Tokyo Macworld Canceled 68
jlechem writes "Wired is running a story about Apple pulling out of Macworld Tokyo. It seems they decided to pull out quietly several months ago. And once they left all the major Apple Developers followed, and IDG canceled the show due to 'lack of exhibitor interest.' Macworld Tokyo is the biggest gathering of Mac fans in the world. Although the three-day show draws about half the exhibitors of U.S. shows, it attracts double the number of visitors, about 190,000. Traditionally held in March, the Tokyo show has run for the last 12 years. After their threat to ditch Macworld Boston, you have to wonder why Apple is pulling out of these expos?"
Worrying (Score:1, Redundant)
Extremely worring news on one front, maybe Apple just an't comming up with the new goods to show off...
Problem being, why an't they developing anything new?
we call it predictability (Score:3, Insightful)
we'll miss em if they go. maybe now they can finish that port of OS X for the Hammer
Re:we call it predictability (Score:1)
Re:we call it predictability (Score:1)
however, the company that does the shows IDG is having problems right now, there could be more to this than simply not wanting to spend the money.
Re:we call it predictability (Score:3, Insightful)
People have come to expect something amazing every time when in fact no company can produce that many truly innovative gee-whiz-bang new products several times a year, every year, for years on end while meeting development deadlines and maintaining the secrecy needed to keep expectations going till the moment of revelation. People have been expecting too much - a revamped Newton, a move to AMD procs, an iPhone, an iMac 2 that will clean the house, give you mind blowing sex, cure cancer, teach the kids, and fit you into a size 3.
And please tell me the OS X on Hammer line was a joke. That rumor has been completely discredited 20 times over. The most likely processor move is to the IBM proc because it offers much easier compatibility with existing software.
Re:we call it predictability (Score:1)
"Its more appropriate to say
Re:we call it predictability (Score:1)
my comment about hammer is not a joke. yes the rumor has been discredited, blah blah blah. However, i would love to see apple make versions for both, and do something intelligent like selling a chipset, motherboard, OS X disk combo.
it would blow m$ out of the water! i have seen Win die hard sysadmins go nutz over OS X. seriously, i'm helping one right now with his new mac, die hard!
hammer/mac systems oem would be great too. finally some choices for the finest os around. please apple please.
oh, almost forgot to mention. os x = darwin = bsd = portable. yes, developers would have to recompile for different architecture, but nothing as difficult as old school porting excercises.
Re:we call it predictability (Score:1)
Moving to x86 or even worse, maintaining a dual platform on PPCs and x86s, would require as great a mov on the part of developers as it would the move to OS X. Major vendors are just now getting in the groove of OS X. Some, such as Quark, haven't made the move yet.
Classic mode on x86 wouldn't exist. Programs would require more than a recompile. Emulation won't do. Apps, the OS, and Aqua have been optimized to take advantage of Altivec and other PPC specialties. Those portions would require rewriting.
Apple is a total computer company. They're product isn't just the OS, nor is it just a computer company. They owe much of their success to the "It just works" idea. It just works because they maintain control over hardware in their systems. As soon as you start supplying a combo deal, people will add inferior components trying to save money and the Apple name looses some credibility and value.
And OS X != Darwin. Darwin is an open source OS that runs well on PPC procs and is workable on x86. OS X is Darwin, Aqua, and a set of apps, most of which would have to be rewritten and recompiled for x86.
MS will not get blown out of the water by a "simple" move to Hammer. Apple isn't trying to kill MS. I think it was in Wired or an essay by Cringely - Jobs just wants to run a successful company, make plenty of money, and be a thorn in Gates' side. Hating/Competing/Crushing MS takes too much energy, and it isn't worth it. Jobs has the satisfaction of knowing that people love his product, and that annoys Gates.
Great! (Score:1)
Re:It takes ignorance to run a mac (Score:2)
Because, from stability to UI consistency, OS X is a better value, even at $100. You might not want or need those things, but a lot of people do.
"thats like prefering a toaster over a microwave because the toaster is easier."
Please. I bought a Mac with OS X because I got the benefits of Unix, without the headaches of other types of Unices, not, as you would have us believe, because I'm a "moron". And besides, what's wrong with "easy"? That's who the switch ads are targeting; those who want ease of use. OS X sells itself to Unix fans.
Re:It takes ignorance to run a mac (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:It takes ignorance to run a mac (Score:2)
puma is the name of os x 10.3, i believe.
Re:It takes ignorance to run a mac (Score:1)
Re:It takes ignorance to run a mac (Score:1)
However, Apple's behavior towards the MacWorld expos trouble me since I live near Boston. A poorly attended or cancelled convention of this proportion hurts the local economy. That's something nobody can ignore.
Re:It takes ignorance to run a mac (Score:3, Interesting)
And a poorly attended/cancelled expo isn't BAD for the economy, it's just not AS GOOD as a burgenoning expo. That's like saying not getting a bonus for christmas is BAD for your wallet, it's not bad, it's just not good.
