PDA

View Full Version : Tuesday: Jobs vs. Sculley


arn
Jun 1, 2002, 07:20 PM
ThinkSecret (http://www.thinksecret.com/features/jobssculley.html) states that Tuesday will be the day for a "major announcement" from John Sculley (former Apple CEO).

Meanwhile, in an unrelated event Steve Jobs is supposedly due for an Apple announcement on the same day.

Tommy!
Jun 1, 2002, 08:04 PM
I bet it's the 10.1.5 update...


but anyway, let's go Steve!!! Who's with me?

speechgod
Jun 1, 2002, 08:28 PM
Am I the only one who has noticed that all the main announcements are being taken care of before MWNY? We've had the XServe, iBook, TiBook---something is going to happen!

By Apple announcing things early, they are adding argument to the case of a G5 in MWNY.

Just a thought.

Grokgod
Jun 1, 2002, 08:43 PM
If this means that the G5 will come out,
I will eat my pademan!
<PAINFUL Star Wars reference to balance painful G5 rehtoric!>

Could it be 10.15 and Powermac speed bumps, that would be so weird, I would marry a wookie!

Yet all the cool recent announcements that havent been at a MacWorld.

Is there a method to all the weird madness?

Kid Red
Jun 1, 2002, 08:52 PM
Originally posted by speechgod
Am I the only one who has noticed that all the main announcements are being taken care of before MWNY? We've had the XServe, iBook, TiBook---something is going to happen!

By Apple announcing things early, they are adding argument to the case of a G5 in MWNY.

Just a thought.

No, it's just that Apple will not wait to announce stuff at big shows anymore. When it's ready, it will be announced.

10.1.5 isn't worth the publicity and interviews for stevie. This is something else, like a new iDevice like stylus or tablet or iApp like video conferencing or something. Still can't figure out what it could be.

big
Jun 1, 2002, 09:10 PM
For review....Current info on 10.1.5 update (from the Installer)

Mac OS X Update 10.1.5 delivers enhancements which improve the reliability of Mac OS X applications, delivers improved networking, security, and expanded peripheral device support. Specific improvements include:

Peripheral Device Support:
-Expanded support for new Canon digital cameras
-Improved support for Nikon FireWire cameras
-Expanded support for SmartDisk, EZQuest, and LaCie disc recording devices
-Improved support for MO drives

Application Improvements:
-Increased stability of Mail and Sherlock
-Emails are properly retained when rebuilding the Draft mailbox
-Updated Carbon applications can use Quartz anti-aliasing technology for high quality text display

Networking and Security Improvements:
-Improves networking via AFP when accessing multi-level directories on Windows NT file servers
-Significant improvement to file searching on local and remote volumes
-Mail accounts go off-line to indicate that SSL encryption settings are not supported by the mail server

WebDAV Improvements:
-More efficient iDisk mounting and file navigation
-Added support for connecting to iDisk using default DNS settings of AirPort
-Support for mounting a WebDAV volume from a non-standard http port

Asian Language Improvements:
-Significant updates to the Korean Input Method, especially important when using AppleWorks
-Internet Connect and AirPort applications updated with Chinese and Korean localized content

spuncan
Jun 1, 2002, 10:04 PM
whoa thats a good description whered u get that from 10.1.5's readme? :)
As for tuesday my guess is that Sculley will be doing some seperate business thing most likely introducing Vanilla Pepsi (Coke recently released Vanilla Coke). Steve will introduce A) iApp. (iMix) B) iDevice (iCam?) C) Nothing (hey its only a rumor)
MWNY Releases- PowerMac, iMac, 10.2

jg3
Jun 1, 2002, 10:17 PM
[ed note: posts incorrectly assuming this was a joint announcement were deleted]

Guys, slow down and read the post and/or article more closely. This is not a joint announcement; it just so happens that Sculley has some "major" announcement for Tuesday, and Jobs was going to also announce something that day, but not nearly as important. However, since Jobs doesn't like Sculley, and wouldn't want him to steal whatever thunder he might have, he might reschedule his announcement, although the article is purely speculative in that regard. That is all.

Sayer
Jun 1, 2002, 11:00 PM
Everyone who was CEO of Apple nearly ran it into the ground including the first Steve Jobs' Dynasty. Sculley was a yes-man to Steve pretty much, but when it became crunch time he sided with the Apple Board. Kind of a puss I guess.

Frankly its amazing that Steve Has not spun the company into the ground this time around (he must have actually learned something from the failure of NeXT).

Steve won't be going anywhere, his ego won't allow him to fail TWICE in the very company that made him rich (to begin with) and a success in this world.

kansaigaijin
Jun 1, 2002, 11:26 PM
It may not be joint but . . .

Jobs defer to Scully by changing his announcement, that would be admitting that Scully is bigger news than Jobs.

10.1.5 is not that big a deal. 10.2 would be.
It should be interesting.

Mike Gagne
Jun 2, 2002, 01:43 AM
I think its the new iJobs......... when your Mac crashes (pre-OSX only) Steve's likeness comes on and tells you how cool its going to be soon.......

Foocha
Jun 2, 2002, 03:51 AM
Some simple facts:
1. Sculley will never work at Apple again: the board & the share holders would not allow it.
2. The two announcements are unrelated.
3. Job's is bigger than Sculley, in media terms, and Apple is bigger than any startup, unless Sculley's announcement really is something like a cure for cancer (unlikely).

The timing of this announcement, close to the 10.1.5 update, is so close that it can't be a coincidence. However, a minor point update hardly justifies Job's talking to the press. I suspect there's more to the 10.1.5 update, and the other rumor that seems to fit the bill is the related rumor about Microsoft updates of Internet Explorer & Office.

Apple has had bad press coverage for the poor experience of Web browsing on an iMac. If the new Internet Explorer is tagged version 6, has anti-aliased type, uses Aqua widgets, matches the Windows feature-set and is Much Much faster, then that really is a minor upgrade worth talking to the press about.

Alternatively, 10.1.5 might be the first version of OS X to ship with Netscape, perhaps as the default browser. Perhaps Apple has got the scoop on Netscape 7 - they're certainly getting very close to AOL these days.

macktheknife
Jun 2, 2002, 04:07 AM
Just wanted to clarify a few things about the reign of John Sculley.

