PDA

View Full Version : When Apple Bottomed Out, 1996-98


MacBytes
Oct 2, 2006, 11:13 PM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: History
Link: When Apple Bottomed Out, 1996-98 (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20061003001327)
Description:: Apple was at an all-time low in 1996, in a severe financial crisis that worried Mac users around the world. Apple's shareholders and customers were losing faith, and competitors were closing in fast. The worldwide press badmouthed Apple in 1995 and 1996.

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

BenRoethig
Oct 3, 2006, 07:36 AM
It was a little less simple than that. Apple was a company stuck in the old ways. They offered only fixed configurations through retailers and they were significantly overpriced for what you got. PowerComputing gained customers because they were with the program. They knew the world was changing to the BTO model and they gave Mac users what the wanted while Apple remained clueless. If there were no clones, users would have left for the PC side.

The Man
Oct 3, 2006, 09:07 AM
People always credit Jonathan Ive with the eMate 300 design, but it really was Thomas Meyerhoffer - who was brought in by Ive.

http://www.meyerhoffer.com/

Okay, Ive was at the head of the design group. Still, Meyerhoffer is officially recognized as the industrial designer of the eMate.

http://www.businessweek.com/1997/22/b352913.htm

steve_hill4
Oct 3, 2006, 11:23 AM
I remember telling people between around 1995 and 2000 that while I liked Apple, I'd never buy one because their market share was small and getting smaller. They were dying.

So glad they didn't die and I realised that there are big advantages in not only having a small user base, but looking at all aspects of the computer first.

IJ Reilly
Oct 3, 2006, 11:54 AM
Oh yes, there was certainly a lot of confusing confusion during that time. Oy. :rolleyes:

Why was the eMate a "mistake?" It sold pretty well, as I recall.

The story of the 1997 Microsoft deal can't or should not be told outside of the backdrop of the ongoing patent disputes between Apple and Microsoft. This deal should not be read so much as an effort on Apple's part to "make nice" with Microsoft as much as it was a settlement of old disputes and effort to move on. As so often happens, this article describes the fin instead of the shark.

Apple bought NeXT instead of Be because the NeXT OS was far more mature than BeOS, and not because Gil Amelio was hypnotized by Steve Jobs. We don't actually know how much Jean Louis Gassée wanted for Be (lots of rumors at the time), only that it was far too much for such a young OS, possibly even more than Jobs wanted for NeXT.