Top 10 Apple Flops 993
Kelly McNeill writes "Though Apple computer is known for some of the computing and technology industry's most notable innovations, its not as if the company hasn't also taken its lumps. Thomas Hormby submitted the following editorial contribution to osOpinion/osViews, which supplies us with his top ten list of Apple's (and some of associated partners) most significant flops throughout the company's history."
Cube? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Cube? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:"Apples == expensive" not a stereotype (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:"Apples == expensive" not a stereotype (Score:5, Insightful)
My dad got one for $999 with DVD burner, 80gb HD, etc.
Not only is this laptop sub-1000$, it specs closely to the Mac and is a much better deal than the 12" iBook. In fact, I bought one myself when I was shopping for a laptop and even w/ the Apple education discount, the Averatec was a better deal.
Re:Cube? (Score:4, Interesting)
Alone, or especially when combined with a still new and pricey LCD flat panel, it was perceived as very expensive for what it was - a miniaturized desktop with no slots.
Petite computers hadn't been around for long (I think Shuttle actually came after, maybe in fact inspired by the Cube) and in the US market, the Cube was a radical approach going against the "gas guzzling SUV paradigm," where most male computer buyers still equate bigger with better.
It also had a significant number of detractors in the press, who all gleefully reported the "cracks" (scratches on the lucite moulding for the first batch) as if the thing was going to split open like a lizard egg.
Still, they sold 100,000, created a loyal following of uber-elite modders, contributed R&D to the iMac G4 and Mac mini, and were responsible for the coolest (pun intended) press release signaling its termination: "Apple is putting the Cube on ice."
Not a total flop.
Powered by "PostNuke" (Score:3, Funny)
Do you want to play a game?
Re:Powered by "PostNuke" (Score:4, Informative)
"Though Apple computer is known for some of the computing and technology industry's most notable innovations, its not as if the company hasn't also taken its lumps. Thomas Hormby submitted the following editorial contribution to osOpinion/osViews, which supplies us with his top ten list of Apple's (and some of associated partners) most significant flops throughout the company's history."
--
Apple and its compatriots have been highly innovative. These companies have proven that even if their ideas are well implemented, they cannot always promote them correctly. Other times, a good idea is implemented poorly, and despite their best marketing effort, the product fails. I have compiled 10 of the most notable products released by Apple or its comrades that have failed.
Apple Pippin
Introduced under Spindler's rule as CEO, the Pippin should have won Apple a position in the console market, one Apple had yet to penetrate. Apple's goal was to make the Pippin a multimedia machine, capable of reading CD ROMs, surfing the internet and to play games.
Apple had decided to share the Pippin's source code with developers for a licensing fee. The developers had a lot more flexibility, and would be able to redesign the Pippin's software to make it attractive for any number of markets. However, Apple was able to recruit only 4500 developers willing to pay the licensing fee.
The operating system of the Pippin was based on the MacOS and with a PowerPC 603 running at 66 MHZ, the Pippin used a similar processor to desktop macs at that time. Being a multimedia machine, the Pippin was capable of producing CD quality sound, and displaying up to thousands of colors. With the powerful Power PC processor, Apple thrashed Nintendo and Sega consoles performance wise, but never won a sizable portion of the market.
OpenDoc
The concept behind OpenDoc is an intuitive one. Many elements of applications are redundant (calculators, multimedia players, spreadsheets). Why not 'cut them up' and use different modules interchangeably. Each file would then make calls on these different modules as needed. With OpenDoc, if a user wished to create a word processor document that includes a spreadsheet, the user would not have to copy it over as a table, or use a gimped up version included with the word processor. Instead, they could call up the ClarisWorks for OpenDoc Spreadsheet module and have a full-blown spreadsheet in the middle of a word processing document.
OpenDoc development started in 1995 in collaboration with Novell, IBM and Apple. In 1997, Apple integrated OpenDoc into its core strategy, releasing several OpenDoc apps, and including the technology in Mac OS 7.6. At the same time, the technology was being developed for Windows and UNIX. The companies created the Ci Labs which would authorize OpenDoc components that proved to be compatible as "Live Objects".
In accordance to Apple's vision, it became possible with the OpenDoc compatible version of ClarisWorks to create a document that integrated various OpenDoc modules. The example below has an integrated Video Conferencing session with QuickTime, a browser frame from CyberDog and a graph from another OpenDoc module.
Since 1996, Novell has ceased Windows development of OpenDoc, forcing IBM to take on responsibilities for the platform at the same time they continued development on their AIX (UNIX from IBM). The two versions both evolved and were mature commercial products in 1997. There were problems for OpenDoc, however. At the same time, Microsoft released ann updated version of OLE, and released ActiveX, that closely mimicked the OpenDoc principles. OpenDoc was embraced by major OS developers, but it had failed to attract third party developers. Mac OS 8 was the last release from Apple to include OpenDoc, and it was quietly killed at the hands of Gil Amelio.
