Apple Macworld Snub a "negotiating tactic" 66
Nick dePlume writes "Apple Computer's decision to not endorse the move of the east coast Macworld Expo convention from New York to Boston is a "negotiating tactic," albeit a shockingly public one, reports Think Secret. Sources believe Apple had firmly endorsed the move, which was announced today."
Excuse to cut down to one MacWorld/year? (Score:5, Interesting)
And they seized on this as an excuse.
Still seems mystifying and lame, though.
I bought my first Mac in February 1984 (OK, I was a late adopter) and have attended EVERY Boston MacWorld. Why does Steve want to break my heart?
Re:Excuse to cut down to one MacWorld/year? (Score:2, Offtopic)
In my experience, NT 4 was neither more stable nor faster. Especially on the hardware back in those days.
OS 7 was rather stable, OS 8 was extremely stable.
What was unstable was the extensions that people would add to the OS. If you didn't do that, you almost never saw crashes-- and even then you only saw crashes from poorly written apps.
A OS 8 machine, unpatched, running quality apps, would never crash. Giving it less issues than NT 4. (Which is not to say that NT 4 wasn't a big improvement for MS)
Re:Excuse to cut down to one MacWorld/year? (Score:1, Funny)
Run, Forrest, Run!!!
Re:Excuse to cut down to one MacWorld/year? (Score:2, Offtopic)
7.5 was bad, real bad, and 7.5.1, 7.5.2, 7.5.3, "buster", "son of buster," etc. were not much better.
8 and 9 have been OK.
My own experience is that stability differences between unprotected memory/cooperative multitasking systems and protected memory/preemptive multitasking systems are MUCH LESS than they ought to be. I won't go quite to far as to call protect memory/preemptive multitasking "snake oil," but software quality, third-party attention to detail, and SQA are obviously a much bigger factor than the kind of technology used.
My experience is also that anyone who claims BIG differences in stability between Macs and Windows systems is grinding an axe.
Actually, when the Mac first came out, I thought its instability compared to a PC running MS-DOS might kill it. But, fortunately, Windows came out and equalized the situation.
Let's define "crash" to mean "any situation which leads you decide to reboot the machine." That's to get away from silly language games ("Oh, that wasn't a CRASH, it was a "kernet panic.") ("Oh, yes I see that when you click on a window it take fifteen seconds to bring it to the top, but NT is STILL RUNNING). By that definition:
On a "sweet" system--one with a fast processor, lots of memory, and reasonably good luck about the combination of software, hardware, drivers, etc. I find that OS 9 and Windows 98 can be fairly stable--let's say "several" crashes a week. OS X and Win 2K are better, but not THAT much better. In my personal experience they crash several times per month. Now please don't get on my case about "that's not NT's fault, you must have some bad third-party driver." This is my actual experience USING the system.
The only situation in which I see a HUGE difference is doing software development, where I commit lots of gross errors all the time. In THAT specialized situation, yes, OS X or NT is a godsend, and OS 7-8-9 or WIndows 95-98 are a pain.
It reminds me a little of 1939. (Score:4, Interesting)
Regardless, no doubt Apple need the break, with their losses this quarter. Yeah, Boston is cheaper, and purportedly Apple had agreed to it, so why're they getting fussed about NYC, which would be more expensive?
To negotiate a lower floor price in Boston? Well, good. Seems shrewdness on Apples part is apt, imnsho.
Of course, the *real* question that needs to be answered is which city (Boston or New York) has the best security
Re:It reminds me a little of 1939. (Score:1)
Re:It reminds me a little of 1939. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:It reminds me a little of 1939. (Score:2)
No the loss is not that big a deal, and they are profitable for the year, but that doesn't mean that they don't have to watch their money.
A 250K here, 250k there and pretty soon it adds up to real money.
I think apple wants/needs to make Macworld a profit center, and until that happens things are going to be tough-- there's no reason they should be spending any money, net, on macworld. It should at least be free to them, if not something they derive a couple million in profit from.
Re:It reminds me a little of 1939. (Score:1)
Or they are using software that don't utilize altivec. (Yes I did some benchmark on software I use, and the 1GHZ G4 lost to my Athlon XP2000). Still looking forward to that 970 however
Re:It reminds me a little of 1939. (Score:2)
Nope, this is the case for regular FP operations as well as integer work.
