Apple to 'Switch' to Windows? 903
JFlex writes "PC Mags writer John C. Dvorak discusses the idea that Apple may dump OS X and 'switch' to running Windows in a recent column: "The idea that Apple would ditch its own OS for Microsoft Windows came to me from Yakov Epstein, a professor of psychology at Rutgers University, who wrote to me convinced that the process had already begun. I was amused, but after mulling over various coincidences, I'm convinced he may be right. This would be the most phenomenal turnabout in the history of desktop computing.""
Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:5, Insightful)
Ok, let's see what you've got...
Epstein made four observations. The first was that the Apple Switch ad campaign was over, and nobody switched.
Um. Wow, okay.
First of all, the Switch campaign was just an ad campaign. Ad campaigns come and go. Even successful ones. (Think "Be all you can be" or "Dude, yer gettin' a Dell!" And yes, those were both very successful campaigns.)
Also, Apple marketshare, unit sales, profits, and revenues are at their highest ever, and growing at a faster rate than, for example, Dell.
So, point 1, wrong.
The second was that the iPod lost its FireWire connector because the PC world was the new target audience.
First of all, this is completely irrelevant to any discussion about whether or not Apple might switch operating systems, which is what I thought we were talking about. FireWire, or the lack of it, has zero to do with Windows. Additionally, since all DV and HDV cameras and decks have FireWire and require its use as the primary - and usually only - means of video transport, FireWire isn't going anywhere [appleintelfaq.com] on Macs in general anytime soon. Further, since all Macs since the Power Mac G4 (AGP Graphics) support USB booting, and since all new Macs and PCs are universally guaranteed to have USB 2.0, going with USB on the iPod and eliminating additional support chipsets for things like FireWire - especially on a peripheral - seems prudent.
But I'm getting sidetracked by Dvorak, here, because the iPod not having FireWire is completely, utterly unrelated to any discussion about whether or not Apple might be switching to Windows.
Point 2, wrong. Actually, not even wrong...just utterly irrelevant.
Also, although the iPod was designed to get people to move to the Mac, this didn't happen.
Um, no. The iPod was designed to be a product that, you know, sold well. Which it, you know, did. Wildly so.
This whole "iPod was deisgned to sell Macs" business was a fantasy created by press and analysts who attribute that guess to Apple as if it were their sole intent. So we'll just ignore that the iPod is one of the most successful consumer products ever, and at the same time say it failed at some imaginary goal and purpose that there is no solid proof Apple ever created it for.
And on top of it all, most of the anecdotal evidence suggests that the "halo effect", as it were, actually works in some areas, at least marginally. To say nothing of the fact that, as I said before, Apple marketshare, unit sales, profits, and revenues are at their highest ever.
Point 3, wrong in both premise and substance.
And, of course, that Apple had switched to the Intel microprocessor.
Ahh, Dvorak must be feeling emboldened by his decade-plus of wrong predictions that Apple was on the verge of switching to Intel finally coming true.
There are many, many reasons Apple switched to Intel, all discussed ad nauseum elsewhere. "Switching to Windows" isn't one of them. Has Dvorak missed the amount of time, secrecy, and effort Apple has put into keeping it's options open for Mac OS X to run on alternate hardware platforms? Christ, Dvorak.
To say nothing of the fact that if Apple's secret purpose was to start a switch to Windows, you'd think they'd have at least made it possible to, oh, I don't know, RUN WINDOWS on the Intel-based Macs easily, which isn't possible at this time?
Point 4, wrong again. Well, at least Dvorak's consistent, if anything.
Dvorak is also actually missing the biggest play for Apple here: being able to run Windows and other x86 OSes in virtualization [zdnet.com]. That would be the holy grail for many academics, researchers, scientists, and other users, most of whom use Macs because they don't want to use Windows. With hardware partitio
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:5, Interesting)
Epstein made four observations. The first was that the Apple Switch ad campaign was over, and nobody switched.
I switched. 3 other people in my office switched. Whats he talking about?
Seriously, in December 2004 there were no Mac owners in my office, then I got an iBook (always wanted to play with OSX), and within a month two other people had purchased various Macs based on my purchase. Then 3 months ago someone else purchase a powerbook, again based on the experiences of us owners in the office.
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh, and I have to say that Entourage is aces.
-h-
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:5, Insightful)
Me too. I think the best response with Dvorak is just to ignore him, but unfortunately Slashdot keeps printing his rubbish.
Dvorak knows he's wrong. (Score:3, Insightful)
Sadly, I see just realized that this huge thread is in Slashdot's economic interest as well. Expect more of the same.
