Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Jobs Excited about Device, Keynote?

The most important addition to Apple, the one that would benefit the consumers, the staff, the shareholders and everyone in the world for that matter, wouldn't be a phone, or a widescreen iPod, or a HD display - it'd be a roadmap to minimising the companies C emissions and increasing equality within it's economy, ie. right down to the assemblers at the plant.

That's not something I could go to a store and pick up, or carefully unwrap, but it's more important than everything ever announced at a MacWorld combined.


But hey, this is an American company, so I guess I'll have to make do with the short term material satisfaction of a smartphone and new UI graphics - which would be substantial mind you.

But short term...

ie. before earth = mars.
 
cyberlarson said:
What if they are going to release 10.5 to ANY Intel machine. That would rock things up
Click to expand...

If Apple were to license OSX, the release of 10.5 would be the right time. While releasing OSX for all BIOS based PCs is neither practical nor desirable, between OSX10.5, bootcamp, and Intel's EFI firmware and chipsets Apple is in a good position to offer a licensing program on its terms with little added effort from either Apple or the PC makers to make it effective. The drivers already have to exist for Apple's own hardware to work.
 
BRLawyer said:
I just would like to share some thoughts with you, after having talked to SJ yesterday...he told me the following things will appear tomorrow, in the sequence described below:

1st hour -

1 - State of all things Mac;

2 - Leopard preview;

3 - Updated Minis with Core 2 Duo;

4 - New MBP 12/13";

5 - And one more thing for Macs...30th Anniversary Mac (Frogdesign form factor and extreme GPU);

2nd hour -

6 - State of all things iPod;

7 - New movies at iTMS and Beatles catalog;

8 - iTV;

9 - and one more thing...the iPod Phone!
Click to expand...



3rd HOUR:

We all wake up


:p
 
And now for some completely foundless speculation...

Note that the following is simply idle speculation. Caution: too much idle speculation just 1 day prior to MWSF may be hazardous to your health, especially if it leads you to expect too much...

If this is true, and SJ is really that enthusiastic about this device, I wonder if it is the long-awaited Apple phone. I just can't see SJ getting that excited about the iTV.

Now, keep in mind that Apple is all about vertical integration. The iPod is not successful because it is the cheapest or the most tricked-out MP3 player, but because of its integration with iTunes. We love the Mac because the Mac and OS X were designed to work together. So, Apple won't just introduce another consumer phone, or even an MP3 player/phone, because the only advantage this would provide would be that you would have one less thing to carry around. If SJ is excited about this, it is because he thinks this device will change the way we do things, and help Apple to grow both in sales and in public awareness.

So how could a phone do this? It would have to allow for total integration with your home computer. So, a PDA with some form of OS X Lite would make sense. Perhaps with up to 8 (or 16?) MB of flash memory, which would have to be shared between the OS, contact lists and iTunes. So, it would have some limitations as an MP3 player, since this would not be its primary purpose. This would have the added benefit of not eating too much into the iPod market.

The really exciting this about this would be that if it were successful, it could also drive Mac sales. The question is, will there be enough of a market for this phone if the additional connectivity/functionality only works if you have a Mac, and would PC owners buy the phone just for its built-in features? And having bought it, will some PC owners opt to purchase a Mac for the added functionality?
 
Xyl said:
In this case, selling OS X for PCs won't make Apple lots of money, unless they also charge 400 USD per license.
Click to expand...
Don't make me come over there and give you an economics lesson. Profit is marginal profit TIMES sales volume and you can make more at $99 than at $400 on a product that has close to zero marginal cost. It's called elasticity of demand. And Microsoft cannot sell at $400 if Apple comes in at $99.
 
Machead III said:
The most important addition to Apple, the one that would benefit the consumers, the staff, the shareholders and everyone in the world for that matter, wouldn't be a phone, or a widescreen iPod, or a HD display - it'd be a roadmap to minimising the companies C emissions and increasing equality within it's economy, ie. right down to the assemblers at the plant.

That's not something I could go to a store and pick up, or carefully unwrap, but it's more important than everything ever announced at a MacWorld combined.


But hey, this is an American company, so I guess I'll have to make do with the short term material satisfaction of a smartphone and new UI graphics - which would be substantial mind you.

But short term...

ie. before earth = mars.
Click to expand...

HEY TREE HUGGER... don't rain on my parade. Let's save the environment on Tuesday, after the announcement. I'm sure that Samsung, microsoft, dell, and HP have already made those enviromental announcements at CES.

Don't kill the vibe yet, wait until everybody starts complaining that they didn't get what they wanted at Macworld.

:D
 
BillHarrison said:
What if, of all things, the big announcement is NOT hardware? Lets look at the current climate:

Apple has LOTs of mindshare, and has ported OS X to intel. They have a "New version" of OS X coming out. Coincidentally, so does microsoft. OS X is cheaper. In many ways, its better, especially for the home user. OS X Basically "works" on standard PC hardware, but for a few driver issues.

