Text 1702, 117 rader
Skriven 2006-06-04 14:55:00 av Robert E Starr JR (2148.babylon5)
Ärende: Re: Atheists: America's m
=================================
  * * * This message was from Carl to rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.m * * *   
         * * * and has been forwarded to you by Lord Time * * *         
            -----------------------------------------------             

@MSGID: <HNmdnQoR869v3R7ZnZ2dnUVZ_tednZ2d@comcast.com>
@REPLY: <1148535437.681322.123970@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>

"Gregory Weston" <uce@splook.com> wrote in message 
news:uce-54DF73.14065004062006@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> In article <oO6dnfNuDIXNEhzZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> "Carl" <cengman7@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> As to Apple, it will be interesting to see what happens with the shift to
>> Intel.  SO far, every time Apple has shifted platforms  (680x0 to Power 
>> PC,
>> then to OSX etc) their market share has halved.  Now they're going into 
>> the
>> PC hardware world and they've always considered themselves more of a
>> hardware company than software.  It will be very interesting to watch.
>
> Nits:
>
> 1) The major impact on Apple's market share was set in motion before the
> PPC by the way the company treated 3rd-party developers under John
> Sculley. Developers were driven away en masse for quite a long time,
> which tended to restrict the quantity and variety of software which,
> which impacted the number of new and repeat customers.

Never having been an Apple developer I have no reason to challenge that.


>
> 2) Apple's market share has not halved with/since the advent of OS X.

It had been reported as having done so by InfoWorld.  My understanding
is that it's at about 3% now.  I'm certainly open to better figures.

>
> 3) They're not really particularly in "the PC hardware world"
> significantly more than they were 6 months ago.

Actually, I think they are because of their using Intel.  It means that they
can dual boot to an Intel box.   Intel's not just chips; it's motherboards,
graphics chips, network chips, etc.

Apple will have a harder time adding permium proces to commodity
hardware.

>> It would be a lot of fun if Apple opened it's GUI to Linux and started
>> selling the OS and not caring about the hardware.
>
> And then Apple would die.
>
> Actually that statement shows a common, but fundamental, lack of
> understanding about what the Mac OS is, what it offers, and why people
> choose to use it. The user benefits of a consistent GUI have certainly
> helped them at least stay afloat during the roughest patches, but simply
> transplanting the Mac OS UI to a commodity Linux isn't that simple and
> wouldn't really make Linux into a Mac.

Part of the benefits of a consistant UI have come at the expense of too 
tightly controlling the platform.  It's a trade-off.  The more you close the 
hardware and software, the easier it is to make things consistent.  On the 
other hand, it's also contributed to keeping the Mac a niche machine too.

I have a lot of respect for Apple, but I don't think Apple's Mac will 
survive going in the direction they are.

I also don't think that Apple has to turn a Linux box into a full Mac.

Move the bulk of the GUI to Linux and you do several things:

1) Significantly increase the number of developers writing to the API.

    This is HUGE.  The developer community has always been pretty small
    (comparatively) and except for a few niche areas, development for the
    Mac was always done last (if at all).  This could change that.

2) Significantly increase the number of users that are exposed to ane become 
accustomed to the GUI.

3) Provide a mechanism by which users of commodity system might consider a 
Mac an upgrade to the Linux experience.

4) Make Apple the rallying point (once again) for the anti-MS brigade.

5) I'm not suggesting that Apple give away the GUI for free, so it would 
generate a revenue stream for the Mac
    platform.  Right now the iPod is keeping Apple afloat.

6) Boost the number of people that don't use Windows.   Windows continues to 
sell even when MS takes way too may years between releases because it's got 
the momentum and is considered the "obvious" choice.  Take that mantle away 
(or put it in doubt) makes people look closer at alternatives.


If (as you say) I continue to have a common, fundamental lack of 
understanding of the Mac platform, that proves my point.  They're a niche 
player that has a fairly low visibility except among the already converted. 
Apple needs to find a way to get its wares out to more people.  The way 
Apple has gone about it for the last decade has been pretty bad.  They've 
lost the mantle of being the MS alternative (which is now Linux), they've 
lost the momentum they once had.  They've lost developers.  They've lost the 
"buzz."

They can (and many could argue have) develope the best OS in the world....at 
the rate things are going it will be a great asterisk on the Wiki page that 
contains the history of Apple before they got out the PC business and 
concentrated on iPod & music.  The Next OS was also arguably  the best when 
it was released.  It didn't survive by itself either.

Carl

-- What do I know?
                                            
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)