Re:Dvorak knows he's wrong. (Score:3, Interesting)
That's what I think every time I see a Dvorak article posted here. And the fact that they keep getting posted is my rationale for blocking ads here.
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:5, Insightful)
Keeps him employed, and keeps those ad sales people happy.
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:5, Funny)
Ouch.
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:5, Interesting)
Also... truly, I cannot imagine for even one moment why Apple would want to switch to running Windows. They have no windows software to sell; they have no real hardware advantage to bring to that market. Not even looks. There are plenty of cool looking Intel platforms out there from the nutzo to the trim and stylish and everywhere in between.
I can see why they might consider becoming a software only shop and stop making hardware — there are plenty of nice Intel-based platforms out there, and software margins are far better than hardware margins (speaking as a software vendor myself.) I'd be pretty happy running OSX on a Dell, for instance, and I think the number of people who might try OSX if they could legitimately install it on their PC is probably a very large number. But drop the software and keep the hardware? No. Don't think so. :)
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:3, Insightful)
While I totally agree, it's supremely unlikely. Why does Windows have so many problems and why does OSX have so few? It's not pisspoor or great coding (though it certainly could affect things) - it's the hardware. Hardware that Apple has to support is 100% controlled by t
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:3, Interesting)
I worked in the HPC area and got sent out to WWDC '04 because we were getting a 512 processor mac cluster (the ink was just drying on the PO when I flew out). I was a complete Mac newbie, but I was very impressed with everyt
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:3, Informative)
A powerbook, and an iPod followed about four months later when my wife got tired of me using 'her computer' as I told all my geek friends.
Kinda like getting caught riding a moped at first, but now it's not that big of a deal. I remember the first time I got Tomcat running on it, that shut up the guys that were mad at me for dumping Linux as a desktop client (2002 again mind you, i
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:3, Insightful)
I switched. 3 other people in my office switched. Whats he talking about?
I hate to add another "Me too" post but I also switched, and I work for a major PC manufacturer. By showing a few other people my PowerBook I have convinced four other people to switch (and get iPods, but that is another story). I am starting to think that Dvorak writes these articles so someone pays attention to what he is writing, like a small child who is not getting enough attention so s/he misbehaves to get the only type
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, the switch to Intel closes that gap significantly. In the notebook area, (and I guess you are talking about notebooks because the desktop G5's were introduced years ago), the gap may even be reversed now.
a sample of apple policies and experiences (Score:4, Interesting)
Sample of Apple customer policies/problems I've run into:
I won't even begin to get into the illegal price fixing and racketeering against independent dealers.
Re:a sample of apple policies and experiences (Score:5, Interesting)
My experiance on the phone with apple (given, I have applecare) was very positive. They have friendly, knowledgeable people who *speak english*. More knowledgeable than in the store I've found btw.
I had a similar problem with the screen (also had the infamous problem with the latch) on my 15inch alBook when I first got it, I called apple up and they repaired it free of charge. Sent me a box, sent it to them in a box, they sent it back fixed. Took a grand total of a week all told.
You can make apointments on their website in advance for the "genius bar" btw, no waiting on line at the store, just show up when your apointment time is. Never had any probs with this.
What parts? I have a mac laptop, not much I'm going to be upgrading on it. The stuff I will be, hard-disk and ram, are standard parts found anywhere.
As for repair, that's warranty/applecare is *for*. If you buy a dell, you want to get the three year warranty for extra $$$ too, or they'll do the same thing to you. That is unless you want to a) repair it yourself or b) go to a non-authorized repairer (both of which you can do with macs too).
While I havent gone through apple's repair training program, there's a hell of a lot of technical info on macs/osx on the web, much of it offered up free by Apple (and plenty not offered up by apple, but easily findable).
Lastly, how can it be illegal price-fixing, Apple does not have a monopoly on the computer market by a long shot. If you want a mac, you pay Apple's prices. If you just want a cheap computer, go somewhere else. You are not *entitled* to a cheap mac, whatever you may think.
~Anub
Re:a sample of apple policies and experiences (Score:5, Informative)
Let's recap your little tirade, or as you put it: "Sample of Apple customer policies/problems I've run into".
* No phone support after 90 days.
So, you wanna give me an example of one of the Big Three that offers a dial-a-geek phone service STANDARD after 90 days? Dell? Nope. Gateway? Not a chance. HP/Compaq? Not even an 800 number.
* If you post into the web forums about a problem Apple doesn't like to "discuss", expect it to be silently removed.
Okay. Quack conspiracy theory. What web forums? Macintouch? MacAddict? apple.com?
* 14 days, blah, blah...