What if the big announcement, of all things, is a retail version of OS X for the common PC?! It would be a huge transition, but one that is PERFECTLY timed. Apple has let people use windows on its machines, it has the right machines, and now has some idea of how to keep its sales will stand up against computers that can now be basically compared to one another apples to apples.

I can't be the first person to have thought of this? In a few months Microsoft expects millions of people to fork over $$$ or more for vista, would that not be the PERFECT time for Apple to say, hey, look, we have a GOOD quality alternative?

Apple will always be in hardware, but now, its in "Designer" hardware, IE, stuff that I would buy from them just because of what it is, not because it runs OS X. For example, looking at the macbook, its the best, most attractive piece of hardware for that price. Sure, I can get a similair speced laptop for 699-899 from dell, but, it wont look as good, it wont have all the features, etc.

I dunno, anyone care to comment on this idea? I mean, hardware sales only take you so far. I would dare say opening up OS X to generic boxes would concievably improve Mac hardware sales in the long run.

It would certainly widen the installed base which is great for getting more programmers etc on board.
Click to expand...

The only flaw in the logic is the majority of Apple's sales today and the inflated stock price is based on hardware sales now and in the future. If apple did this the market reaction would not be good (speaking of stock owners) they would see this as a loss of revenues and it would take years to recover the lost hardware sales with a new software revenue model.

Remember Apple dominates its space in the market because they control the total experience. Doing this will cause the experience be less and as users experience problems with the OS due to minor differences in hardware they will blame and hold Apple responsible for things outside of their control. Just look at the PC industry, you buy a computer put software on it, update the OS, update drivers, install new hardware and when you have a problem all the different manufacturers involved or who you think are causing the problem all point the finger at the other guy. They can do this since it is very hard to tell who is really at fault.

You do not have that problem with Apple, thus the reason for Apple success people who own a PC are going throught what the auto industry did in the 70's why do I have to put up with problems when I can buy from someone else who take full responsible for what I bought of them. That is what Ford & GM are dying because auto companies who care about your driving experience from start to finish.
 
Machead III said:
The most important addition to Apple, the one that would benefit the consumers, the staff, the shareholders and everyone in the world for that matter, wouldn't be a phone, or a widescreen iPod, or a HD display - it'd be a roadmap to minimising the companies C emissions and increasing equality within it's economy, ie. right down to the assemblers at the plant.
Click to expand...
Regardless of how much carbon is emitted making computers, the Internet, by cutting transportation waste, is doing more to limit C emissions than any factor other than green plants and algae.
 
crispoe said:
OS X on PCs

I thought about this as well.
That would be one secret apple would want to keep until after vista was finalized.

As far as apple losing their hardware business- I really doubt it. Sure it may take a small hit, but as Apple becomes more and more a consumer electronics company, the pipeline is going to grow and they may be able to afford to sell less Mac HW (even though they won't). Macs are now comparable to other computer manufacturers in terms of price, but Apple still leads the way when it comes to hardware design, looks, and brand. Macs will still sell even if you can run Mac OS X on a Dell. People love the sexiness of the Mac, and I don't think thats about to change. Competition is good thing, and will keep Apple being innovative on the Mac Hardware.

Apple would need to implement something to battle piracy for the Mac OS, if they were to release it for all PCs. They would also need to greatly increase the support and QA staff around OSX because of new drivers etc that would be needed to ensure stability.

I don't expect them to license the OS to Dell or any other manufacturers to be included with a new computer, without a big premium. It would strictly be a packaged standalone product.

If this is true.. if you were in the market for a new computer, it would probably be cheaper just to buy a mac, than to buy a dell and then buy OS X/iLife.
But for those of us who have PCs and want OS X, we need to pay the $199 for the license. Then we need to spend another $79 for iLife.

If they really wanted to ensure stability for there Pro Line of applications (Final Cut) they could use the TPM module in Macs to only let Pro Applications run on Mac Hardware. Just an idea.

I doubt it will happen but it would certainly stir up the sh*tshorm.
Click to expand...

Apple could do this by mandating its EFI implementation instead of BIOS and the use of specific intel reference designs. At the end of the day, Apple has as much to fear from Dell or HP selling OSX as BMW does the 2008 Malibu taking way 5-series customers. Completely different markets for different people.
 