Trivial code, that isn't CPU intensive anyway, however, will run faster on a higher clock rate CPU, but it isn't doing much work anyway.
Re:It reminds me a little of 1939. (Score:1)
>Trivial code, that isn't CPU intensive anyway, >however, will run faster on a higher clock rate
>CPU, but it isn't doing much work anyway.
???? What kind of non cpu intensive task will run faster on a cpu with a higher clock?? That don't make any sense. Either it is cpu/memory bound in which case the fastes cpu system will finish or it is io bound(Harddisk,modem,network) in which case the clock of the cpu don't matter.
Why you don't want to come to Boston (Score:5, Funny)
A perplexing one at that. (Score:5, Informative)
No doubt people will claim that this is Steve Jobs being mercurial.
But to be honest, I'm surprised-- I would think Apple would welcome the move to Boston, especially given that it is supposed to make the show cheaper for exhibiters. I don't really think that Apple has a real strategic advantage of having MacWorld in NYC-- after all Boston is less than a days drive away, and is also a big hub of computing types.
Furthermore, if what they really want is to be in NYC, why threaten to boycott NYC 2003?
One thing thats perplexed me is that Think Secret talks about a press release from Apple, but I have not been able to find it.
Is this really not a public issue- and merely something thats gone on in the back rooms of negotiating that someone (possible IDG) decided to make public to make Apple look bad? OR was I just poor at finding the release from Apple? A reference to Apple actual statement would be valuable (think secret mentions it but doesn't link to it.)
To be honest, one thing thats odd about the situation is that I would expect the show to be apples show-- not Macworlds. Or put another way, this is the kind of thing that Apple would create themselves and then hire a company like IDG to manage for them-- rather than something that Apple will likely want to have owned (and the profits going to) an outside entity (Which I believe is the people behind the Macworld magazine.)
Since Apple is a niche market, what they may really want is their own show-- or enough control that this show serves their marketing needs. It doesn't seem like it would be viable to have two major competing shows.
Furthermore, these shows are really a profitable thing, even after paying the convention center and the union guys, the organizers clear a lot of cash. And they are making that cash based on the fact that Apple will have major announcements-- and indirectly, companies will exhibit there because of Apple's presence.
When I was looking at MWSF 2003 booth space, it looked like not much of the show had sold out, so the recession may well be changing the economics of the situation.
This may be the beginning of a reshuffling that has the shows moved to different times of the year (Possibly fall and spring) to better suit sales cycles (the christmas rush is more important than back to school, so MW in the summer may be bad timing.) We may end up with Macworld going away and Apple Expos replacing it... its not clear whether that would be better or worse.
Apple runs an excellent show for WWDC, but then, that's a much smaller affair.
Straw man. (Score:4, Insightful)
I'd bet NYC 2003 is a strawman. What they want (and what ThinkSecret seem to imply) is that what Apple *want* to do is go back to Boston, but at much cheaper rates.
Playing bluff, in other words.
Of course, there's also the rampant possibility that I'm reading to much into this. A common sin.
Re:Straw man. (Score:5, Funny)
it's like charging a fee on god for having churches
Re:A perplexing one at that. (Score:2)
Hmmm, even if that were true, that would only make me exactly as gutless as you.
Pure stupidity in my opinion. (Score:4, Insightful)
The only thing I really hate about Apple is the extreme arrogance (and I am a switcher on the client side!).
If they don't want to go then to hell with them. I was considering paying the $1295 for the convention in January in SF but now... ah, who am I kidding, I need the write-off vacation.
Re:Pure stupidity in my opinion. (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't see the arrogance.
conventions are marketing events. Microsoft controls the windows conventions. Its not surprising that Apple would require that MacWorld to meet its needs.
After all, it is really apple's convention, its not a convention for apple-- the people who put on that show are profiting on apple's support, not the other way around.
Re:Pure stupidity in my opinion. (Score:3, Interesting)
Unfortunately, I think that is exactly the 'arrogant' attitude that is what holds apple back from being as successful as the IBM compatible PC industry.
Historically, they've always seem other people profiting off of 'their industy' as leeches, who owe their existance to apple. They crack down on diversity, especially when it's not apple authenticated, and while they seem to throw out technological innovation like no one knows, the fact that they keep it closed off from the rest of the world (in terms of use and development) kills them.
Apple _would_ owe its profit to the people at the show if they supported the _whole_ industry -- and then, they'd probably have a lot more profit.