Mac TV
Apple was the first major personal computer manufacturer to release a machine with a bundled TV tun
Re:Powered by "PostNuke" (Score:4, Interesting)
I've pretty much hated chat ever since, and from what I can see of IRC and AIM spam, things haven't much improved.
It was eerie, though, how much it felt like AOL, which I was also on (being a refugee from the craptastic Prodigy).
The frightening thing is, I still have an AOL account. Never set your parents' sites up on a non-portable system.
Re:Powered by "PostNuke" (Score:5, Funny)
>
>Do you want to play a game?
Ahem. That's "Shall we play a game?" to you, sir.
Turn in your geek card. As mistakes go, that's a WOPR. (Slashdot is a strange game. The only winning move is not to play.)
Re:Powered by "PostNuke" (Score:5, Funny)
Shall we play a game?
Love to. How about Slashdot Fanboy Flame War
Wouldn't you prefer a nice game of chess?
Later. Right now let's play Slashdot Fanboy Flame War
Fine.
Apple First Strike - WINNER NONE
Microsoft First Strike - WINNER NONE
Apple vs. IBM Hardware Scenario - WINNER NONE
OSX vs Windows Software Scenario - WINNER NONE
APPLE-AMD Alliance Scenario - WINNER NONE
European Amiga Uprising - WINNER NONE
Transmeta offensive - WINNER NONE
MS-AMD Pact - WINNER NONE
Opensource theater wide uprising - WINNER NONE
Grammar Nazi hostility escalation - WINNER NONE
IBM-SCO counterstrike - WINNER NONE
Sun product announcement surprise - WINNER NONE
Amazon One-Click Conflict - WINNER NONE
DRM limited war - WINNER NONE
Internet Explorer quick strike - WINNER NONE
P2P crackdown - WINNER NONE
Worm assault on Firefox - WINNER NONE
Swedish viral attack on Windows - WINNER NONE
China-India Outsource Pact - WINNER NONE
Torvalds-Gates peace accords - WINNER NONE
ATI Graphics card Domination - WINNER NONE
BSD survival - WINNER NONE
All out format war - WINNER NONE
Programming Language Preference Battle - WINNER NONE
Browser standards confrontation - WINNER NONE
OpenOffice GPL dissention - WINNER NONE
Missing Poll Option Discord - WINNER NONE
Off-topic political rivalry - WINNER NONE
Re:Powered by "PostNuke" (Score:5, Funny)
site already /.ed (Score:4, Funny)
Re:site already /.ed (Score:3, Funny)
Microsoft Word 6? (Score:5, Interesting)
In it's place, I'd like to nominate the Apple
Apple ///, no. Apple SOS, yes. (Score:3, Insightful)
Now, Apple SOS (Sophisticated Operating System) for the Apple
-Mark, who's having SOS coding flashbacks now, thankyouverymuch
Re:Apple ///, no. Apple SOS, yes. (Score:3, Interesting)
Anyway, if SOS is anything like ProDOS from an assembly language point, I can't possibly see it being all -that- bad. After experiencing the hell that was programming to the File Manager for DOS 3.3, ProDOS (and perhaps SOS, since ProDOS was based on SOS) is a dream.
From what little I've used of the
Re:Apple ///, no. Apple SOS, yes. (Score:5, Informative)
But, yeah. SOS was kinda weird.
the gravity thing (Score:4, Informative)
hawk
Re:Microsoft Word 6? (Score:3, Interesting)
> perhaps the list's originator doesn't even know about it.
As stated in the
First on the list... (Score:5, Funny)
Problem in database connection
You'd think they'd be a little more specific.
Most recent blunder (Score:5, Interesting)
Apple misjudged product availability and actually ran out of iMac G4's for two months before they released the iMac G5.
Yeah, the iMac G5 has relaly been making sales records at Apple, but how much of that is due to there being nothing in the iMac line for people to buy for two months?
Re:Most recent blunder (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Most recent blunder (Score:3, Insightful)
At least... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:At least... (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't get me wrong, I'd take the money too... but you've got to have some pride in your workmanship.
Re:At least... (Score:4, Insightful)
I do support, I deal with people who use windows to do their jobs. The fact is its not user friendly and it has a lot of particular quirks that get in the way.
I'm not saying its any worse than say Linux in that regard, but at least Apple can be proud of OSX. Windows may not be a business flop but it is in terms of quality.