Sculley has been--rightly or wrongly--villified by Mac loyalists for ousting Steve Jobs back in 1985 and missing the Windows threat in the late 1980s and early 1990s. I am no fan of the man myself, but Sculley should be given credit for pulling Apple from the brink when he introduced the first usable Macs (the Macintosh Plus and the Mac SE and II series) as well as desktop publishing programs like PageMaker and tools such as LaserWriter. If you can trace Apple's dominance of the desktop publishing and graphic design industry, it would undoubtedly start during here. See "Apple" by Jim Carlton and "Apple Confidential" by Owen Linzmayer for more details.

I would also like to comment on another post's remarks concerning the merits of Sculley's desire to protect Apple's profit margins. As a high-risk company in a high-risk industry, investors naturally expect above-average profit margins to compensate for the risk they are taking. One can accuse Sculley of short-sightedness, but protection of profit margin is not something CEOs of fast-growing companies can ignore. Also, the same post mentioned that Apple should have issued more debt to fund the production of the Mac. As any corporate finance textbook will tell you, this is a big no-no. No company who experiences volatile sales (technology companies such as Apple for example) should issue debt to fund expansion. The logic behind this is simple: Volatility in sales also translate into volatility in cash flow, and since cash alone is necessary to pay off any interest that accompanies debt, volatility in cash flow raises the possibility of financial distress (i.e. bankruptcy). This is what is happening to the Telecos who gorged on debt. While the Mac may look like a hit in retrospect, remember that Steve Jobs could have easily bankrupted the company had he embarked on a course of debt-funded expansion.

Foocha
Jun 2, 2002, 04:21 AM
We can't credit Sculley for the development of PageMager - this was surely thanks to Adobe. In fact, if you want to see who saved Apple back then, Adobe are probably the guys, and if you want to see what Sculley did to thank them for their trouble, look no further than the kick in the teeth he delivered in doing a deal with Microsoft over TrueType!

Hmmm.

Foocha
Jun 2, 2002, 04:23 AM
Oops - PageMaker was thanks to Aldus back then wasn't it!

Meek
Jun 2, 2002, 08:30 AM
mactheknife:

I didn't vilify Sculley for ousting Jobs back in '85. (That would be another post -- don't get me started.) I vilified him for RUINING the Mac.

If a new product with a flashy introduction doesn't succeed right out of the gate, it is tagged as a loser and finds it almost impossible to recover. (Witness the Cube; it never recovered after it was tagged as a loser. Even after improvements and price adjustments. No buyer wanted to be associated with it, a la Edsel.)

The 1984 Mac sold like gangbusters in the first months it was out. That's because it was snapped up by early adopters and computer enthusiasts who would pay almost anything.

Then there was no follow-through. The product sputtered after the early adopter phase ran its course.

Average computer users -- not diehard Apple fans -- weren't biting.

The reasons they didn't bite were that the Mac was 1.) pricey and 2.) a totally new, unproven platform with almost no software and third party support.

Early adopters don't care about such things (as much).

When you launch a new unproven platform with almost no software you have no business asking for a premium price.

You're lucky anyone buys it at all, and you HAVE to attract buyers with price, because you can't attract them with available software and support -- it isn't there.

When the platform takes off, you can command higher prices, but not before.

"Protecting profit margin" is a luxury you can ill-afford on a new, untested, unproven, unsupported technology. Widespread adoption and acceptance of the platform should be your first priority and fattening profit margins should come later.

Charging $1999 for the 1984 Mac and issuing some public debt to fund its manufacture and promotion was EXACTLY WHAT APPLE NEEDED TO DO.

You say, "As any corporate finance textbook will tell you. this is a big no-no."

That's why entrepreneurs with little business schooling succeed and academicians write textbooks from the comfort of their tenured professorships.

Sculley was not an entrepreneur, he was a bureaucrat. Jobs was an entrepreneur and a brave risk-taker.

Issuing public debt to fund the 1984 Mac's launch and production and charging $1999 was a risk -- A BIG RISK. No doubt.

But the risk all hinged on whether the Mac was a good product worthy of success and I contend it was.

Five hundred bucks is a lot of money (especially in 1984). I submit it would have made the difference and the Mac would have taken the personal computer market by Tsunami. (It didn't.)

You'd be amazed at how close a relationship exists between price and demand. A small difference can translate to huge sales. Sometimes as little as $25 can be the deal breaker. I submit that $500 was a HUGE deal breaker.

The Mac faltered at its intro and never really recovered. It had to claw its way back and has been clawing its way ever since -- even today.

Yes it HAD to latch on to the Desktop Publishing niche, because it had no choice. It needed a niche because it couldn't succeed as a general purpose personal computer.

(The hideous, unfriendly, green text screen IBM PC and clones succeeded because of a large scale price war combined with WIDESPREAD ADOPTION. In the face of this, Apple was seeking 50% and higher profit margins. Thank Sculley and Gessee for this -- Gassee has since stated that this was a big mistake.)

(Gasee also said in his book The Third Apple, "It is difficult to revive a product that has had a poor start.")

Lastly, you suggest we read Owen Linzmayer for perspective.

Good idea. I invite you to read his comparison of John Sculley to Neville Chamberlain -- the great Hitler appeaser.

The reason why Apple's lawsuits against Microsoft for ripping off the Mac failed to succeed wasn't because the judge(s) failed to see where Microsoft ripped off the Mac, it was because Sculley signed an agreement with Bill Gates giving Microsoft a "non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free, perpetual, nontransferable license to use these derivative works in present and future software programs, and to license them to and through third parties for use in their software programs."

The judge(s) found most of Apple's claims against Microsoft covered by this agreement.

Thanks, John.
:mad:

arn
Jun 2, 2002, 08:58 AM
Read This: I deleted some replies as "punishment" for not actually reading the article.

