PDA

View Full Version : January 27, 1996: Memo to Apple Fans: Things Aren't Going S...


MacBytes
Jan 27, 2006, 06:55 PM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: Tunes
Link: January 27, 1996: Memo to Apple Fans: Things Aren't Going So Great... (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20060127195526)
Description:: none

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug

Superdrive
Jan 27, 2006, 08:08 PM
No kidding, things weren't going great. Copland, never came in its full form. Newton, got the ax down the line. Pippin, never took off. Glad to see the company stuck around another ten years to see better days.

iGary
Jan 27, 2006, 08:10 PM
Thank God for the Steve™.

2nyRiggz
Jan 27, 2006, 08:12 PM
I'm glad they didnt burn in the flames cuz we wouldnt be enjoying the great products of today...thanking ya Steve.


Bless

rdowns
Jan 27, 2006, 08:22 PM
That's the year Spindler took the top 250 reseller sales reps (Apple products) in the industry to Disney World and tried to turn us all into Apple's sales force as they were cutting them left and right. Was a tough time to be peddling Macs but I had a real good corporate account who bought Macs by the truck load (Avis).

Apple spared no expense that 3 days and even picked up the tab for golf for about 30 of us. They also gave us a really nice solid glass Apple as a momento. I display it proudly in my wall unit.

iMeowbot
Jan 27, 2006, 08:29 PM
The complete letter (http://www.erik.co.uk/applesun/appleletter.html) for the morbidly curious.

nagromme
Jan 27, 2006, 08:58 PM
Apple wasn't actually losing money were they? They were profitable even in the "darkest days," just less so, right?

I'm glad Apple turned around in the ways it did, but it doesn't seem like quite such a "near death experience" to me.

http://quicktake.morningstar.com/Stock/Income10.asp?Country=USA&Symbol=AAPL&stocktab=finance

http://www.mackido.com/Myths/doomed_history.html

iMeowbot
Jan 27, 2006, 09:06 PM
Apple wasn't actually losing money were they? They were profitable even in the "darkest days," just less so, right?
They did lose a couple billion in there. Their sales were okay, but look down at the expenses for 1996 and 1997. That was their real problem, massive investments in all kinds of things that couldn't make them money.

DMann
Jan 27, 2006, 09:14 PM
They did lose a couple billion in there. Their sales were okay, but look down at the expenses for 1996 and 1997. That was their real problem, massive investments in all kinds of things that couldn't make them money.

And we shudder at the thought of having M$ coming in and
bailing us out at the 11th hour, at the expense of Apple promising
to drop the pursuit of making it known that Windows was indeed
a failed, but blatant attempt to copy the Mac OS. Innovation
wins again!

iMeowbot
Jan 27, 2006, 09:47 PM
The 1997 Microsoft-Apple settlement had nothing to do with Windows being a copy of Mac OS. In that case, it came to light that Apple gave Microsoft permission to do that.

The $150 million (which, it should be noted, was really a token investment for companies the size of Apple and Microsoft) plus assurances that Office would continue to be produced was to settle a dispute over QuickTime and Windows Media Player. What happened is that Apple hired an outside company to get them better QuickTime video playback performance on Windows. The optimizations worked very well, so well that MS hired the same outfit to fix performance problems in Windows Media Player. The problem was that the contractor reused code it had since signed over to Apple when doing the Microsoft job. The gist of the argument was that Microsoft knew, or should have known, that the code now belonged to Apple.

The settlement let both sides stop spending money on litigation, let Apple tell corporate customers that Office wasn't going away, let both sides keep decent performance in their media players, and got Apple hooked up with the promise of a reasonable Web browser at a time when Netscape was beginning to falter and Cyberdog was sinking with the rest of OpenDoc.

The announcement may have elicited boos at the time, but it was a pretty sweet deal for both parties.

winmacguy
Jan 28, 2006, 02:48 AM
The complete letter (http://www.erik.co.uk/applesun/appleletter.html) for the morbidly curious.
Interesting read. I was on the 2nd year of my OE in London in 1996. I think I vaguely remember hearing about a company called Apple computer whose founder no longer worked for them and the company was probably going to go out of business. I was into gardening and following the financial markets rather than computers at the time.

Rock on Steve!

Fender2112
Jan 28, 2006, 07:46 AM
The 1997 Microsoft-Apple settlement had nothing to do with Windows being a copy of Mac OS. In that case, it came to light that Apple gave Microsoft permission to do that.

The $150 million (which, it should be noted, was really a token investment for companies the size of Apple and Microsoft) plus assurances that Office would continue to be produced was to settle a dispute over QuickTime and Windows Media Player. What happened is that Apple hired an outside company to get them better QuickTime video playback performance on Windows. The optimizations worked very well, so well that MS hired the same outfit to fix performance problems in Windows Media Player. The problem was that the contractor reused code it had since signed over to Apple when doing the Microsoft job. The gist of the argument was that Microsoft knew, or should have known, that the code now belonged to Apple.

The settlement let both sides stop spending money on litigation, let Apple tell corporate customers that Office wasn't going away, let both sides keep decent performance in their media players, and got Apple hooked up with the promise of a reasonable Web browser at a time when Netscape was beginning to falter and Cyberdog was sinking with the rest of OpenDoc.

The announcement may have elicited boos at the time, but it was a pretty sweet deal for both parties.
Interesting info. I have never heard this part of the story before.

iMeowbot
Jan 28, 2006, 08:10 AM
Interesting info. I have never heard this part of the story before.
It came out as a side story in the Microsoft antitrust proceedings. Bill Gates (Hm, maybe it was Steve who said that) did mention that it was a way of getting out IP disputes when the deal was announced, but the details weren't made very public at the time.

Here's (http://www.theregister.co.uk/1998/10/29/microsoft_paid_apple_150m/) one badly-formatted telling of the details.

mr_flibble
Jan 28, 2006, 11:31 AM
It reminds me how great idea Pippin was.. Bring it back Apple! Now it could be game console with games one should play on Pippin and on his/her Mac as well, increasing amount of games available for Mac. Pippin should has been and still could be the same Apple Trojan Horse as iPod/iTunes are these days.