Re:It takes ignorance to run a mac (Score:1)
Re:It takes ignorance to run a mac (Score:4, Insightful)
It takes ignorance to run a mac, it really does... they are (as compared to a PC): 1.) Expensive 2.) Perform poorer @ most things 3.) Not upgradable 4.) Software is becoming more and more limited ..
I can't believe I'm responding to such an incredibly blatant troll. Oh, well, here's the answers to your questions anyway: 1.) Yes, Macs are more expensive. If you buy your computers based on price alone, don't get one. 2.) Their CPUs are currently slower than x86 CPUs, also. That has absolutely jack to do with being "better" at "most things" (my poor slow G4 probably burns DVDs at 1.15x the rate your PC does ... big deal). 3.) Pure crap, what is "unexpandable" about PCI and AGP slots, SDRAM, FireWire/USB/Bluetooth and CPU upgrade cards? Where are you getting your "information?" 4.) The software is actually becoming less and less limited. MacOS X runs basically everything Linux does ... plus lots of real-world apps that Linux doesn't, like Office, Photoshop, games, etc. Of course Macs have less software available than Windows ... but I seem to be doing fine without Bonzi Buddy and Deer Hunter 3, thank you.
i fail to see the reason to be running a mac? Am i alone here?
Evidently you are. Seriously, if you don't see the advantage in running a version of Unix with a REAL usable interface and major commercial application support, then don't worry about it, they're not for you. But the rest of us are doing just fine with ours.
Re:It takes ignorance to run a mac (Score:1)
Re:It takes ignorance to run a mac (Score:2)
2) Like......... raw data crunching? yeah, you're right. But some of use don't do raw data 24/7.
3) You mean like my old Powermac 5400/180, originaly speced at 180Mhz pre-G3 processor (I forget the number), I think maybe 64k cache, 16 MB of memory and a 1.5 gig HD. Now it's speced at 300 Mhz G3, 256k cache, 142 MB RAM, 40 Gig HD. ANd this was one of the education macs which weren't supposed to be upgradeable at all. Or perhaps you're reffering to the G4 towers? The ones with teh PCI slots, open drive bays, plenty of room for memory? Yep, no upgrades to be found there.
4) Hmmm, right bringing more developers over to your platform limits the hardware.
maybe it is the folks at IDG? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:maybe it is the folks at IDG? (Score:1)
Maybe it's the Internet obviating the need for a place to showcase new technology!
I was at Comdex this year. Very sparse on Wednesday--and the locals were not liking the downturn in business. AAMOF, the most encircled booth on the floor was the metallic flashlight booth. Even the tap dancers on the way into the Microsoft "wing" had more people standing in front of it than any other display booth I saw that day.
I had to reflect on the fact that nothing interesting was released that hadn't already been seen on the Internet. Nothing. Apple only needs one big media blitz a year (and it's easier to have a lot to show once a year than many times a year). . .so why waste the millions it would cost?
killing hardware sales (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:killing hardware sales (Score:4, Interesting)
To add to this, Macworld are expensive to Apple. The booths, the personnel, their lodging, the equipment--Apple would rather shave some costs and attend only one Macworld--the one in San Francisco, where its closer to the corporate office and spends less to attend.
New York is a big expense as well, but with an Apple Store in place (and the largest of them all), having a Macworld there would generate business and home sales, cushioning the expense blow of attending Macworld there. That's probably why Apple became angry at returning to a smaller venue such as Boston.
Re:killing hardware sales (Score:2, Interesting)
maybe mac has decided that more switchers ads and less macworlds is the right path for the times.
anyway, now IDG can get onto planning WinWorld, if only they could figure a way to make the escalators crash and the elevators freeze . . . . .. .
Re:killing hardware sales (Score:1, Interesting)
I think the real issue at Apple is the emmense cost of going to these shows. In this economy I am sure that Apple is looking for any way to cut costs. I would rather Apple put the money into R&D and marketing than a Mac only trade show. Going to MacWorld is preaching to the choir. They need to be enticing new people over to the platform.
the origional iMac was not a MW release (Score:2)
While it is true that people seem to assume *anything* can be updated at MW (unless it just was), the Origional Rev A Bondi iMac 233mghz was announced August 15th 1998. I think the iMac might be the biggest thing Apple released since 1984. Granted the iMac took nearly everyone by suprise, so it was not the usual "i'm not buying an ibook now if they might upgrade them next month", but you get my point.
Apple very publically said a year or so ago that they are not going to save all big hardware releases for 2or 3 Expos a year (Tokyo has been the release for some big products). The last two years they used NYC as more of a hands on intro to 10.1 and 10.2 as much as a place to upgrade some of the existing hardware. NYC has not had a "knock their sock off" release since the Cube a few years back. yes, they did not sell well, but it was a huge crowd magnet.