Sculley is announcing something "earth-shattering" that is unrelated to Apple. The only relation to Apple is that he was a former Apple CEO.

arn

kansaigaijin
Jun 2, 2002, 09:38 AM
I read the post and the (what, think secret?) article, they sure know how to hype it.
I remember back when the mac came out and reading reviews but ya it was too expensive, I was self employed, i could claim it as an expense etc, but it still came out of my pocket. I could buy a Peugeot 604 for C$4000. and did. I was in the car all day so that was luxereeee and convenience. Did not think then that a computer would mean that anytime, it was just a tool to keep track of how much money I was making and how much taxes to pay. That was eighty-four but by eighty-nine I was in a different line of work and knew that Inform Designer/Manager/User was an amazing product but the execs didn't get it ( we had customers filling in 1000's of forms a day, and had to be able to find them . . .) where are they now? Macs were too expensive! to sell to management. we had POS systems that were state of the art but just green text on a nice grey screen, I could go on . . . about the times when management bought PC type stuff and got soaked and the solution wasn't. So here we are again Scully and Jobs, remember Jobs hired him away from what, Pepsi? It could still interesting.
Do you want to drive a 79 Peugeot 604 or a 79 Chevrolet Impala? What kind of man are you?

big
Jun 2, 2002, 09:40 AM
whoa thats a good description whered u get that from 10.1.5's readme?

oh my installer, that's where...I do not see the final build of 10.1.5 being that great, especially after running it for several weeks. as always, we'll have to wait and see what happens tuesday.

cgmpowers
Jun 2, 2002, 10:25 AM
Anytime I hear, "....will be the day for an "earth-shattering" company/product announcement ....", I cringe.

I keep thinking of that damned scooter from Dean Kamen, the Segway.

Somehow when I hear people say, "earth shattering", "life altering", "awe inspiring new invention"...I just scream, but it was JUST A SCOOTER!!! Heck, it'll be sold on QVC one day and then labled as a "As Seen on TV" product and later sold at Walmart..

I'm done venting, I'll go take my medication now and sit in the corner and rock myself back to sleep... (heh, j/k)...but seriously, it was JUST A SCOOTER.

Kid Red
Jun 2, 2002, 11:16 AM
Originally posted by cgmpowers
Anytime I hear, "....will be the day for an "earth-shattering" company/product announcement ....", I cringe.

I keep thinking of that damned scooter from Dean Kamen, the Segway.

Somehow when I hear people say, "earth shattering", "life altering", "awe inspiring new invention"...I just scream, but it was JUST A SCOOTER!!! Heck, it'll be sold on QVC one day and then labled as a "As Seen on TV" product and later sold at Walmart..

I'm done venting, I'll go take my medication now and sit in the corner and rock myself back to sleep... (heh, j/k)...but seriously, it was JUST A SCOOTER.

And the wheel is just a circle. So what's your point? No great invetion is earth shattering in essence anyways.

Sorry, but I think the segway is awesome. Self balancing, effecientlly powered, small, compact and a pleasent welcome to the environment as a mode of transportation. I can see this taking off in a few years.

big
Jun 2, 2002, 01:10 PM
what would be earth shattering would be to dump our oil dependant ways, and move to a more concentrated populous. With the advent of technology and the internet, this will be easier to do.

sorry always looking for a release on New Urbanism...the 20th century is over, we don't have to be modern anymore.

macktheknife
Jun 2, 2002, 01:25 PM
meek:

I am not going to start a flame war on something as stupid as trying to defend John Sculley (I had already said I was no fan of the man myself), so I'm just going to give a quick response and call it a day.

I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment that correct pricing is important to attract more buyers as low prices typically equals high demand. I merely wanted to point out that high profit margins are important--although far from essential--for a company like Apple to justify its high-risk operations.

As you said: "That's why entrepreneurs with little business schooling succeed and academicians write textbooks from the comfort of their tenured professorships. " Yes, I agree that entrepreneurs are courageous and intelligent individuals who have the guts to put their money where their mouths are. Tom Siebel spoke at my brother's graduation last weekend, and it was quite inspiring to hear how he started his own company back in the early 90s with a few millions, an office in ghetto East Palo Alto, and second-hand furniture he bought at auctions (including the fold-out table that served as his desk for 2 years).

That said, let us not forget that ideas that originate in the classroom and academic halls eventually find their way into practitioners' hands. Option pricing, asset-backed securities (such as single-family mortgages), modern portfolio theory (measurement of risk), etc. were all products of brilliant thinkers in academia. Also, for every Tom Siebel, you have hundreds of petsmart.coms whose convictions and courage to take risk was eclipsed by their inability to manage the basic business.

In any case, I stand by my comment on the danger of high-growth companies using debt to fund expansion schemes, as such companies should use equity to fund growth that will lead to cash only several years down the road. Yes, we can admire the entrepreneurship and the risk-taking courage of all those telecom startups, but to gorge on massive debt to fund unprofitable projects was to ask for trouble. So I do not disagree with your assessment that Apple should have cut its prices. I merely questioned the means that you had suggested that they do it as well as highlighting the constraints that the company had to contend with.

Lastly, I completely agree with your assessment of Sculley's short-sightedness and stupidity in practically giving Bill Gates a window (very bad pun intended ;) ) of opportunity to sell his crappy software to the masses.

boobers
Jun 2, 2002, 01:32 PM
The reason why Apple's lawsuits against Microsoft for ripping off the Mac failed to succeed wasn't because the judge(s) failed to see where Microsoft ripped off the Mac, it was because Sculley signed an agreement with Bill Gates giving Microsoft a "non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free, perpetual, nontransferable license to use these derivative works in present and future software programs, and to license them to and through third parties for use in their software programs."

The judge(s) found most of Apple's claims against Microsoft covered by this agreement.

Thanks, John.
:mad: [/B][/QUOTE]

From what i remember, Gates did give Jobs an undisclosed amount of money as an out of court settlement for blatant OS rip-offs Microsoft used in Windows, as well as investing heavily into Apple Computer (not enough to have any say in the company-Jobs ain't no fool)
boobers

peterjhill
Jun 2, 2002, 02:21 PM
Originally posted by Sayer
Frankly its amazing that Steve Has not spun the company into the ground this time around (he must have actually learned something from the failure of NeXT).