This one's not even true. I received my iBook G4, which I'm typing this to you on, via UPS Ground. Took two weeks. The day I got it, the RAM wasn't seated correctly. Took it to my local Apple Store. Fixed on the premises, no charge. While the genius was looking it over, he said, "Wow, this is a bummer. Do you know that the new model just came out?" No, I didn't. He notified the store manager, and I walked out with the new model. No Charge.
* A guy that works at an Apple Store was less than knowledgeable and rude to you.
Really?? Rude to YOU!?? Why would ANYBODY be a jerk and lie about something like wobbly screens? Maybe you should take an etiquette class, but I digress.
* No reserving a spot via the web for the 'genius bar' unless you're a ProCare customer. At the local Apple store, that typically means a 30+ minute wait, and there's nowhere to sit.
Dude, I've been to Apple Stores on the East Coast, West Coast, and the Midwest. I've never seen an Apple Store that didn't have somewhere to sit. Besides which, you're in a MALL!! Sign in and go shopping.
* Various parts are not "covered" by Apple. Duckbills, feet, yada, yada...
This is really getting old. I've gotten two sets of replacement feet for my iBook (you know, the one I'm typing this to you on), mostly because the one time that I lost a foot, I flipped out and wanted LOTS of spares. Went to an Apple Store in Chicago. Got two sets of replacement feet. Still in the ServiceSource parts bag. For free. No paperwork. Really. Look, by now, either you're really just trolling, or people really don't like you very much. My heart goes out to you.
* Parts are not available. You're very certain. And you're mad about it..
Are you just impaired? You can't get parts for a Macintosh from Best Buy, but you can probably develop a relationship with your local independent Apple dealer (not an Apple Store). He'll probably sell you anything you need. I don't know what parts you'd need to buy that you couldn't purchase from a legitimate service channel.
I think you really need a vacation. And an AppleCare warranty.
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:5, Informative)
I bought an ibook used from my brother in law, when I had a problem I took it to the Apple store's genius bar and got excellent support and was never asked for a proof-of-purchase or warranty.
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:5, Funny)
He Claimed up until the Day they announced it that Apple will never do a Video Ipod.
Hell Dvorak did not even go to CES and yet he still wrote about it.
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:5, Funny)
No, no, that was Steve Jobs.
Dvorak has a reality distortion field too, but he's got it on backwards, so it only distorts reality for him, obviously.
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:3, Interesting)
To say nothing of the fact that if Apple's secret purpose was to start a switch to Windows, you'd think they'd have at least made it possible to, oh, I don't know, RUN WINDOWS on the Intel-based Macs easily, which isn't possible at this time?
Couldn't this be an intermediate step? Plus, they can get royalties from Microsoft when they release 'Windows Vista for Macintosh' with support for the hardware. That way they don't get stuck having to support BIOS and all that - they get to do it their way.
</d
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:5, Funny)
Dvorak: wrong, again. So stop readin him (Score:5, Insightful)
This is his job we're talking about. He's not some sort of tech-prophet. He's a writer. He sells words, regardless of their truth and even more so, regardless of his belief in their truth. The more people read his stuff, the more influence he gets, the more his predictions carry any weight, the more money he makes.
If 2 billion people read Dvorak and all disagreed, he wouldn't care. He'd still get paid. As it stands, since all he is doing is predicting, he can't be wrong in the traditional sense, because he can simply say "Just you wait. You'll see!" And there's nothing we can do about it....
On the internet we have a name for folks like him (Score:5, Insightful)
iPod FW Comparison (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:iPod FW Comparison (Score:3, Insightful)
My theory on the Firewire to USB switch has more to do with design. Unless Apple went to the small 4-pin firewire interface, the nano wouldn't be so small with a standard 6pin Firewire interface. To be able to achieve
Re:iPod FW Comparison (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:5, Interesting)
And at its core is seems to suppose that Apple WANTS to compete with Dell and Compaq. And that's what really strikes me as dumb: nobody in their right mind wants to compete in that arena. It's dead: it's low margin, it's totally saturated, and it's dominated by whoever can make the cheapest box and operate on the slimmest margins, with the most streamlined supply chain.
It's a WalMart market, in other words. That's like the absolute antithesis of everything Apple. Apple does fat profit margins on low-volume niche machines. They're a big fish in a small pond, and they do very well by it. Why they'd want to be the same small fish, in a much bigger, FAR more brutal pond, I cannot possibly understand.