Apple ///, anyone? (Score:5, Informative)
The first models were plagued by quality control problems - a clock chip from National Semiconductor that wouldn't work, inadequate ventilation resulting in the unseating of chips (which was rectified by lifting the computer a few inches and dropping it), too-short keyboard cables, and very little software.
The Apple
Here is a picture of the Apple ///. (Score:3, Informative)
You have to admit that it is cool looking. Weird-ass keyboard (why make a numerical keyboard with just subtraction?!), but cool looking.
Re:Here is a picture of the Apple ///. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Here is a picture of the Apple ///. (Score:5, Funny)
More buttons would confuse users. You can perform any basic arithmetic operation with that keypad *.
Subtraction? x, -, y, ENTER.
Addition? x, -, -, y, ENTER.
Multiplication? 4, -, -, 4, -, -, 4, (... so on
So much less complicated than our "modern computers" with our * and / and + keys.
* Not including division.
Re:Apple ///, anyone? (Score:5, Interesting)
Talk about backwards compatibility (Score:3, Interesting)
That's the kind of backwards compatibility Microsoft, Sony, etc. can only dream of.
Re:Apple ///, anyone? (Score:3, Interesting)
Apple's final solution was to sell the Mac LC with the entire Apple ][ chipset on a daughtercard. IIRC, that didn't sell too well and most schools just bought Macs or PC's.
Re:Apple ///, anyone? (Score:3, Informative)
(And the long lifespan wasn't that strange. www.ibm.com had PCjr parts listed well into the late 90s.)
Re:Apple ///, anyone? (Score:5, Funny)
That's not true! They both have a one button mouse! *ducks*
Re:Apple ///, anyone? (Score:5, Interesting)
Why the heck isn't the Apple /// in there?
I heard it was such a flop that Apple became kind of superstitious about their naming conventions and refused to name any subsequent products beyond "][". They had [apple-history.com] the Apple I, Apple ][, and Apple ][+ before the Apple ///. After the Apple /// flopped, they went back to "][" and had the Apple //e, Apple //c, and Apple //gs. For the Macintosh line, they had the Mac //, Mac //x, Mac //cx, Mac //ci, Mac //si, Mac //fx, Mac //vi, and Mac //vx. They never used "///" again, or any roman numeral above it.
Even now, they have dumped numbering their product lines altogether, despite the constant upgrades in hardware configurations. The only exception is the processor suffix (G4 or G5), which doesn't really indicate the product generation anyway. This applies to iPods as well.
Re:Apple ///, anyone? (Score:3, Interesting)
Finally, about 2 weeks before my PhD thesis was due, the 'drop' method didn't resurrect my computer. After about half an hour of poking at chips, attempting restarts etc, it eventually came back, but although L
Re:Apple ///, anyone? (Score:3, Interesting)
Word on the street is the III's engineers had to add circuitry to keep the advanced capabilities from being used from emulation mode. It's also said that if the power lamp was burnt out, the computer wouldn't boot up!
Perhaps the best two things to come out of the Apple III were Appleworks (an Apple II port of
Flops at Apple are predictable (Score:5, Interesting)
It has always been about Steve Jobs. The man has insight and what could almost be considered clairvoyance when it comes to building things that people crave. God knows that I'm one of those at his feet, weeping and bathing him in frankincense.
Re:Flops at Apple are predictable (Score:3, Insightful)
Unfortunately, this also represents a huge problem for Apple down the road. As much as Jobs has dictated that which is desirable, genius tends to have a shelf life. A time will come when he just can't produce the same way- I hope to hell that he is grooming some m
Re:Flops at Apple are predictable (Score:4, Interesting)
I started out in 1977 on a first-run Apple ][ Standard (Integer ROMs and casette tape.) I eventually upgraded to an Applesoft BASIC card, 4 Mhz. turbo card, Corvus hard drive, the works. I still have all that stuff, actually, except the Corvus which died long ago. I was one of the early crowd of Apple hackers: in 1978 I was selling a simple speech synthesizer that plugged into the game paddle port
Now, his decision to unceremoniously drop the Apple
Re:Flops at Apple are predictable (Score:3, Informative)
Wow, you need help with reality.
The Apple II had an incredible run
Now I'm a pretty huge Apple II fan ("call -151" and "PR#6" always come to mind...) but I completely understand why Apple gave up the Apple II after so many years.
It was a great machine. But it
Re:Flops at Apple are predictable (Score:3, Interesting)
Furthermore it was Scully who turned Apple into something more than just a computer company, the whole "brand icon" thing was his idea. In that sense, the Jobs II era is really just walking in Scully's footsteps.