Steve won't be going anywhere, his ego won't allow him to fail TWICE in the very company that made him rich (to begin with) and a success in this world.

umm... Steve managed to run Next well enough to get bought out by Apple, thus setting himself up for the second coming of Steve. Also Pixar is doing incredibly well. Steve sure the hell is unconventional, I will give you that. But it should be pretty darn obvious that Steve know how to make a profitable company. Give the man some respect!

Mr. Anderson
Jun 2, 2002, 02:31 PM
I find the lack of information on Sculley wierd. Does anybody know what he's doing now? Is this earth shattering announcement going to be from a start up or something that he's been working with for a while?

Anyone with some info here would be great.

pkradd
Jun 2, 2002, 03:04 PM
This is not an "Apple Event" such as the intro of the iPod or XServer. No press conference or get together at Cupertino is scheduled. (There were alot of grumbling from the press when they were called to witness the intro of the XServer - many fell asleep!). I suspect SJ is going to talk about things in general, perhaps even indicate what is coming in the next several months up to and including MWNY. Perhaps he's going to announce that Quicktime 6 is finally coming our way. Generally, he has really been press-shy about talking unless it's to Time. We'll have to see. Actually the Sculley announcement seems more intriguing. Stay tuned.

pkradd
Jun 2, 2002, 03:09 PM
Here's somethimg on Sculley - dont' know how new it is:



John Sculley

Partner, Sculley Brothers

John Sculley was formerly President of Pepsi Cola Company for six years and CEO of Apple Computer for ten years, taking that company to number one in worldwide PC market share and the leader in multimedia computing. He is best known as a marketing executive who brought big brand marketing to Silicon Valley in the early 1980s and led major brand-building campaigns such as Pepsi Generation, Pepsi Challenge, Macintosh 1984, Apple desktop publishing, and the launches of PowerBook, QuickTime and Apple CD-ROM home computers. Advertising Age and AdWeek Magazine both have named John "Advertising Man of the Year." Financial News Network chose him as "Marketing CEO of the Decade."

John is currently an active investor in several California start-ups, and is co-founder of Sirius Thinking, Ltd., a New York City Children's educational entertainment company.*

stukoch
Jun 2, 2002, 03:15 PM
I have done some digging around and here is what I have fouund out about John Sculley.

-He is currently a parter in a New York based investment group called Sculley Brothers LLC. The other parterns are his two brothers.

-Sculley Brothers LLC seems to be a major share holder (http://biz.yahoo.com/t/99/4195.html) in a company called LivePerson Inc. (http://www.liveperson.com/)

-LivePerson describes themselves as a provider of technology that facilitates real-time sales and customer service for companies doing business on the Internet.

-Basically they provide a product that lets companies deliver online support in the form of chat.

-Sculley Brothers LLC is also a major investor in a private company called BigMachines.com (http://www.bigmachines.com/) John's brother David is on the board of directors.

-I know very little about this company, but they claim to provide software and service to "streamline" sales.

From this information I would conculde that John's anncounment will probably have nothing to do with Apple, and will most likely only be relevant to the "Sales Support" industry

-Stu K

pkradd
Jun 2, 2002, 04:11 PM
Correct. The Think Secret article makes it clear that the two announcements are coincidental, although speculates that SJ may put his info out first, perhaps on Monday, instead, to beat Sculley to his. Or is it Mulder making the announcement? I'm confused!!

sjs
Jun 2, 2002, 04:26 PM
arn,
am I missing something? I have quickly read the article twice and it appears to say the announcement is NOT earth-shattering, though you have twice stated that it IS.

"From what we are being told, it doesn't appear to be an "earth-shattering" development. We'll keep you informed of new information."

Anyway, interesting thread about Jobs and Sculley.

JtheLemur
Jun 2, 2002, 04:38 PM
I was following the development of IT/Segway for a long time, and when it was finally released, I was definitely impressed - the technology used for it is really interesting, but it is NOT earth-shattering, -changing, etc.

Now, Dean Kamen has also been working on Stirling engines that use very little, or even no, power to operate. If the Segway used THAT, THEN it would be earth-shattering: a form of transportation that either 1) runs on super-cheap alcohol or 2) runs on no power whatsoever.

I mean, I live in NYC, and unless they can get a full 12-15 hours out of a charge, the Segway is pretty useless in a big city. Maybe for things like Postal Workers since they'd never be THAT far from a charge at a post office...

Eh. I'm anxiously awaiting both John and Steve's announcements. Maybe it'll be something neato. =)

Gus
Jun 2, 2002, 05:02 PM
Like mactheknife, I too have no love for John Sculley, but I have to give the man a little credit here. While it was a flop at release, the Newton, and the PDA in general were a vision of Sculley. I am not blind enought o think that Sculley was the only person in the world to think of a PDA, he was the first to articulate it and to describe the practical applications for such a product, which he dubbed the "Knowledge Navigator". Sculley was not a computer guy or a "Think Different" kinda guy, but he was a business man as mactheknife pointed out, and that is why Steve really wanted him anyway. Like I said, I have no real love for the guy, but I have to give him credit for the Newton, which was the greatest PDA ever created--eventually :-) .

Gus

Gus
Jun 2, 2002, 05:04 PM
I forgot to mention that if you really want to blame Apple's decline in the 90's, blame Michael "The Diesel" Spindler. The guy proved to be a worthless CEO.

And if Gassée was so right, why did Be Inc. just go bankrupt?


Gus

adelaney
Jun 2, 2002, 05:10 PM
Originally posted by sjs
arn,
am I missing something? I have quickly read the article twice and it appears to say the announcement is NOT earth-shattering, though you have twice stated that it IS.

"From what we are being told, it doesn't appear to be an "earth-shattering" development. We'll keep you informed of new information."

Sculley's announcement IS supposed to be earth-shattering, Jobs' announcement is not. Read the article one more time, arn has been very clear.

arn
Jun 2, 2002, 06:32 PM
Originally posted by sjs
arn,
am I missing something? I have quickly read the article twice and it appears to say the announcement is NOT earth-shattering, though you have twice stated that it IS.

"From what we are being told, it doesn't appear to be an "earth-shattering" development. We'll keep you informed of new information."

Anyway, interesting thread about Jobs and Sculley.