IBM, one of the biggest, longest-time players in the PC arena, dumped it's PC division last year, and sold it to the Chinese. Why? Because margins were too low and demand wasn't strong enough to give them a healthy profit off of what they were selling: high quality laptops and desktops. People aren't willing to pay a premium for PCs anymore, unless you can really do something to distinguish yourself. Alienware manages to do it, but just barely (and you get a lot of people criticizing them for being expensive, too); Apple wouldn't be able to compete as just a hardware company in the commodity arena.
It's stupid to even think it. I knew Devorak was a publicity whore, but this is just retarded. Anyone who's ever taken a single business class in their life, or who even has a basic understanding of the PC market today, knows it would be a suicidal move.
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is that Apple's x86 platform is completely legacy free (BIOS/MBR/VGA) and uses all new platform technologies (EFI/GPT/UGA). Almost all current x86 OSes, and all current 32-bit versions of Windows, don't support these new technologies, effectively making it impossible to (easily) do anything with these OSes directly on the hardware. Now, this is going to change with Windows Vista, but still.
But your point is still well taken, and one that I made in my own response to which you replied.
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, if apple were going to switch to windows, I don't see why they wouldn't do the whole intel + microsoft transition instead of swtiching to intel and then to windows. This is silly. You can argue G5's were not much faster or even slower than x86 chips, but Mac OS X is clearly ahead of windows.
I wouldn't be surprised to see mac os x to change to another OS, though. Multiple core CPUs are there and the freebsd code injected in their mach kernel is know to have had some problems (just like freebsd 5.x) WRT. scalability. Is not that freebsd will never be fixed and that 6.x is not rocking already, but damn, solaris han been opensourced and it is one of the hottest events on the OS field in the latest years...I wouldn't be surprised that apple were considering to switch their freebsd code for solaris code
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:3, Insightful)
Dvorak explained (Score:5, Funny)
Publish it.
Get people talking about what a moron you are and how absurd your predictions are.
Collect your royalty fees and advertising revenue from all the page hits your absurdity got. In other words, Profit!
Here's my prediction: Underpants Gnomes to hire Dvorak as their new business consultant.
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:4, Interesting)
Hmm, so the server running Windows can't show me the article about why Apple is about to switch because of an ASP error. Irony or what?
Yeah, I know it's probably operator error, the irony would be stronger if it was ActiveX component can`t create object [google.se]
Re:correction to yours (Score:5, Informative)
The proper transport for DV has always been FireWire [wikipedia.org], and the only transport for HDV is FIreWire.
Sure, you can *make* specialty drivers and software, and capabilities in the camera at the other end, that can let you transport data any way you wish...after all, it's just bits.
But DV and FireWire are intertwined, at least for proper, full quality DV transport, and it will be that way for quite some time.
Re:correction to yours (Score:4, Insightful)
"Proper?" That's pretty shortsighted thinking there. One addition to the USB standard combined with a software driver release et voila! USB 2.0 would suddenly be the digital video transport of choice. All accomplished with no hardware changes to the vast majority of consumers' computers.
Here's the conversation at Ritz Photo to imagine: "Sure, I could sell you this digicam with firewire, but you'll need to have a firewire card installed into your computer. I also have this digicam that comes with USB, which your PC already has."
I'm not talking about cinematographers or television studios, or even the "prosumers" here. I'm talking about the 90% of camcorder buyers, Joe Sixpack out there buying a camcorder so he can tell people he's recording Junior's birthday, but really intends to shoot himself and the missus knockin' uglies.
To make lots of money, you build your hardware to sell lots of units at Best Buy. Firewire doesn't entice Joe Sixpack -- to him, it's a computer-geeky negative; especially when there's a known alternative.
Re:correction to yours (Score:3, Informative)
simply prove it with an Ipod. transfer via firewiare then again via usb2 usb2 sucks horribly compared to firewire.
Joe sixpack would be pissed if his camera was always dropping rames or simply stopping during a capture.
Re:correction to yours (Score:4, Informative)
USB 2.0 effective bandwidth: 320Mbps
Required bandwidth for DV: 59 Mbps
USB 2.0 bandwidth remaining: 261 Mbps
This isn't to say that transferring something over Firewire 800 isn't faster, just that USB is more than fast enough to handle DV capturing duties.
Re:correction to yours (Score:3, Informative)
The total bandwidth of the bus is 480 Mbps. Had I used that number, you would have a somewhat more legitimate gripe, although it would be misleading. As it is, you've said nothing.
Re:correction to yours (Score:4, Insightful)
Consumer: "How about that camera there? It's $499."
Salesperson: "Sure. It's not bad. But you have to be careful, it's USB."
C: "Oh
S: "USB is really for hooking up keyboards. If your computer isn't really fast, it'll drop frames, and suffer compression artifacts."
C: "Drop....frames?"
S: "It'll look bad."