Also, it might have been for the best (Score:5, Funny)
If the 'horror stories' are true, having an unmellowed Steve Jobs raise a child during its formative years might not have been such a good thing.
"Daddy, I drew a pony!"
"Pony? That looks like a lizard. This is shit. You're fired."
"Daddy, you can't fire me."
"Then learn to draw."
"This Website is powered by PostNuke" (Score:3, Funny)
-rich
Always liked the Tangerine iMac (Score:3, Interesting)
Personally, I always loved that color and thought it was the most stylish one of the lot.
"she comes in colors everywhere..."
Sam
Re:Always liked the Tangerine iMac (Score:5, Funny)
I also once worked for a Mac retailer. 2 guys walked off with a tangerine ibook. the one question i had for my co-workers working at the time was how did you not notice them stealing a bright orange laptop. anyway, i doubt they were able to resell it
Flops, big deal! (Score:4, Interesting)
Two words... (Score:3, Insightful)
(For every Cube Apple produces, Microsoft is happy to come back with a Windows ME or MS Passport. At least with Apple, the flagship OS doesn't kick you in the jewels every time you sit down to use it. ^_^)
Thank goodness for the flops (Score:4, Insightful)
Cube "Cracks" (Score:5, Interesting)
For those who don't remember, the Cubes would occasionally develop these "cracks," for lack of a better term. IIRC, owners started to see hairline fissures slowly appear underneath the ploycarbonate surface. Apple played it off by saying it added to the "personality" of the cubes, since each set of cracks was unique.
Heck, I love the cubes and I'd probably put them in that blunder list; if Apple could've figured out a way to make them a bit more powerful or a bit cheaper, they may have been succesful. As it was, their exorbitant pricing simply reinforced the notion that "macs are too expensive."
That myth is cracking me up! (Score:3, Informative)
For those who don't remember, the Cubes would occasionally develop these "cracks," for lack of a better term. IIRC, owners started to see hairline fissures slowly appear underneath the ploycarbonate surface.
I don't know whether you're serious or not?! You've used "IIRC" (which you don't) so I actually think you are being serious!
As a cube owner, I've described what the cracks actually were in a post above [slashdot.org].
I have to say, it's very funny what some people can be made to believe.
Re:Cube "Cracks" (Score:5, Insightful)
Article text, links & images intact (Score:5, Informative)
Posted anonymously to avoid whoring karma!!
--
Top 10 Apple Flops
Though Apple computer is known for some of the computing and technology industry's most notable innovations, its not as if the company hasn't also taken its lumps. Thomas Hormby submitted the following editorial contribution to osOpinion/osViews, which supplies us with his top ten list of Apple's (and some of associated partners) most significant flops throughout the company's history.
[Image] [osviews.com] Apple and its compatriots have been highly innovative. These companies have proven that even if their ideas are well implemented, they cannot always promote them correctly. Other times, a good idea is implemented poorly, and despite their best marketing effort, the product fails. I have compiled 10 of the most notable products released by Apple or its comrades that have failed.
Apple Pippin
[Image] [osviews.com] Introduced under Spindler's rule as CEO, the Pippin should have won Apple a position in the console market, one Apple had yet to penetrate. Apple's goal was to make the Pippin a multimedia machine, capable of reading CD ROMs, surfing the internet and to play games.
Apple had decided to share the Pippin's source code with developers for a licensing fee. The developers had a lot more flexibility, and would be able to redesign the Pippin's software to make it attractive for any number of markets. However, Apple was able to recruit only 4500 developers willing to pay the licensing fee.
The operating system of the Pippin was based on the MacOS and with a PowerPC 603 running at 66 MHZ, the Pippin used a similar processor to desktop macs at that time. Being a multimedia machine, the Pippin was capable of producing CD quality sound, and displaying up to thousands of colors. With the powerful Power PC processor, Apple thrashed Nintendo and Sega consoles performance wise, but never won a sizable portion of the market.
OpenDoc
[Image] [osviews.com] The concept behind OpenDoc is an intuitive one. Many elements of applications are redundant (calculators, multimedia players, spreadsheets). Why not 'cut them up' and use different modules interchangeably. Each file would then make calls on these different modules as needed. With OpenDoc, if a user wished to create a word processor document that includes a spreadsheet, the user would not have to copy it over as a table, or use a gimped up version included with the word processor. Instead, they could call up the ClarisWorks for OpenDoc Spreadsheet module and have a full-blown spreadsheet in the middle of a word processing document.
OpenDoc development started in 1995 in collaboration with Novell, IBM and Apple. In 1997, Apple integrated OpenDoc into its core strategy, releasing several OpenDoc apps, and including the technology in Mac OS 7.6. At the same time, the technology was being developed for Windows and UNIX. The companies created the Ci Labs which would authorize OpenDoc components that proved to be compatible as Live Objects.
