Text 1755, 196 rader
Skriven 2006-06-04 23:10:00 av Robert E Starr JR (2200.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: <_sydnfe2RtasEh7ZnZ2dnUVZ_oednZ2d@comcast.com>
@REPLY: <1148535437.681322.123970@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>

"Gregory Weston" <uce@splook.com> wrote in message 
news:uce-A6992B.21281304062006@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> In article <HNmdnQoR869v3R7ZnZ2dnUVZ_tednZ2d@comcast.com>,
> "Carl" <cengman7@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "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.
>
> It's something that a lot of people have forgotten, or missed where the
> pebbles came from that resulted in all those ripples (several of which
> you've noted in your post).
>
>
>> > 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.
>
> Wrong end. It was under 4% when OS X shipped. It was under 3% before the
> iMac debuted. So about 3% now isn't halving.

I stand corrected, and I am now more critical of Infoworld. :)

> On the other hand, though,  keep in mind that market share isn't a
> particularly meaningful number to anyone who doesn't have a direct
> financial stake in a vendor.

I disagree. I think that if Apple had a 30% share, a lot of people that
wouldn't consider buying an Apple now because it's a niche box would
consider it because it would be more mainstream.

Justr my opinion.

<snip>

>
>> 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.
>
> And also a false win. A majority of the API (both in size and
> significance) has nothing to do with the GUI. Most of the low-level
> functional stuff is already available to pretty much anyone who uses gcc
> and there's a good chunk of high-level non-UI stuff that relies on
> supporting technology not currently part of any Linux distribution.

Even if a lot of the API has little to do with the GUI, a GUI is what the 
user
sees and so is often the most important part of the app.  Often it is a
disproportionately large part of the app.

Witness how badly MS did when trying to move their apps to the
Mac platform.  It makes a huge difference in the qwuality of an app
if the developers are coding for a specific GUI/API and are familiar
with it.


>
>> The developer community has always been pretty small (comparatively)
>
> .... since Sculley (Seriously. That man's attitude toward developers just
> as Windows was become a viable environment was, IMO, one of the biggest
> blunders in the history of the industry. It took Apple nearly a decade
> to get their developer base back to the same absolute numbers they had
> had before 1990, and they're closing in on a second decade without
> having regained the relative level of support they had.) ...
>
>> and except for a few niche areas, development for the
>> Mac was always done last (if at all).  This could change that.

Scully...coming from a soda pop background (I think it was Pepsi)
saw things as a traditional retail product.  That view was reinforced
by the Windows side of the industry at the time.

He was also trying to encourage Mac clones at the time, trying to
duplicate the growth that came with the PC clones.

>> 2) Significantly increase the number of users that are exposed to ane 
>> become
>> accustomed to the GUI.
>
> All griping about how it deviates from what they're used to. ;)

Derpends. I wouild think that current Apple users would stick with their 
Macs,
but Linux users would suddenly have a GUI that they can rally around.
Even if it wasn't identical to a Mac, it would be close and you'd have a 
bunch
of developers that were not only zealous over Linux, they's be zealous over 
the
GUI too.

>
>> 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.
>
> Honestly, I don't think that works. Choosing something for the reason
> that it's "not something else" isn't historically a particularly good
> fight.

I've made the argument before that hating MS is a stupid business plan.
The interesting thing is that Linux doesn't have a business plan because
it isn't really a business.

Still..whether they admit it or not, most Linux users are there because
they hate MS.  This seems like a ready to go market.

> Even worse when the "something" and the "something else" aren't
> the product but the producer. As a related example, consider the case of
> Be. They were a significant anti-establishment rallying point as they
> got off the ground, but many of the people that came to them weren't
> looking for "better than the Amiga/Mac/Windows" so much as they were
> looking for "the Amiga/Mac/Windows, just not from
> Commodore/Apple/Microsoft" (see last comment) which resulted in a
> constant dilution of and distraction from what initially had great
> potential.


Be was ill-advised from the start for a number of reasons.  Wonderful
case study for a business class.

>
>> 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.
>
> A misconception. A common one, but no more correct for being so. Right
> now, as it has been for about 15 years, the Mac hardware is keeping
> Apple afloat. The iPod (and iTunes music store) are helping to keep
> Apple in the mainstream consciousness, but are certainly not the
> majority contribution to their fiscal status.
>

Ok...that's the common perception from the trade magazines.
If you're right (and I have no reason to doubt you), the magazines
are doing significant damage to Apple by reporting it that way.


It *might* be the case that without the iPod, Apple's lack of growth
would lead to very bad things for Apple's stock and the trades are
reporting it from that view.  Just a guess though.







> G
>
> -- 
> What I write is what I mean. I request that anyone who decides to respond
> please refrain from "disagreeing" with something I didn't write in the 
> first
> place.
>
                      
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)