C: "Oh. Well, that's not good. What else can I buy?"
S: "This one right here is only $699, and it comes with the card for your computer so you don't get dropped frames..."
Re:correction to yours (Score:3, Insightful)
Since the vast, vast, vast majority of PCs have USB connectors and don't have 1394 connectors guess what people who own these cameras use? Vast. And since it's DV, the quality is exactly the same over the USB connection as the 1394 one. Perhaps it's not "proper" since it's not an open standard and required drivers. Some users would still be better
Re:correction to yours (Score:4, Insightful)
Since USB 2.0 and firewire are roughly (within an order of magnitude) comparable in performance, why would a product developer choose to use the far more expensive firewire chipset? Especially when that presents difficulties breaking into the low-end PC market, where firewire is far from ubiquitous? That's even the reason we assume the iPod went to USB, was to break into the PC market.
I think firewire is the Betamax of local connectivity. It may be technically superior, more convenient, [insert other advantages here] but it never had the industry backing of USB. Firewire will still hang around for a while because of the large amount of legacy video hardware using it, but it's only going to be present on higher-end PCs, kind of like a technologist's version of a VTEC sticker on a ricer. It's already a niche player, and the niche is growing smaller instead of larger.
Re:correction to yours (Score:5, Informative)
The reason you don't find FireWire on many low end PC's is that it has not been a part of Intel's reference designs for motherboards, since Intel is not a member of the patent consortium that profits from FireWire. Now that Apple is a high-profile customer there is a chance this will change.
Re:correction to yours (Score:3, Informative)
The ones that don't have it listed probably almost all HAVE it, it's just such a standard feature that they don't bother giving it top billing anymore. It's practially assumed on anything that's MiniDV.
Many of them have, in addition to FireWire, USB connections, usually for downloading still pictures using proprietary software or drivers. It's what I would consider a completely useless feature, but it fills space on the
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:3, Funny)
Oh, wait. Maybe we weren't talking about communications tools, maybe we were talking about entertainment devices?
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Dvorak: wrong, again. (Score:3, Informative)
Not really. Sure, the basic specs say USB2 is 480 Mbps while 1394a is 400 Mbps, but when you add in protocol overhead and especially when you start adding stuff on the bus (1394 can do peer to peer, USB can't, 1394 also handles the bus better), the throughput is better for 1394a. And of course 1394b blows it out of the water (granted, there's still not much 1394b around).
Is it just my imagination... (Score:5, Funny)
Nahh... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Is it just my imagination... (Score:4, Insightful)
(As a side note, what's he on? It must be some good stuff for him to think this ever held sense.)
mod article -1, troll (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:mod article -1, troll (Score:3, Interesting)
Fact is, Apples have becoming more and more like standard PCs for the past decade at least. I see no reason not to expect this to continue - it seems to be working, and it almost certainly reduces their cost.
However, I don't see Apple switching to Windows after the big success of the unix-based OSX. Rather, I think it's more likely that over time OSX will become closer and closer to
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Well if I remember correctly.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Professor in psychology (Score:3, Funny)
If John C. Dvorak wants some attention.... (Score:4, Funny)
Totally lunatic... (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't think so (Score:5, Insightful)
Typical Dvorak thoughtlessness and ignorance (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally, I've always disliked the Mac look'n'feel, from the ugly Chicago fonts of old to the top-of-screen mighty morphin' menu.
But Mac OSX has always had something the PC hasn't -- stability. And that's because it's designed into the OS from the ground up. Windows has always felt like stability was "grafted in" somehow, and it's never been a comfortable fit.
Like most management, he gives no thought to stability or the correctness of the implementation. "As long as it's done, it's good enough." And it's that attitude that placed Windows exactly where it is, and why the Mac exists at all. It's not the "computer for the rest of us" -- it's the computer for the discerning crowd.
Yellow Journalist (Score:5, Interesting)
Every once in awhile, Dvorak manages to hit upon a sensationalist story that's true by pure accident. This then convinces his "fans" that he knows what he's talking about. People then latch onto that single instance of "being right" to accept his pathetically low rate of correct predictions.
Stop listening to this guy. Stop posting his articles. Ban PC Magazine for publishing this nonsense. Otherwise Slashdot becomes just as bad as Dvorak himself.
That would be awesome! (Score:3, Insightful)
It would also remove Apple as the "other" platform. Right now, if asked "do you only support Windows," most people will say, "Oh, yeah, we support Macs too, so we support everybody." With Mac down the tubes, there is another obvious "second" desktop platform.... (And, by support, I'm not so much interested in software as I am in Internet hookups, going places and being able to hook in my laptop to a display, etc.)