In accordance to Apple's vision, it became possible with the OpenDoc compatible version of ClarisWorks to create a document that integrated various OpenDoc modules. The example below has an integrated Video Conferencing session with QuickTime, a browser frame from CyberDog and a graph from another OpenDoc module.
Since 1996, Novell has ceased Windows development of OpenDoc, forcing IBM to take on responsibilities for the platform at the same time they continued development on their AIX (UNIX from IBM). The two versions both evolved and were mature commercial products in 1997. There were problems for OpenDoc, however. At the same time, Microsoft released ann updated version of OLE, and released ActiveX, that closely mimicked the OpenDoc principles. OpenDoc was embraced by major OS developers, but it had
Re:Article text, links & images intact (Score:5, Funny)
Apple flops? No Newton? (Score:4, Insightful)
The Newton was a Palm Pilot before there was a Palm Pilot, and it was supposed to have handwriting recognition, but it didn't live up to expectations. The breakthrough of the Palm was that you had to relearn your handwriting in this gestures thing the computer could understand.
Re:PDP line? (Score:4, Informative)
PDP-10 rules! [wpi.edu]
Question... (Score:5, Funny)
I'll need to know this information before I can top one, much less ten of them!
An overlooked flop (Score:5, Insightful)
I remember going to OfficeDepot and looking at the Performas and they along had like six different models with six different model numbers. Something like 6510, 6511, 6512, 6514, 6515, etc. (I know the actual numbers were different. These are to illustrate my point.) There were just very subtle differences between the models but for whatever reason, it warranted a different number. Basically it was a nightmare trying to remember what was the difference between any two numbers. That whole scheme of trying to provide a range of configurations was a flop. Fortunately, Steve undid that and cut down the product line into four basic models. I, for one, welcomed that.
Re:An overlooked flop (Score:3, Informative)
Link to other version of article (Score:5, Informative)
This one is probably the original that osviews.com is referencing.
Mirror (Score:5, Informative)
This may be
10 flops? (Score:5, Funny)
My Top...err, Bottom Ten List. (Score:5, Interesting)
What, you were expecting one button mouse to be here?
k.
Re:My Top...err, Bottom Ten List. (Score:3, Informative)
ADB devices can daisy-chain up to 20 devices, though usually after 6 power can become an issue. ADB actually provides a usable amount of power, like USB does only not as much. It's usable for input devices other than keyboards and mice (such as graphic tablets) because it communicates faster than PS/2.
This page has more information on ADB and its capabilities [apple.com].
Exploding external disk drives (Score:3, Funny)
Word 6 (Score:4, Informative)
The new manager decided to just use WinWord 2.0's code-base on the Mac.
Not quite correct. I worked there around that time.
The decision was to use the same source code to build both Windows and Mac versions.
With Pyramid, the goal was to make a word processor that would be carefully designed: back end universal, front end specific to each supported OS (which would be Windows, MacOS, and possibly OS/2 PM). When Pyramid didn't work out as well as they hoped, they decided to take the Windows source code and build it for MacOS.
Rather than running wild with #ifdef statements and trying to make a native Mac interface, they used a compatibility library. IIRC this was called WLM (Windows Layer for Macintosh). It was not unlike the "winelib" library.
Because both Windows Word and Mac Word were compiled from the same source code, the two products became fully compatible. This was a major leap in features for the Mac Word product. Previous versions of Mac Word had been much smaller and faster, but they were also missing features compared to Windows Word, which meant that file compatibility was not 100%. (You can't import a file, and then export that file with edits, if your word processor does not support all the features that file uses!)
Business users were much happier with Mac Word 6 because of the file compatibility. Home users, students, and magazine reporters tended to be annoyed about the slower speed of Word 6 compared to the older versions. There was a bug that made the "word count" feature particularly slow, and Microsoft caught a lot of heat from the press because magazine reporters tend to care a lot about word counts.
As for it being a top 10 flop, I disagree. I don't think you can reasonably call it a failure. From Mac Word 6 onward, every version of Word for the Mac has had good feature compatibility with Windows Word, and of course Macs got faster and got more RAM. And Microsoft wasn't making enough money on the Mac version to continue to support a complete extra development team with its own code base.
And by the way, the Mac developers I knew at Microsoft all really loved the Mac and wanted to make good software for it. You can accuse Microsoft of not caring about the Mac, or grudgingly writing code for it, but it's not true.
steveha
A special flop the Slashdot crowd will appreciate: (Score:5, Interesting)
A/UX, the first Unix OS for Mac.