Or, maybe not, but the mac industry as a whole would.
Re:Pure stupidity in my opinion. (Score:1)
Re:Pure stupidity in my opinion. (Score:1)
Wait... I thought we were discussing Apple declaring they weren't supporting the MacWorld expo? How exactly is that 'supporting their community'?
"It's not thier show, it isn't hosted by them, nor is the money made by them"
Right, Right, sorta. Apple does in fact get proceeds from the convention. But, if they don't show up, they won't make direct profit, I guess.
"I have no idea where your getting the idea that people profiting off them are leeches"
I didn't say that they were leeches, I said that Apple view them that way -- which your next statement:
"but lets look at it this way: You design a new method of transportation. We'll call it teleportation. We'll say this method is revolutionary because it function by allowing people to instanteously vanish from one place and appear in another. Now lets say that you have a friend, we'll call him John Cochran, and he comes along and steals your plans, rapes your machines of thier components and creates a new method of transportation called transporters that do the same thing. Would you be happy to bend over for him as he makes billions off of your hard work?"
seems to agree with -- because frankly, I don't think any of the other vendors at MacWorld are abusing Apple and raping their machines. They're part of the Mac Community too. But Apple just doesn't like any challenges to its authority, I guess.
"Apple doesn't owe its profit to the show, the show owes its profit to Apple."
And while perhaps correct, that's exactly the kind of arrogant attitude I'm complaining about.
"The motivating factor for me and about everybody else to go to the show over everything else is to view the keynote personally."
Well good, I'd hope you'd support your Mac Community regardless of whether Apple cares about it or not.
"No network hiccups, except when the person next to you has the audacity to cough and you miss by what measure the G4 outperforms [isert specs here] PC."
Well gee, that supported your argument, and didn't make you look like a biased mac-obsessor at all.
"The Mac industry you say? Well, you must mean the Apple consumer base, because there is no "Mac industry" just a Mac community"
EXACTLY! There is no Mac industry, because APPLE WANTS TO BE THE ONLY TOP DOG. There are ONLY consumers, no other vendors in the market for other hardware, or software -- yes, yes, I know there actually are, I'm trying to make a point on how Apple wants it.
As long as there is only an Apple consumer base, and NO Mac Industry, Macs will continue to hold less than 10% of the desktop market.
Re:Pure stupidity in my opinion. (Score:2, Insightful)
Perhaps a couple years down the line as the switch campaing becomes more succesful and the Palladium initiative is realized for what it is, then people will start flocking ot hte mac at a rate I doubt Apple can handle. Then they can relicense thier machines to others, because then they are guaranteed that in the long run that is a smart move. At this stage in the game, I just don't see it possible yet. maybe a couple years down the line. Personally I look forward ot the day I can make my own Mac with parts of my choosing in a gorgeous enclosure, just differnt enough that a mobo can't use it.
Oh and when is siad Apple supporting thier community I was referring to its continued Attendance since the conception of MacWorld, now f only they would give out free stuff other than just posters.
Re:Pure stupidity in my opinion. (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple does not crack down on diversity. That's just silly. The only examples put forth for that I've heard of were people who were blatently using apple copyrighted stuff.
They don't keep their innovation closed off from the rest of the world-- everyone is free to use it. Hell, they build it into the OS or give it away for free completely as they did with rendezvous.
Somehow you seem to be ignoring the fact that Macs and Windows boxes are not compatible, and they never will be. And it ain't apple's arrogance that makes this the case.
Re:Pure stupidity in my opinion. (Score:2)
Yeah, by modding down ACs and idiots who mark me as a foe I have found slashdot to be much more enjoyable.
Of course, periodically while responding to someone else I'll see an AC post like yours... funny. How pathetic your life must be to keep track of such shit.
Re:Pure stupidity in my opinion. (Score:1)
I was wondering exactly what you meant by this? I don't really understand a) what you _are_ implying is responsible for this (honest question) and b) where this turned into an "Apple is better" "No windows is better" argument.
Re:Pure stupidity in my opinion. (Score:2)
Apple isn't arrogant and clamping down on diversity-- it is not apple's fault that windows is not compatible with them. It is not apple making themselves incompatible with windows. It was windows not following the apple standard (preferably licensed.)
My first MacWorld experience (Score:5, Interesting)
Not only was Jobs there but virtually every hardware and software maker was represented. People were giving out free stuff (from throwaway brochures to full software packages) and there was generally lots of excitement.