Too bad the whole thing is just one crack delusion.
-Rob
This is beyond stupid (Score:5, Interesting)
Yea right.... (Score:5, Insightful)
1. This would be a boon to Linux and a bust for Apple. $x % of people want to be different, and Apple would no longer be different. Or different enough. The GUI is not even close, nor the functionality when comparing the two OSs.
2. OS/X is doing great because of the BSD roots, which benefits from Linux (and vice versa). More hardware makers are opening up their drivers. They have momentum already. And their stock price already reflects this.
3. If it was only about "cool" hardware, Alienware would be larger and Dell's decidedly unsexy hardware would make them another mid-sized company. Cool helps, but there is no shortage of "cool" Wintel boxes, just of buyers.
Sorry, but Dvorak must be jonesing for the hits only slashdot/digg can provide by putting out a story like this. Nothing to see, move along...
That's funny (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm a windows developer by trade, I can't imagine going back. I cannot tell you how nice it is to go home to a computer that "just works", works intuitively, and elegantly after a long day FIGHTING with windows systems. Apple would lose a substantial portion of it's customer base and just become a novelty hardware dealer like alienware.
His key points here on how "no one switched/came over because of the ipod" are just wrong. It's true it wasn't a groundswell, but apple's PC marketshare is growing at about 19%. That's pretty fast, and it's better than it was a couple years back.
Just a reminder (Score:3, Informative)
This type of article is typical for Dvorak. Throw out a crazy statement with no justification, add some flame-bait ("fanatical users", "crazy"), and sit back smirking. In fact, I feel like we just went through this sort of thing [slashdot.org].
(Hey, even that old post mentioned a broken clock. I guess if you cross a broken clock with a broken record, you get Dvorak!)
Story restated for those who didn't RTFA (Score:5, Insightful)
John Dvorak continues to be the biggest idiot in the tech commentator business. He's been making stupid predictions since at least the '80s, and shows no sign of stopping now. Dvorak wishes he had 1/10th of Robert Cringely's wit and insight. We wish that Dvorak would start scorecarding himself the way that Cringely does, and give up so that he can do something else with his time.
Okay, the story summary goes: Apple and Jobs have recently spent multi-tens of millions developing an Intel version of their operating system so that they can use Intel chips. Soon, they will throw away all that development work, infrastructure work, and vendor relationship work and just use Windows, maybe putting a pretty little 'Mac-a-like' face on top of Windows, because, wait for it, because: Steve Jobs wants to be just like Dell and Compaq.
The ignorance beggars comprehension.
As a comparison, Robert Cringely's prediction: free versions of OS X 10.4/intel given away on bootable ipods so that windows users can try mac for free (once 10.5 comes out.)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
When did MSFT bail out Apple ??? (Score:5, Informative)
I believe that was partially due to a court settlement, but it was also a big PR stunt for both companies. It got the DOJ off of MSFT's back, it renewed faith in the Apple/Mac platform, and it was a hell of an advertisement for Mac Office 98 (believe it or not, MSFT makes good money from Mac Office).
Apple has *always* had a lot of money in the bank. $Billions ever since their IPO in the early 1980s. At their lowest point they still had over a billion dollars in cash in the bank. Compare this to Silicon Graphics who is now down to a few tens of millions in the bank, dwindling from about $500M about 5 years ago. Even if Apple would have continued bleeding money, they would have remained in business for a long time, even without this so-called MSFT bailout.
A Professor of Psychology said it..... (Score:3, Insightful)
Must be true then.
April already? (Score:3, Insightful)
x86 switch with OSX for nothing? (Score:5, Insightful)
Dvorak predicts world won't end (Score:5, Funny)
ASP error 0126 (Score:5, Funny)
Active Server Pages error 'ASP 0126'
/article2/0,1895,1923151,00.asp, line 377
/ 0,1460,a=171069,00.asp' was not found.
Are they absolutely sure they want to switch to Windows?Include file not found
The include file '/component/util_generate_article_discussion_info
Dvorak again proves he's an idiot (Score:3, Funny)
"But if Apple's saber-rattling was done to scare the community into backing off so it wouldn't discover the Windows stratagem, then the incident makes more sense."
What does rumors about a breakout music production box have to do with that? Hey Dvorak, there's rumors of a REAL video iPod...but BACK OFF, you might uncover their plan to switch over to Windows!
"This switch to Windows may have originally been planned for this year and may partly explain why Adobe and other high-end apps were not ported to the Apple x86 platform when it was announced in January." Yeah, Adobe is always first to have their apps completely ported. They had PPC support right away, and were the first with Altivec support. If Adobe hasn't updated their apps for OS X on Intel, then there must be a conspiracy.