I believe the article has been edited... either that or I misread it... as I recall it stated that Sculley's announcement would be earth shattering.... now it just says "major announcement"

Can anyone else confirm that I'm not crazy? :)

thanks
arn

MacAztec
Jun 2, 2002, 07:08 PM
Does this mean there is going to be an announcement in the hardware/software sector of Apple?

DakotaGuy
Jun 2, 2002, 07:36 PM
Well since Sculley used to work for Pepsi maybe Steve and him will be at the same announcement when Apple introduces the iMac with the base painted like the Pepsi Ball with a complete set of Brittany Spears MP3's loaded on the machine complete with Brittany Spears Quicktime music videos. Hey I am just trying to be funny. A Pepsi/Apple venture is almost as funny as the Disney/Apple venture!

sjs
Jun 2, 2002, 08:29 PM
Yes, arn, I can confirm that you're not crazy...ok, not really confirm... but I'm pretty sure...

BTW, actual earth-shattering news could really ruin your day, or week.

SilvorX
Jun 2, 2002, 08:43 PM
hmm since it'dd be earth shattering or something along the lines, maybe they developed a mac that has a G4 processor 10x faster than a P4 2 ghz processor...nah
maybe they just developed a revolutionary mac product or somethin or other :S lol, n if it was "the introduction of mac OS to x86 machines" it wouldnt exactly be earth shattering...more like riot starting

deejemon
Jun 2, 2002, 11:03 PM
*

speechgod
Jun 2, 2002, 11:05 PM
Originally posted by peterjhill
Steve sure the hell is unconventional, I will give you that.

Let's see that one more time:

Steve sure the hell is unconventional, I will give you that.

Steve is about as easy to predict as the weather. Objectively, he is the prime example of chaos theory. (Or just chaos!) :)

speechgod
Jun 2, 2002, 11:09 PM
Originally posted by deejemon
My guess is a connection kit to make iPod compatible with Windows.

That is a very good hypothesis.

Think about it: if they sold 125,000 or so just to 3% of the market, what about the other 97%?

Watch out Rio! Your jukebox should be called the Rio Grande! :D

TimDaddy
Jun 3, 2002, 01:13 AM
Originally posted by deejemon

I don't actually give a rats whether Windows people can use iPod, but that's my prediction.
My guess also includes that Windows functionality will not be on par with Mac (why should it?), eg: Contacts may not be supported.


If Windows compatibility will mean a significant increase in sales, I say go for it! Good for Apple! And, I hope only after thousands of people purchase it do they realize is isn't as good without a Mac. I buy little games and stuff all the time and after installing it realize half the crap shown on the box is only available with windows. Let them see how it feels to get something you want and realize it's not all there! Plus, people see the few limitations I have as a Mac user and that makes them think that they are better off with Windows. Maybe when the shoe's on the other foot it will just be another excuse to say "You should've got a Mac".

Cappy
Jun 3, 2002, 01:13 AM
Don't forget we're due for a video conferencing solution from Apple as per Steve's comments earlier this year.

Foocha
Jun 3, 2002, 04:02 AM
Remember, the market for iPod is users with a Firewire connection, and that Firewire is far more common on Mac than on Windows PCs, as such, Mac represents far more than 3% of the Firewire enabled desktop market.

Nonetheless, I'm sure there's a large niche of PC users that Apple could sell iPod to. The real challenge would be one for Apple's marketing department - how to reach those PC users, who think that Apple is not for them.

I think that an iPod announcement is as good a bet as any, but right now it's a tough one to call.

p03
Jun 3, 2002, 07:30 AM
Steve Jobs, CEO of Apple Computer, Inc. today announced a revolutionary update to Apple's flagship operating system. Mac OS X 10.1.4.2 precedes the much anticipated 10.1.5, which will allow updated Carbon applications to take advantage of Mac OS X's Quartz rendering engine.

The current update, 10.1.4.2, offers important new features such as increased version numbering, updated "read me" files, and minor incompatibilities.

"The new update is huge," said Steve Jobs at a press conference held today at Apple's Cupertino, Calif. headquarters. "This is a milestone that puts us five, but maybe eight years ahead of our competition."

Analysts agree that PC and software vendors are unlikely to release a version 10.1.4.2 of any competing operating system in the next five years.

"Version 10.1.4.2 was built from the ground up to address the needs of education, home users, graphic artists, and Hollywood movie studios," said Phil Schiller, Apple's Senior Vice President of Worldwide Product Marketing. "We've seen the ultimate Digital Hub," he added, "and it's got Mac OS X 10.1.4.2 written all over it."

Meanwhile, former Apple CEO John Sculley is also seeking attention. At a New York press conference coinciding with Apple's announcement, he spoke to press about his latest venture, a yet unnamed company specializing in pollution-free energy derived from empty space and Live-O-Med, a medication with the proven effect of indefinitely elongating human life, stopping the ageing process, and providing immunity to all diseases and injuries.

According to analysts, Sculley's announcements might have an adverse effect on Apple's stock price.

clonenode
Jun 3, 2002, 08:00 AM
A thread at AppleInsider (click here) (http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=001760&p=2) states that the eMac is going to be sold at the Apple Retail stores. That would be a pretty big announcement, don't you think?

cryptochrome
Jun 3, 2002, 11:07 AM
iPod is great PARTLY because it uses firewire. Firewire is great but not many people outside of macs have it. They do have USB though.

Rather than putting a seperate/alternative USB port in the iPod for firewire-less machines, how out-of-the-question would it be to make a firewire-to-USB adaptor? Aside from the difference in speed, their capabilities are similar (namely hot-pluggable).

Coupled with the necessary windows software, this would allow apple to sell iPods to the larger computing community, and help drive adoption of firewire ports for people who get tired of USB speeds on their iPods. It could be USB 2.0 even, though that would be a more complex matter and would make the adoption of firewire less appealing.

johnpaul191
Jun 3, 2002, 11:09 AM
[wild guessing ahead] Jobs is going to invite everyone to the party next month in NYC...... ipod sized pieces of cake for all! yay! the TAM came out in March 1997, so will they follow up with some sort of 25th birthday magical device only sold in limited numbers to the public.... ... new to Macs? what's a TAM? (http://tam.axon.net/) go there and find out......

