neutral SAN solution that is far cheaper than the majority of competing offerings. It obviously doesn't require Mac OS X.
The Xserve line is also expanding into broadcast TV and video and film development, markets Apple has targeted with its Final Cut Pro suite. That is a high dollar market. Apple is also targeting biotech and entry level high performance computing, and offers a fine low cost super computer option.
If you only equate Enterprise and corporate markets with the ditto head IT idiots running office operations on the cheap, well then I'll agree that Apple isn't desperate to compete over the ultra low profit sales which HP and Dell are curently scrapping over. However, Apple is picking up a lot of interest and increasing its sales in key business markets where real money is involved.
It's not like Apple doesn't run some of the largest successful online retail operations itself on Xserves running Mac OS X: ever heard of the Apple Store and iTunes? You might also check into major Universities and school districts that manage thousands of Macs integrated into existing Kerberos and Active Directory infrastructures. If you haven't noticed, Apple isn't still selling System 7. It's selling a POSIX based OS that makes Windows look obsolete.
It's not that Apple can't be like Microsoft and run on is software Dell PCs; the company doesn't have any desire to. Recall that it was Michael Dell expressing an interest in selling Mac OS X on Dells, not Steve Jobs.
Apple is worth twice as much as it was just last year, and sales have jumped from 800,000 per quarter to 1.6 million in the last two years. This last quarter, Apple will sell close to 2 million Macs, and next year it will sell around 9 million. Apple has no intention of copying HP or Dell; the company is outperforming Dell despite selling only a tenth of the machines. As its sales increase, Apple will make a lot of money without ever needing to match Dell's sales to the cubicle.
Apple has software products, a services business, retail stores, and a music business. Apple sure as hell isn't wishing it was a PC vendor pushing undistinguished, cheap boxes to corporate drones under the thumb of Microsoft.
Corporations who think they need Microsoft can stay in the 90s while their competitors outpace them running whatever platforms they find more suitable, economical, and productive. Do you think businesses need multiple hardware vendors for their corporate automotive fleets, or do they buy from one maker?
Most corporations I've worked for have standardized on a vendor; they are not in any better shape standardizing on Dell than if they were to standardize on Apple. There are no other hardware vendors selling Dell PCs either.
Apple's Mac OS X Leopard and Microsoft's Vista: A Risk Strategy
Sorry your ADSL is expensive.
I pay $1100 a month to share a basic 2 BR flat in SF, and going out to eat somewhere basic typically costs $20/person unless drinks are involved. If my motorcycle gets ticketed for being parked on the sidewalk, it's $100. People commonly pay $200 a month for a garage, or being careful, you can park on the street and pay the inevitable $250 in tickets every quarter.
WiFi won't be free in SF until the City approves the plan and it actually gets built. While the plan drags along, I pay $50/ month for 1.5 Mbit ADSL.
When I go on vacation, my biggest expense is paying my rent while I'm away, but it's almost worth it to be able to come home from vacation and know I'm still somewhere people travel to visit. Oh, by the way, it's fairly expensive to be a tourist here, too.
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/
Yes I have that problem too because I go through Macs so often that I can't keep the five I'm using authorized at once.
I have lots of iTunes songs I bought, but don't seem to recall to authorize the machines, so they just sit around with tracks they can't play until I get a new iPod, and then have all sorts of troubles.
But its problably just you and I with that problem, since its such a perfect storm of improbability that causes the dilemma.
-
Inside Apple's iPhone
Well if I go to Amazon and the server doens't respond, I might shop around and enventually place an order elsewhere. However, if I'm cashing in an iTunes gift card, and the iTS doesn't respond, I'm going to try it again later until I get my $20 of music.
Note that Apple's brick and mortar stores are so busy right now that they frequently use roaming people with WinCE handhelds to place credit card orders. I expected the Apple Store to be slowing down after the holidays, but it was crazy busy with people buying stuff. Apparently, the people who got non-iPods took them back and set out to buy an iPod.
-
Inside Apple's iPhone
Which is why Creative is losing huge amounts of money. While DIVX might be popular among people who don't pay for things, it's not something that NORMAL people use. And by that I mean people who don't sit on slashdot all day wondering why everyone else isn't building robots.
Creative stuff is generally big and bulky - not exactly the mass market stylish and simple product that Apple's been churning out with the iPod.
--
Inside Apple's iPhone
Oops! You edited out the bits of the CNET article that were relevant to set up a strawman of your own. I didn't misinterpret anything Kanellos wrote; I didn't "interpret" anything, I just pointed out how aburd it all was.
The article and website isn't a revenue creator, its shared ideas that I've found that I thought were interesting. Yahoo ads bring in less than a couple dollars in a day of high traffic, and only help to cover part of the hosting expense. Amazon and iTS ads don't earn anything unless people buy things.
But enough about me. What's your motivation for posting things you know are a lie in an effort to discredit obvious facts? Shill, troll, astroturf, or just bitter?