I don't think those things will change by moving it back to Boston, but what could is the image of the show. No matter what anyone says, New York is the capital of commerece in the western world. All major US media is based there, even the Daily Show. Apple should WANT to be there, regardless of it being more expensive. Everything is more expensive there. It's New York.
Sadly, With IDG signing on for three years in NYC, Apple has but two options -
(1) Have their own AppleGalaxy in New York or
(2) Give in, prehaps with other consessions, and go to Bean Town
What does Apple have to gain from this? (Score:4, Interesting)
They intentionally told IDG they were behind the move then suddenly pulled the carpet out from under them?
Sure, New York is where the "scene" is, but the extra money that it's going to cost to keep it there (if Apple truly wants it there..who knows now) could be used towards development or better Apple products.
Is there an eclipse going on somewhere in the universe that only effects Marketing/PR people? Apple and MS seem to have gone mad in such respects.
Re:What does Apple have to gain from this? (Score:5, Insightful)
Isn't that all you need to know right there?
Sure, it's very possible Apple is just trying to gain some sort of leverage, either more space, discounts, more control, or even just to look like they are in control (yes, that matters to Apple). But while I think that is very possible, I wouldn't trust ThinkSecret.
Re:What does Apple have to gain from this? (Score:2, Insightful)
More Madness: Apple Banned From MWSF (Score:2)
MacCentral is quoting [macworld.com] the head of IDG saying that they may consider banning Apple from all expos! Either this is negotiating, or as you said there is a madness that affects marketing/PR people. There are even mayors and senators offering to fly to Cupertino to resolve this for Christ's sake!
offtopic, but, Apple vs MS (Score:1, Informative)
Apple did pick up the MS switch campain story. Strikes me as rather unusual Apple to tease others like that....
Re:offtopic, but, Apple vs MS (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:offtopic, but, Apple vs MS (Score:1)
Re:offtopic, but, Apple vs MS (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.redlightrunner.com/appleads.html
(notably, 1984, Lemmings, Crowd Control and y2k)
From this site
http://applemuseum.bott.org/sections/ads.html
Examples include snail and toasted bunnies. It also has the links for the other ads, but some of them appear to be broken.
Re:offtopic, but, Apple vs MS (Score:2)
Lemmings hits the nail right on the head.
Its fun to watch pc weanies sputter and stutter as they try to justify their following the crowd and ignoring reality.
But that ad really shows the mentality well.
Re:offtopic, but, Apple vs MS (Score:1)
Re:offtopic, but, Apple vs MS (Score:2)
The Big Apple Show (Score:5, Interesting)
So instead, Apple comes out with a really kick ass G4 and some cool app and people then whine and complain about how much Apple sucks. Apple sells maybe 20 new G4's.
Remember, the iPod was release with out a trade show. If fact, releasing products without any hyper fanfare of a Apple show seems to get people more excited and act more like consumers instead of critics.
So until the rumors die down, or until Apple becomes processor chip god, people are going to be disappointed with the keynotes and Apple.
Charlie Greco's Ego is to blame (Score:5, Interesting)
- MacWorld likely to return to Hub [boston.com]
- IDG World Expo's Charlie Greco Appointed to Massachusetts Lodging Association's Stamas Commission [yahoo.com]
- Shows wait for Hub move [businesstoday.com]
These are just a few articles that mention Greco's hometown-boy status. Particularly interesting is his appointment to the Stamas Commission. That seems like a pretty obvious ploy to get in with the political/tourism wonks of the city...and is probably not something he could have done had he been considered an "outsider".
This whole thing sounds to me like he didn't ask for Apple's opinion on the matter, or ignored Apple if/when they told him they would prefer the show stay in NYC. Personally, I hope the jerk gets burned by his own egotistical needs, rather than doing what's truly best for the Macintosh community...keeping MacWorld in the the financial and media capital of the States for at least a few more years.
Self promotion (Score:4, Insightful)
Conspiracy Theories (Score:1)
If both companies are actually OK with this thing, then I think it shows how little respect they have for the people who shell out their hard earned cash for their crap [applecrap.com]. They don't need to resort to public "bickering" to get us to understand anything. If they want 1 Macworld Expo in the US per year, so be it. But this whole cloak and dagger theory is just a load of crap [applecrap.com].