Wry Cooter
Jun 3, 2002, 01:09 PM
Has anyone paid attention to the "next big things" that Sculley has attached himself to since his Apple days? Has anyone ever heard of those products again in the least manner shape or form?

I'm trying to recall off the top of my head, seems that Sculley was big on promoting products that were almost already being done cheaper and better by others... one may have been PDA related, the other was related to digital photography. His actual career as a hired gun for high tech start-ups since has been rather embarrassing in my memory. But those are the details that one should pull up for doing a quija board job on Sculley's announcement, which in all likelihood is totally unrelated to what Jobs is going to announce.

And regarding the usual retrospective armchair quarterbacking of the fall of Apple that does not deserve further comment here... I don't think anyone ever gives Spindler nearly enough blame, for what that is worth. If any one was exemplifying the Peter Principle, it was Spindler- a company being run by the mentalities of middle management works as well as its vision.

jayscheuerle
Jun 3, 2002, 04:03 PM
Scully's introducing a revolutionary transportation device, codenamed "Mary Anne", a unicycle with gyroscopic stabilizers and redundant onboard computers that keep it upright at all times and is controlled merely by leaning. Barnum and Bailey has placed a preliminary order for 500 of the $4,000 vehicles. Scully was quoted as saying "People will build circuses around these things."

MasterX (OSiX)
Jun 3, 2002, 05:02 PM
Originally posted by Cappy
Don't forget we're due for a video conferencing solution from Apple as per Steve's comments earlier this year.

I often wounder what Apple will create or augment to help out some of MacOS X's shortcommings:

Video Conferencing - iChat
Scanner Support - iPhoto (but 10.2 seeds suggest Image capture)
What are we supposed to do for QT Clips off digital cameras? - no idea (Image Capture seems so weird now)
Video input (ATi Xclaim USB/MyTV)- more Image Capture?
Finder should update track names from CDs via iTunes, but doesn't
Wacom - InkWell (makes very happy, well if it'll work on serial, my last legacy device)

There's obviously a ton but those are my 2 cents. (Still waiting for scanner support into SOMETHING besides the crappy EPSON/UMAX drivers, doesn't PhotoShop 7 work with scanners in OSX with the OSX TWAIN drivers? I wish i knew)

MasterX (OSiX)
Jun 3, 2002, 05:05 PM
Originally posted by Kid Red


No, it's just that Apple will not wait to announce stuff at big shows anymore. When it's ready, it will be announced.

10.1.5 isn't worth the publicity and interviews for stevie. This is something else, like a new iDevice like stylus or tablet or iApp like video conferencing or something. Still can't figure out what it could be.

Not so much apple doesn't like MW anymore, but they save NEW products for MW. Ok the 2nd iBook (Dual USB), iPod and Xserve don't count.

Ok nix that, they have no freakin' pattern. All I know is after last year's MWNY apple wised up BIG TIME. Look at MWSF (iMac, iBook, iPhoto). I just REALLY miss the old MWs. If they still existed we'd see a new iMac, iBook, PowerBook, PowerMac, AND the Xserve at MWNY this year. Instead we have most of them now. Hard to say which is REALLY better, but Apple is good at staying competative now, ALSO it lets them update AGAIN at MW if they really want to.

MasterX (OSiX)
Jun 3, 2002, 05:07 PM
"earth-shattering"

Taken literally I think we all know that Scully really wants.

HE'S TRYING TO KILL US ALL!!!!






AGAIN!!!!!

Wry Cooter
Jun 3, 2002, 06:03 PM
Originally posted by MasterX (OSiX)

Ok nix that, they have no freakin' pattern. All I know is after last year's MWNY apple wised up BIG TIME..

Product announcements at the Expos never was in their favor-- the big buying periods are really before each expo.. school buying was at least a month before the summer expo and Holiday buying a month before the winter expo.

I've never liked that they are going up against CES each time either.

MasterX (OSiX)
Jun 3, 2002, 06:22 PM
Yeah, MW Keynotes in general has been slipping . Since the MWJP of the Flower Power iMacs so i recall. I guess now that apple is producing great products full-time we're all just harder to please. :)

MasterX (OSiX)
Jun 3, 2002, 06:28 PM
Originally posted by Foocha

Apple has had bad press coverage for the poor experience of Web browsing on an iMac. If the new Internet Explorer is tagged version 6, has anti-aliased type, uses Aqua widgets, matches the Windows feature-set and is Much Much faster, then that really is a minor upgrade worth talking to the press about.

Alternatively, 10.1.5 might be the first version of OS X to ship with Netscape, perhaps as the default browser. Perhaps Apple has got the scoop on Netscape 7 - they're certainly getting very close to AOL these days.

Apple sucks up to AOL (new Airport, hold their hand through OSX development). AOL lets Apple use AIM protocol.

Apple wouldn't use Netscape (again) simply because they use WAY too many workarounds. I mean some apps use workarounds for some minor issues (earlier versions of OSX 10.0, pointer disapearing while scrolling, etc) but Netscape REALLY must hate the individual OS. It looks like NetscapeOS when running, and although the smoothest out there for OSX, the display method looks COMPLETLY differnt from Quartz or anything else. I mean look at how the page tears at the bottom and top. Netscape was only good for it's compatability in OS9, now that died since IE-OSX is better than Netscape. I'll use Chimera if i want Mozilla. Cocoa lives forever!

Roger1
Jun 3, 2002, 07:20 PM
Hmmm. Maybe Fox is going to announce a new round of celebrity boxing? Jobs-v-Scully!:D

MasterX (OSiX)
Jun 3, 2002, 07:29 PM
Originally posted by Roger1
Hmmm. Maybe Fox is going to announce a new round of celebrity boxing? Jobs-v-Scully!:D

It was only a matter of time....

Roger1
Jun 3, 2002, 07:41 PM
Sorry! I COULD NOT Resist! :p

benjc
Jun 4, 2002, 03:21 AM
I have to disagree on a previous post about how Mozilla/Netscape is no good as an OSX app. It's actually an amazing port from my point of view. I work with Solaris, Windows, Linux and Mac OSX on all my desk, with my Titanium as my primary machine... and preferred interface into all the unix plaforms. Mozilla 1.0 runs on all platforms the exact same, and can look and feel the exact across them all. That is exactly what it should be like for a cross-platform product. I don't have to learn anything different.