A/UX included special battery support for the Macintosh Portable (yeah, the first portable, the flop, the really heavy one that used lead-acid batteries) and also had sleep support, which was totally unheard of at that time.
I took a certification class in A/UX, and the Apple guys told me they didn't seriously expect to sell many units, the product only existed to fulfill requirements for government sales that specified a Unix OS must be available for any personal computer CPU being requisitioned. Nevermind that the users never intended to USE Unix, the bids were rigged against Macs by specifying Unix must be available, and it wasn't, so that meant Macs were disqualified from bids and only PCs would be considered. But Apple won back some major government business by meeting this petty requirement. Cost em a bundle though.
Re:A special flop the Slashdot crowd will apprecia (Score:4, Informative)
I think what really killed A/UX was MAE, the Mac Application Environment for Unix, which was how you got Mac apps running on A/UX. I think I recall it ran on other platforms like SUN. There was a lot of pressure to release it on more platforms, which Apple definitely did NOT want to do. The last thing Apple ever wanted was to see a Mac GUI running on Intel hardware, and that's where they saw it going.
Now if you want a REALLY obscure Apple Unix, here's one: SCO Xenix for Lisa. I actually configured and delivered one to a client. He had a custom written accounting package, he got a serial I/O board and hung 4 dumb terminals off the Lisa, and had 5 working terminals (including the Lisa) to do data entry. I just couldn't believe it when I saw the Lisa boot up to a command line and run Unix. After seeing the Lisa's distinctive white screen with black type for so long, seeing white text on a dark Lisa screen was like staring into a black hole.
Apple's Great Quality Meltdown (Score:3, Interesting)
Every major product shipped in late 95-early 96 under Spindler (*spit*) had a major flaw requiring recall or replacement.
System 7.5, the 6200 logic board, the plastics on the Powerbook 5300, flaming batteries on powerbooks, video cables on several all-in-one models, and many other flaws. I worked in Apple Tech support at the time and it was hell.
These were not failures of design but they were severe failures in execution, specifically Spindler's (*spit*) dismantling of all quality control groups and procedures within the company. The "Great Quality Implosion", as veterans call it, would have killed any normal company. Only Apple's near fanatical consumer base saved the company.
Re:Apple's Great Quality Meltdown (Score:4, Interesting)
The group wasn't composed entirely of geeks--most of them were smart, talented diligent people who knew their products and loved working at Apple. The advantages of it are readily apparent: Economies of scale... independence... cross-training... centralized quality information for management, engineering and marketing... It was an excellent idea and an excellent group.
I pointed this out in an email to John Sculley when the breakup was proposed. He answered me, said that the points I brought up were good ones that hadn't been raised to him before and asked if I minded if he took it up with the responsible managers.
Next thing I knew, I was in a small conference room with five layers of management and HR suggesting that I might want to forget my objections and shut the hell up. The breakup went through and quality took a nosedive for a while.
However, the people from that group were dispersed throughout the company. As time went on, they gained control of their own quality organizations. By the time Steve Jobs returned, he had seasoned, knowledgeable, dedicated quality people throughout the company. Many of them are still there.
One technical Apple failure (Score:5, Informative)
http://assembler.roarvgm.com/Apple_Bandai_pippi
Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up (Score:5, Insightful)
I think if you were to look over the last few years of posts on slashdot, regarding Apple, you'd see that "we" have been concentrating on their successes, with very few exceptions. I don't think an article that will probably generate interest for a few hours will do Apple's rep any harm.
Taking Risks (Score:4, Insightful)
Sometimes, as with the iPod, they come up with the right product at the right time and win big. However, sometimes they get there too early: the Newton was ahead of it's time and much better than the other first generation PDAs, but people just weren't ready to buy them yet.
Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up (Score:4, Interesting)
I liked Apple then. I like them better now. Go Steve Go.
Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up (Score:4, Informative)
Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up (Score:5, Informative)
"Thomas Hormby is a high school student in Nashville, Tennessee. He maintains two Mac history websites, http://www.mlagazine.com and http://www.macreate.net."
So, it's not so much Apple bashing (although the editorial by-line does make it appear that way) as much as it is a look at some of the ideas that flopped: some were very good ideas not well implemented, others were just ahead of their time, and some were jsut bad ideas (e.g. Word 6.0 for Mac from Microsoft). Oh yeah, not every comment in there is against Apple - some of them are about Apple-related products.
Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up (Score:4, Funny)
Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up (Score:5, Funny)
Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up (Score:5, Funny)
In further new, my history prof actually WAS alive during Greece's heyday. Or at least he looked it.
Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up (Score:5, Interesting)
Frankly, I'm still pissed at Apple for abandoning the Apple
And don't even get me started on the Apple
II GS (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't forget the II GS [wikipedia.org]. That was a killer machine with sound processing to die for. When it was released it made the available Macs look a bit weak (I think all there was available was the 128/512K models, the Mac Plus, and the Lisa/MacXL). All monochrome, very dull, totally unexpandable. Very pricey!
People who say that Apple's rot began when Jobs was fired miss the point. Jobs had managed to convince the execs (both regulars and the people who replaced him) tha
Agreed (Score:3, Insightful)
I kept my
Well
Re:II GS (Score:5, Interesting)
Without a time machine that would have been impossible. The successful days of Apple in education were pre-Mac. They basically ruled the education market in the early to mid 1980's. Logically, if they had wanted to keep the market, they should have maintained the ][ series rather than launching an incompatible computer. There's no real reason why we couldn't have 3Ghz 32-bit descendants of the 6502 today.
Re:II GS (Score:4, Interesting)
The mac turnaround came with the LaserWriter and the "Fat Mac" (Mac 512) in 1985. By Autumn of 1986, when the IIGS came out, the Mac was well-established as the graphics machine. MacDraw was incredible. The page layout programs (_Ready,_Set,_Go!_, 1-2-3, PageMaker) and the LaserWriter had already created a new industry. Yes, they were pricey.
By 1987, it was clear that the 65816 processor would never develop "legs". Apple, by itself, was too small to keep Western Design Center in business and making competitive processors. The IIGS was 2.8 MHz; the Macintosh was 8 MHz. And the 68000 wasn't just Apple's: Atari, Amiga, Apollo, and Sun were also using 68000s.
The Mac system architecture was clean, with plenty of room to grow. Only minor tweaks were needed to enable memory to grow past 8 Megabytes (the "32-bit clean" issue with Applications and firmware in ROMs) when a 1 MB machine was big, and PCs were still struggling to get past 640K. The IIGS couldn't grow like that. GS/OS was clearly porting Mac technologies back to the IIGS.
The Apple
Re:II GS (Score:5, Interesting)
After Steve Jobs left Apple, he started NeXT which was obviously oriented towards both big and small business. In the meantime Apple stagnated and didn't revive until he came back and ported NeXTStep to Mac hardware.
If he wasn't kicked out from Apple, NeXT would no doubt have Mac application compatibility. Then Apple would be the only company with UNIX workstations that also run all popular personal computer apps. Sun and Microsoft would be in deep trouble. And by '95, Apple would run NextStep on consumer Macs and Microsoft wouldn't have any product with unique advantages to grab 90%+ market share.
Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up (Score:3, Informative)
Whole text mirrored here (Score:4, Informative)
Apple Pippin
Introduced under Spindler's rule as CEO, the Pippin sould have won Apple a position in the console market, one Apple had yet to penetrate. Apple's goal was to make the Pippin a multimedia machine, capable of reading CD ROMs, surfing the internet and to play games.
Apple had decided to share the Pippin's source code with developers for a licensing fee. The developers had a lot more flexibility, and would be able to redesign the Pippin's software to make it attractive for any number of markets. However, Apple was able to recruit on 4500 developers willing to pay the licensing fee.
The operating system of the Pippin was based on the MacOS. With a PowerPC 603 running at 66 MHZ, the Pippin used a similar processor to desktop macs. Being a multimedia machine, the Pippin was capable of producing CD quality sound, and displaying up to thousands of colors. With the powerful Power PC processor, Apple thrashed Nintendo and Sega consoles performance wise, but never won a sizeable portion of the market.
OpenDoc
The concept behind OpenDoc is an intuitive one. Many elements of applications are redundant (calculators, multimedia players, spreadsheets). Why not 'cut them up' and use different modules interchangeably. Each file would then make calls on these different modules as needed. With OpenDoc, if a user wishes to create a word processor document that includes a spreadsheet, the user would not have to copy it over as a table, or use a gimped up version included with the word processor, instead they could call up the ClarisWorks for OpenDoc Spreadsheet module and have a full blown spreadsheet in the middle of a word processing document.
OpenDoc development started in 1995 in collaboration with Novell, IBM and Apple. In 1997, Apple integrated OpenDoc into its core strategy, releasing several OpenDoc apps, and including the technology in Mac OS 7.6. At the same time, the technology was being developed for Windows and UNIX. The companies created the Ci Labs which would authorize OpenDoc components that proved to be compatible as "Live Objects".
In accordance to Apple's vision, it became possible with the OpenDoc compatible version of ClarisWorks to create a document that integrated various OpenDoc modules. The example below has an integrated VideoConferencing session with QuickTime, a browser frame from CyberDog and a graph from another OpenDoc module.