All that being said i find it unfortunate that MW Tokyo is bagged for 2003. The turnout is not that of the US expos, but they Mac users in Japan are generally quite dedicated. I always heard Jobs loved to go into Sony's home territory and and be able to win over a crowd (like releasing the TiBook there). The show also is usually used by a lot of 3rd parties to show off some cool hardware. Everything from the newest Epson printers (that the USA will not see for months) to the clear iBook modification parts. oh well..... maybe it'll be back for 2004.
Allow me... (Score:4, Funny)
was
Although the three-day show draws about half the exhibitors of U.S. shows,
drew
it attracts double the number of visitors, about 190,000.
attracted
The Problem with Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's why in one word: Motorola
What Apple should have done is made one big fancy switch all at once. In other words, they should have gone with a new processor producer *before* they started coding OS X. That way, software producers who would have had to re-write the code for the new OS anyway could also take into account the new processor architecture.
Right now, unless someone else (likely IBM, but when?) can produce the PPC chips, Apple is stuck with Motorla and their craptastic ability to produce new, faster processors. Sure, OS X screams on a dual 1.25 GHz system compared to the 450 MHz I'm running right now, but Windows 2000 also screams on a 3.0 GHz system when compared to a 1 GHz system.
The point is, Apple can't switch to a new architecture now as it would mean software producers would have to once more re-write software they just re-wrote for OS X, and those who haven't gotten that far yet would be back to square one. This is, in short, a problem.
Furthermore, Apple's own 'Think Different' ideaology might be turning around to bite them in the ass. Here they are, presenting this new OS to Windows users and saying "Switch. We're different. And better. And we'll give you cool stuff." But people have short attention spans. If Apple doesn't put out new/cool stuff on a really regular basis, people wonder if Apple is still inovating.
I don't think any what I just wrote is clear. Sigh...
exactly the opposite is true (Score:2, Interesting)
Once OS X is fully adopted, Apple could release hardware based on another architecture with no Classic support. App vendors would need to recompile Carbon/Cocoa apps into "fat" binaries.
But who knows...if Intel continues to push Pentium performance, maybe a G4 emulator could smooth the transition, like the 68K emulator that shipped with the first PPC macs.
Re:exactly the opposite is true (Score:2, Interesting)
Had Apple simply done a big, fancy switch, they could have included a G3/G4 emulator for running OS 9 / Classic apps. Anyone wishing to stick with OS 9 would stick with their current computer, or buy a new one and run things in emulation, which is no problem since Apple would have wanted (at the time, and now *definately* does) to phase out Classic anyway. In other words, Apple has no real reason to keep those people still wanting to run Classic happy.
Anyone wishing to run the new operating system would have to buy a new system as well - this would be true anyway since OS X requires a heftier computer to do it's thing.
I want to write more, but I have to run. More later, then.
Re:The Problem with Apple (Score:1, Informative)
Re:The Problem with Apple (Score:1)
Re:The Problem with Apple (Score:1)
So, no one would have upgraded to OSX. No developers would have hurried to carbonize applications. Macs would drop from 5% marketshare to 1%.
why pull out? (Score:5, Interesting)
They are cutting all unnecessary costs.
The internet is taking away from the importance of expo's, as are the Apple Stores.
Re:why pull out? (Score:3, Funny)
I KNEW switching to the Mach kernel would have a terrifying downside somewhere.
BlackBolt
Re:why pull out? (Score:4, Funny)
a grrl & her quadra [danamania.com]
Huge tradeshows are what's dying. (Score:4, Interesting)
Apple's quite generous with the hardware at these events, rivalling the amount of equipment found in the largest tradeshow booths.
This, and the fact that Comdex is on the skids (how's CeBit doing?), really just points to the fact that vendors everywhere, Apple included, are realizing that the best way to reach real customers is through smaller, targeted, developer-oriented events.
Re:Huge tradeshows are what's dying. (Score:1, Funny)
Developers! Developers! Developers!
Developers! Developers! Developers!
and so on...
Trade shows ending? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Trade shows ending? (Score:1)
This is why geeky things named with common words appear at the top of Google searches. Examples:
Tradeshows aren't all that... (Score:4, Interesting)
Cost! (Score:2)
<footnote>
Speaking of "times as they are", are times really that tough for everyone or are we being hood winked into missing raises and doing without when things aren't that bad? Maybe this isn't intentional, it could be that people have gone from being ultra liberal with spending to ultra conservative. Even in my company which has always been slow to spend, things have cut back. What's the real reason behind all this?
</footnote>
Re:Cost! (Score:1, Insightful)
MacWorlds cause problems (Score:4, Interesting)
Another reason why the expos are a hassle for Apple is people read all the rumor sites and expect ridiculous products (I've been waiting for a 2Ghz G5 for some time now.) to be released. When they aren't released, customers get pissed and blame Apple. It's a joke. One rumor site (I don't want to give them advertising.) once posted an article about a possible join effort between Apple and Lucent to produce a wireless product. The source? A Lucent commercial that shows people using Mac's. It's no wonder Apple lets their lawyers loose on these guys.
Now if only Mr. Google would help me find that darn article...
dont fret my pet (Score:1)
why there aren`t build AppleStore tokyo? (Score:1)