It is the best browser I've used on OSX because it's actually compliant unlike Opera and OmniWeb and is much nicer to use that IE and works better than IE except on the Microsoft sites... but heck, even MSN doesn't completely work on OSX, it's windows only for music.msn.com for example.

If it's the bubbly aqua look you want, then no, this isn't for you, but for complete functionality, and a true OSX app that is proven cross-platform and uses skins exactly like every other platform then this is a great product, and it has no problems with fitting in perfectly in the OSX environment, graphics wise, as the default browser, with OSX panes instead of dialog boxes.

From an outsider of the Apple world who has come into it, it's nice to see such a great product from the non-Apple world work exactly like it does everywhere else in the world of Apple. It's exactly what we need.

And not only that, I can trust that it works, and it has cool tab browsing....

Ben

Mike Gagne
Jun 4, 2002, 03:32 AM
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Foocha 3. Job's is bigger than Sculley, in media terms, and Apple is bigger than any startup, unless Sculley's announcement really is something like a cure for cancer (unlikely).

....and just like most of todays cancer cures that usually kill the patient Scully almost cured Apple

imct
Jun 4, 2002, 08:10 AM
Originally posted by Mike Gagne
[QUOTE][i]
....and just like most of todays cancer cures that usually kill the patient Scully almost cured Apple


it's very sad that some people spread false information about the current clinical practice against cancer. if you were in the field you would know that today mortality rates from treatment are very low, as we have new strategies against treatment side effects.
what kills people is cancer, not good clinical practice, and I wish we could avoid misinformation in a difficult battle like the one that science and people are fighting against neoplasia.
I know this isn't the proper place to discuss this matter, but I just can't stand this kind of urban legends. believe what you want, but don't publish it unless there is up-to-date and unbiased evidence.

regards

buffsldr
Jun 4, 2002, 09:18 AM
Originally posted by imct



it's very sad that some people spread false information about the current clinical practice against cancer. if you were in the field you would know that today mortality rates from treatment are very low, as we have new strategies against treatment side effects.
what kills people is cancer, not good clinical practice, and I wish we could avoid misinformation in a difficult battle like the one that science and people are fighting against neoplasia.
I know this isn't the proper place to discuss this matter, but I just can't stand this kind of urban legends. believe what you want, but don't publish it unless there is up-to-date and unbiased evidence.

regards

Relax. I think you can hardly call a macrumors post as "publishing it". Dude made his point. We all understood his point and so did you. Spare us the condescending rhetoric about the integrity of medicine.

jelloshotsrule
Jun 4, 2002, 11:42 AM
we know what jobs announced...

what did sculley do? sorry if i missed something obvious

imct
Jun 4, 2002, 12:42 PM
Originally posted by buffsldr


Relax. I think you can hardly call a macrumors post as "publishing it". Dude made his point. We all understood his point and so did you. Spare us the condescending rhetoric about the integrity of medicine.

I am relaxed. I don't know about doctors in the USA, but on this side of the Atlantic medicine is pretty much working your arse off for a good thing and not getting paid that much (unless of course you're an old ob/gyn or ophtalmologist) and we're also happy doing it. Here we have free medical insurance for all citizens, and we work with a fixed wage most of the times. I don't know about your integrity, buffsldr, but I know that I've got some and most of my colleagues here do. End of story.

Skandranon
Jun 4, 2002, 01:28 PM
Dude. Where's Sculley announcement already? I have to leave work in an hour and still nothing.

What the *****.

:confused:

jbouklas
Jun 4, 2002, 07:33 PM
I'm still waiting...

puffmarvin
Jun 4, 2002, 08:32 PM
geez... sculley sucks.... where is this "breakthrough" announcement?

jenkij
Jun 4, 2002, 08:32 PM
Does live pictures inc. still exist? didn't Sculley have something going on with that? I have searched all the national news sites and really can't find anything.

hal9000
Jun 5, 2002, 02:03 AM
John Sculley's announcement is...

...drum roll please...

...his new company called InPhonic that will provide wireless bidding services for eBay for $2.99 per month.

:o

Gelfin
Jun 5, 2002, 02:31 AM
Originally posted by hal9000
John Sculley's announcement is...

...drum roll please...

...his new company called InPhonic that will provide wireless bidding services for eBay for $2.99 per month.

:o

Wow. That's... um... okay, that sucks.

Why is it that every business I see with Sculley at the helm just screams "doomed" to me? That "Gizmoz" company... yeesh. Maybe somebody should tell him he could just flush the money down the toilet quicker. Probably says something about why his tenure at Apple was less than spectacular.

Mike Gagne
Jun 5, 2002, 03:17 AM
it's very sad that some people spread false information about the current clinical practice against cancer. if you were in the field you would know that today mortality rates from treatment are very low, as we have new strategies against treatment side effects.
what kills people is cancer, not good clinical practice, and I wish we could avoid misinformation in a difficult battle like the one that science and people are fighting against neoplasia.
I know this isn't the proper place to discuss this matter, but I just can't stand this kind of urban legends. believe what you want, but don't publish it unless there is up-to-date and unbiased evidence.

regards

You are right about cancer......I should know as I have had friends die of it and have had it myself.......I didnt die thanks to quick acting dedicated medical pros. Now Scully....maybe he is a cancer and not the "cure" that I tried to intimate he was......maybe we all imitate cancer at times.....growing to fast and taking all we can get from our host.......In the middle of this dark humor was a thread of a point that was made as a metaphor....I did not intend to disparage..... Regards

DavidOS
Jun 5, 2002, 10:07 AM
http://news.com.com/2100-1033-932504.html?legacy=cnet&tag=lthd

That is what Scully did . . . booring . . . !

Mr. Anderson
Jun 5, 2002, 11:43 AM
Oh, that's pathetic. A wireless eBay bidding system? I could see, sort of, why they would have thought it would be earth shattering. Now all the eBay geeks can bid on their cell phones, whoo hoo! It might be benificial for a few, but I hardly call it a major new tech. Its not evolutionary nor revolutionary, its just taking a system and expanding its service.