Since 1996, Novell has ceased Windows development of OpenDoc, forcing IBM to take on responsibilities for the platform at the same time they continued development on their AIX (UNIX from IBM). The two versions both evolved and were mature commerical products in 1997. There were problems for OpenDoc, however. At the same time, Microsoft released ann updated version of OLE, and released ActiveX, that closely mimicced the OpenDoc principles. OpenDoc was embraced by major OS developers, but it had failed to attract third party developers. Mac OS 8 was the last release from Apple to include OpenDoc, and it was quietly killed at the hands of Gil Amelio.
Mac TV
Apple was the first major personal computer manufacturer to release a machine with a bundled TV tuner to the public. The Macintosh TV was Apple's first effort in merging the home theater and personal computer. The machine was also one of the only two black Macs ever made (the second being a special edition 5400 sold only in Europe)..
The Macintosh TV was first envisioned as a tenth anniversary Mac, but it was eventually cancelled. After the unexpected success of the Color Classic, John Sculley requested that a machine comparable to the Color Classic be made with a CD ROM drive and a 14" Trinitron CRT. The logic card was a slightly modified IIvx, Apple's midrange 68030 machine. The Macintosh TV was released on October 23, 1993, shortly after being resurrected.
The new machine was designed to be low cost and have a small footprint. Its most notable features were its TV tuner card and remote control. The TV tuner code had RCA and coaxial inputs, allowing us
Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up (Score:3, Funny)
Like hell. They stopped making "Coffee Coffee Buzz! Buzz! Buzz!" and they named a flavor after Dave Matthews.
Re:Limits of Innovation (Score:3, Interesting)
But my guess is three things... PRICE and PIRACY.
Apple boxes are way too high priced for what you get, IMHO and the opinions of ALOT of people... if I can do the same thing on a PC for half the price, I will). Even their high end systems, are not high end by my standards... I mean if I'm paying close to $3000 (CND money) for a machine, I expect it to have a better video card then a Rade
Re:Limits of Innovation (Score:3, Interesting)
Sure, installing it with on a serial port console was a little annoying... but once we got an iso setup right it wasn't too bad.
I also don't happen to think 3k for a dual processor box with a Nvidia 6800 Ultra DDL card capable of
Re:Limits of Innovation (Score:3, Informative)
Free or cracked/hacked software is just as available for the Mac platform as it is for the PC.. What I found in the Mac community was that the process was more...organized. Neat. Tidy.
For example, finding a serial for QT on the PC, while easy, necessitates me navigating through up to a dozen poorly layed-out webpages c
Re:Limits of Innovation (Score:5, Interesting)
Does the size of a company determine the quality of it's product?
Does the quality of a product determine it's company's size?
If you answer yes to either of those questions, you're out of your fucking mind.
I'd also like to point out that the year-old article you're linking to predicts that the iPod will be crushed by competitors such as the Dell DJ "selling for as little as $299", that the iTunes Music Store will be crushed by Wal-Mart, Microsoft, and Sony, and that it will take "at least a year" for Apple to sell 100 million songs. None of these things are even remotely true.
Re:Limits of Innovation (Score:4, Informative)
Mac game typically come out one year after their PC equivalent, cost the same as the PC version when it was first shipped, and don't come down in price very fast.
It's almost impossible to find games for Macs on shelves even at Apple stores (they usually have a few token ones). You need to buy them online.
However a few publishers do have Mac-PC games in the same box like for the Myst series.
As for Linux the situation is not very good. Of recent memory only the Neverwinter and the ID games series have been good on Linux. The rest must be run through Cedega/WineX, and this is *hard*.
Neither Linux or Mac games are a patch on the Windows scene, and that one is being overtaken by consoles at the moment.
Re:What is a "brown bag release"? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I Thought You Were Talking About OS News! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up (Score:3, Funny)
No, no...that's linux fanatics. Apple fanatics bitch about PCs all the time ;-)
(I'm both a linux and mac fanatic and I do use PCs and Windows quite a bit, so I feel entitled to say this!)
useful (Score:3, Funny)
So glad mirrordot is able to mirror the "Problem in Database Connection" page.
-Ted
Re:Apple's biggest failure (Score:5, Insightful)
The original Mac ran on a 68000. A slow 16/32-bit processor with no MMU or support for VM. It also had limited memory.
There is nothing wrong with assembly language or cooperative scheduling, if you are willing to take the time to do it well and in a disciplined manner.
The Mac team did their best with what was available at a reasonable cost. I'm not going to blame them for decisions that were suboptimal on processors that would not exist for many years.
If you wanted a Xerox workstation, they were available, at stratospheric prices.