"At Macworld, most observers said that these new Macs could indeed run Windows now."
And since then, it's been proven that it won't work out of the box. This has been pretty well known since Macworld, shouldn't Dvorak be a little more on top of things? Did he even attend Macworld, or did he ask the janitor emptying the garbage what looked neat?
"Another issue for Apple is that the Intel platform is wide open, unlike the closed proprietary system Apple once had full control over."
Where did Apple say they were going to support every piece of hardware, nowhere that I've seen. Hmmm, there's even restrictions in OS X to allow it to only run on sanctioned hardware (until it get's hacked). Looks like from OS X's commercial standpoint, they're still only need to support a closed system.
"As someone who believed that the Apple OS x86 could gravitate toward the PC rather than Windows toward the Mac, I have to be realistic. It boils down to the add-ons. Linux on the desktop never caught on because too many devices don't run on that OS. It takes only one favorite gizmo or program to stop a user from changing."
Oh where to begin. No one ever thought Windows would really run on a Mac, did they? What does that have to do with anything? Linux on the desktop, maybe it never caught on because it isn't installed in people computers when they got them. Maybe it's because there isn't a great consistent easy to use/configure/maintain/whatever desktop environment yet. Is there a point to these sentences?
"To preserve the Mac's slick cachet, there is no reason an executive software layer couldn't be fitted onto Windows to keep the Mac look and feel. Various tweaks could even improve the OS itself."
Right, let's skin Windows to look like OS X, that's useful. And I'm sure MS will give them all the code needed to tweak the OS. That's almost as funny as "Windows, as crappy as many believe it to be, actually thrives in this mishmash architecture."
Sure, I quoted half the article here, but only cuz I was too lazy to mock every single sentence.
Business Sense (Score:3, Insightful)
They switched to Intel because it made business sense and aligned with their underlying value proposition as a company.
Becoming another WinTel vendor, however, is completely antithetical to their business model.
Their business model is based on differentiating the experiential components of computer use. The CPU is not a mechanism by which they can provide differentiation; the OS is. OS X is generally considered a better user experience than any Windows version.
Why on earth would they switch?
They would not. The fact is, Dvorak makes money off getting people to click to that stupid page, and he does it by saying stupid things. If he had the first clue about Apple, he might actually have had a correct prediction about the company in the past decade. How many times has he proclaimed the company dead?
Dvorak - King of the Trolls (Score:4, Informative)
Just ignore the guy.
Why would they leave a profitable niche? (Score:3, Interesting)
I am no Apple fanboy. In fact I've never owned an Apple system in my life and never had any desire to own one. But if Apple keeps it up, I just might have to reconsider. If Apple could port their Cocoa shell to Linux and to offer a Linux based OS X, in addition to BSD based one, I will definitely switch, considering that their hardware is no longer lagging behind in performance. I may switch for some other reason as well -- for example, if for some reason Window has more Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) in it than OS X, and it really starts to step on my toes, then I will also switch.
Jobs is responsible for OS X in the first place (Score:3, Insightful)
Remember, years ago, Apple was developing a new OS, Copland (if I remember right), while being headed by Gil Amelio. Jobs was at NeXT, then. Then, Jobs comes back to Apple (billowing S-emblemed cape and all), ousts Amelio, throws out the bathwater AND the baby of the Copland project, and replaces it all with OS X, whose other parent besides BSD is NeXTStep.
So, replacing OS X with Windows would be tantamount to admitting that the heroic rescuscitation of Apple was, I dunno, not worth the effort or something.
*blink* (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean, seriously, haven't you guys learned that Dvorak is just a useless turd of the industry yet?
Wow, what a commitment! (Score:3, Informative)
Did Dvorak even try OS X? (Score:3, Insightful)
Several friends of mine switched. They like the good engineering and the 'Just works' thing. They have jobs to do on the computer and can't be bothered with whacky programs, virus etc. Their iPods Just Work (TM), and then they look to the Mac for a similar stable computing experience. The 'Halo' effect is certainly working, and they would have nothing to gain by becoming just another Windows platform.
Dvorak is off a tangent again, but this time it's so obvious, it reveals his lack of insight and reflection for anyone to see. It's just embarrasing. Someone point him to this thread, please :)
April Fools day is still six weeks away (Score:3, Interesting)
What a dumbass. First of all, he's about a month and a half early. (check the calendar)
He's basing this on the ideas of someone else who thinks that removing Firewire from iPods means anything about the operating system Apple will use, never mind that Windows supports FireWire just fine, it's just that PCs have been slow to adopt it. And Apple wants to switch to Windows because because they switched CPUs? You mean to one they had already been making sure for years that their own OS would run on? The one with a much faster update schedule than Microsoft could ever dream of?