I would have been happy to see a 'MaryAnn'....

Wry Cooter
Jun 5, 2002, 12:31 PM
Originally posted by dukestreet
Now all the eBay geeks can bid on their cell phones, whoo hoo!

Now you no longer need to be at home tied to the Desktop as the bid ends, so you can pay too much for worthless junk while driving down the road eating frenchfries! Impress your dates... "Hah, just got a Boba Fett for only 9 dollars!" They will be so awed they may not handle seeing you again.

I think it seems a big whoop to the suits because it is one of the first real 'buy it on your phone web thingies", and also they view it a bit like opening the stock market to home clients 24/7... which creates its own sort of false bubble.

Mr. Anderson
Jun 5, 2002, 12:35 PM
Its still a small market niche. And with very limited press it seems it won't take off anytime soon. Hell, there's no mention of it on eBay's home page, figure they'd want to tell everyone, weird.

LordJohnWhorfin
Jun 5, 2002, 01:33 PM
Live Picture has been Dead Picture for a long time now.
John Sculley was instrumental in running it into the ground. He was the same guy who almost destroyed Apple by pursuing unreasonable margins at the expense of market share (Mac market share in 1989 was 25%!) and signing the secret agreement with Bill Gates which granted them the right to copy core Apple UI behavior, causing them to lose their long early-90s lawsuit against microsoft.
A visionary? Yeah, in a sense: keep track of what he's involved in and stay as far away as possible!

topicolo
Jun 6, 2002, 10:57 AM
Yeah, Sculley's stupidity makes me cry...

I can't help but wonder what apple would be like if they let people clone macs early on. Would they be like what MS is now? or would they still get beaten down by MS, just like palm? If apple succeeded and became huge like MS, would they be hated as the "evil empire?"

I guess we'll never know

Foocha
Jun 6, 2002, 11:21 AM
I've often wondered about the old "what if" scenario.

If Apple had managed to pull it off, and set up the right OEM agreements, the Mac could have become the defacto standard (this would have taken some help from Microsoft, who had volunteered to broker the deals with IBM clone manufacturers at the time).

If Mac had become the standard, they would have invested more in Copeland and probably pulled it off. Rather than using OS X now, we'd be using System 8 with a micro kernel, multi tasking & memory protection. NeXT would probably have gone bust by now, and Microsoft would be competing with Lotus to be leader in office productivity software. Apple would probably have stopped manufacturing hardware, and Dell would be the leading Mac developer!

By now, Netscape would have taken Apple to court for illegally commingling their Web browers Cyberdog (they would probably have paid big buck to a brand consultant to come up with a better name by now) with their operating system.

In this scenario, Apple's monopoly of desktop operating systems would be more complete than Microsoft's today, since Apple & Microsoft would be collaborating, Microsoft would not have developed Windows.

Since it's in my nature to support the underdog, I'd be a Linux user and anti-Apple! Shudder.

Wry Cooter
Jun 6, 2002, 05:38 PM
Originally posted by topicolo

I can't help but wonder what apple would be like if they let people clone macs early on. Would they be like what MS is now? or would they still get beaten down by MS, just like palm? If apple succeeded and became huge like MS, would they be hated as the "evil empire?"


I don't think it would have mattered too much... what really lost Macs their share happened before they were ever released, it was IBM coming out with 16 bit while apples installed base was 8 bit Apple IIe. Sixteen bit is the first case that businesses really thought the machines were useful for spreadsheets. When macs first became available, the intel users were already entrenched into their decisions.

If cloning happened earlier in Macs history, it would have had to have happened BEFORE windows, or GEM desktop to have made any difference in Market Share.

Foocha
Jun 7, 2002, 03:17 AM
I guess that would have been the time to release Mac for Intel - with Microsoft's backing, and a substantially superior user experience, I would have been the logical next step from DOS.

topicolo
Jun 7, 2002, 09:29 AM
Originally posted by Foocha
I guess that would have been the time to release Mac for Intel - with Microsoft's backing, and a substantially superior user experience, I would have been the logical next step from DOS.

The thing was, the early macs were FAR superior to PCs hardware-wise, just like how the early Powermacs were superior to first-gen pentiums. The 68000 was much faster than the 8086 and the mac 128k had a much more advanced display. Why would any of apple's brass at the time think of switching? They'd just spent millions in R&D and they weren't willing to throw that all away. I doubt apple would have survived the transition if they switched to intel.

What really screwed apple was their reluctance to consider the mac as a gaming system. They didn't want the mac to be considered a "cute toy" and discouraged game makers. Big Mistake! Games drove the PC industry and apple was unfortunately left in the dust. Still, I blame it all on Sculley. He's a dumb moron and it appears from his latest "announcement" that he still has his head stuck up his ass.

Wry Cooter
Jun 7, 2002, 11:28 AM
Blame Sculley if you want, but wasn't the 'no games on mac' actually a Steverino edict?

Foocha
Jun 7, 2002, 02:53 PM
We could have a long debate on 68k v x86, in the eighties but it would just be very self indulgent of us and not get us anywhere ;)

I'm sure you're right about games in consumer space, I guess I was thinking more of business - the widespread adoption of Microsoft/Intel in corporates is what nearly killed Apple - the problem is that people want the same kind of machine at home as they're used to at work, so when the buy a home PC they buy a Windows one.

That's why I go back to the idea that a Mac in the late eighties running on Intel with Microsoft's backing could have cleaned up in the business sector and have gone on to dominate consumer-space as well.

The only thing that save the Mac was the Internet, which levelled the playing field, and now Apple's focus on iApps - creating tangible reasons to choose Mac over PC.

We can't assume that the Mac would have survived through locked-in vertical sectors like design & publishing alone. Retrenched in this way, as Apple found itself in the mid-90's its revenue was so limited they could no longer afford to develop the OS so that it was competative with Windows.

I'm glad that Apple's back on the right track again now, and look forward to seeing the Mac reclaim some market share from Windows, and perhaps even move into new markets, for the first time in years. Go OS X, Go!