Wow. He's one of the oldest and biggest trolls out there in the computer-related press, and he's still trolling. Remember, his target audience is PC Magazine, read by the kind of folks who don't want to believe that it's a mistake for them to still be using Windows. So he's just providing more comfort to them that mean ol' Apple won't take their tattered, filthy, stinking, virus-laden security blanket away. Hey, switch my keyboard already, I'm writing just like Dvorak!
Seems like Dvorak switched to LSD (Score:3, Insightful)
If you think Microsoft is going to private label a version of Windows for Apple, think again. If anyone could get a private label version of Windows, it would be Dell, and they can't get it. So certainly Apple could not.
Differentiation is the key (Score:4, Insightful)
1. Commodity products that you sell a lot of at rock bottom prices, and make your money on volume (think no name PCs, computer parts, GM and Ford cars,
2. Expensive unique products that you sell a few of at high prices, and make your money on margin (think Rolex, Ferrari, Porsche, Apple Mac,
Think if an inverted bell curve with price and quantity as the axes, and you get the idea. The former is on the far left, the latter is on the far right.
The best place to be is closer to the left as possible, or closer to the right as possible. Being in the middle is the toughest spot.
Apple is already differentiated and sought after. By going Windows, they will lose a lot:
1. Their hardware will be expensive, while the user interface will be the same as one from Dell or a no name PC.
2. They lose revenue by giving a piece of every sale of a PC to their arch-rival Microsoft.
3. They become undifferentiated, and compete with well established PC vendors (Dell,
4. Their user base will be pissed off and will defect to cheaper PCs, since they lose the most unique part of the deal: OS X.
There is nothing going for this line of thinking. Or rather lack of thinking
Re:I don't agree at all (Score:3, Funny)
Why is this front page news? And where's my "report as lame" button?
Re:I don't agree at all (Score:5, Interesting)
Side note: I went to an NT internals talk at USENIX back just before NT came out, and the guy from MS actually made it sound cool. It was the kind of OS that we'd all wanted to see someone do: a true successor to Unix and VMS. Sadly, it seems that they ran out of time, and instead of the elegant integration of Windows as a multi-subsystem, pluggable userspace suite, they slapped Win32 on top of the increasingly innaccurately named "microkernel" and hosed the whole thing. It was barely possible to tell, when released, that below the layers of caked-on mud was the heart of an interesting OS. I almost cried for as long as it took me ot go back to my little Slackware system.
But, I always remember that, and I always remember that SOMEONE COULD do that work still, and NT could become the heart of a truly interesting OS. Would Apple do it? Almost certainly not, but they COULD, and they are partly owned by MS (am I the only one who remembers that deal?)
Re:I don't agree at all (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I don't agree at all (Score:3, Informative)
Interesting idea. Especially as I'm typing this on a £400 Mac, which is roughly the same price as a low-end beige PC, about 1/4 the cost of a decent PC, yet smaller than "miniature" PCs costing £350 just for the case.
I know Apple have long had a reputation for huge profit margins (not as bad as some, *cough*Acorn*cough*), but they're not exactly demanding the proverbial arm+leg for computers at the moment.
As to why they'd
Re:I don't agree at all (Score:5, Insightful)
OS X is icing on the cake as far as I'm concerned. Try an iMac sometime, it's the future of computer design today.
Re:I don't agree at all (Score:3, Insightful)
True, if you feature match, Apple is competitive with Dell, Compaq and company. However, Dell doesn't make me buy all the features. You can strip a Dell to get a lower initial entry cost. Compare a Mac Mini ($499, no monitor) to the bottom of the line from Dell ($349, in
Re:I don't agree at all (Score:3, Informative)
You mean like the iPod is just an overpriced mp3 player? Hasn't stopped Apple from selling at huge margins based on a 'brand experience.' Same way Nike is just selling some fucking shoes.
But no, I doubt Apple is considering switching to Windows yet. But it will probably happen eventually in spite of what His Steveness wants. Look at the market position they find themselves in.
1. They are now, essentially, selling Dells in pret
Apple to 'Switch' to Windows? (Score:3, Funny)
Fudwatcher [blogspot.com]
Re:In other news... (Score:3, Funny)
Unfortunately they apparently aren't aware of the fact.
Re:Obligatory 'Family Guy' quote (Score:3, Funny)
Peter: No, I'm just exhausted 'cause I've been up all night drinking & dreaming up a dumber Apple story than finding a mac virus in the wild.