Rootman said:
Don't make me come over there and give you an economics lesson. Profit is marginal profit TIMES sales volume and you can make more at $99 than at $400 on a product that has close to zero marginal cost. It's called elasticity of demand. And Microsoft cannot sell at $400 if Apple comes in at $99.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure Vista has a higher profit margin than OS X, when it's at 400 vs 129 - and Vista will also easily outsell OS X simply because of the fact that the majority of your average consumer has never even heard of the words "OS X".
Second, if Vista reduces their prices, then the average consumer won't even glance at OS X, since these consumers are already all entrenched in the Windows world - and still think that switching to a Mac OS would cause compatibility issues etc. The only way for consumers to contemplate OS X is a viable option is if it's a lot cheaper than Vista.

So my point is - if prices are kept as is, and OS X is sold to PCs as well, OS X will gain marketshare (most likely). But, Apple won't make lots more money, unless the marketshare becomes quite substantial.
 
I don't know if Apple will license Mac OS X to generic PCs and how that'll affect Apple, but I'd love to build my own computer. While I like the style of Macs, I'd like to add more hard drives & DVD/CS-ROMs w/o having to get external ones that clutter up my desk.

Also, check out TV shows, commercials & movies. Pretty much whenever a computer is in the shot, it's a Mac. Examples: The Devil Wears Prada, Seinfeld (which had several different kinds of Macs throughout the series). If Apple DOES license Mac OS X, a lot of people will still buy Macs because 1) they're stylish and 2) a lot of people are too lazy or whatever to have to go to Dell or where ever and then to the Apple store to buy Mac OS X. With people like my dad who don't know anything about computers except word processing and surfing the web, they just don't know what to look for and would just go to an Apple store and buy a Mac that suits their needs. Most people I know don't know what Blu-Ray is or how much RAM they need or whatever. ALl they know is that they want a computer that's easy to use and doesn't need a 400 page user's manual.
 
Skull Leader said:
And you thought that 802.11n would be impressive....:D
Click to expand...

The only problem is that 802.11n is not ready for prime time, I just saw a tech presentation from the major suppliers of 802.11n and it can not support the bandwidth it offers pass about 25 ft in a normal home. What I mean by normal is your post 1970's wood framed USA house if you get into an older homes with plaster walls or your European concrete or brick contruction I double it will be able to do much more than 25 ft.

Because of this current limitation, this puts doubts on the iTV, if they use 802.11n or g there is no way you could stream HD video from you computer. You need the higher bandwidth that 802.1.n offers but it has be able to offer it at greater distances they 25ft. everything is going HD now and you need lots of bandwidth to stream HD content. I think this is the reason apple is offerinf the Enet port on the iTV, that is the only way to guarratee the bandwith. I bet Jobs demo video content that is HD but I bet it will be hardwired.
 
Rootman said:
Don't make me come over there and give you an economics lesson. Profit is marginal profit TIMES sales volume and you can make more at $99 than at $400 on a product that has close to zero marginal cost. It's called elasticity of demand. And Microsoft cannot sell at $400 if Apple comes in at $99.
Click to expand...

Don't make me comve over there and give you a leasson in reality... :D

Microsoft have three (3) sources of income for Windows.

1. Pre-installed. Try buying a machine without Windows on it. Unless you buy Apple, it is not very easy. MicroSoft make much of their OS revenue from this stream. Entering into this market is not easy as most manufacturers will not go near another OS for fear that M$ will cut them off. M$ has been found guilty of doing this very sort of thing in the past.

2. Corporate Accounts. This is where the big money is. M$ got lots of corporates to sign up for this multi-year deal where they were supposed to get all the new versions of Windows for the duration. Vista was pushed out just within the period most had signed up for so M$ could say they actually got something for all the millions they had paid. M$ sales people must be laughing the asses off about getting away with that one.

3. Upgrades/Homebuilders - Few people bother to upgrade Windows. They ususally get a new verson with their next machine. Or they used a pirate copy. This is the market Apple would have to chase. it is not a very profitable one. Add to that the nighmares of having to supports all those frankinstein configurations out there and very quickly you have a "market best not entered into"

And that is why Apple (correctly) is not selling OS X. It is used to add value to hardware (people can't pirate hardware).
 
Testing Validity of iPhone Rumors

Has SetteB or anyone else tried to see if their GSM phones have any reception in the Moscone Centre?

If there really will be an iPhone demo-ed at this year's MacWorld, then there would need to be full reception at the Centre. Otherwise, if Job's whips out the phone and there's not reception...well...it just wouldn't look good.

Also, has anyone tailed any of the major wireless providers CEO's to see if they HAPPENED to be in San Fransisco? That may be a big indicator as to where this is going...
 
mulletman13 said:
Powerbook G5!!!!

... wait... ha... that is sooo two years ago.... :)
Click to expand...

*looks both ways* Shhhhh!

don't tell anyone I said this but *looks around* PowerBook G7s Tuesday.
worried.gif
 
Rootman said:
Don't make me come over there and give you an economics lesson. Profit is marginal profit TIMES sales volume and you can make more at $99 than at $400 on a product that has close to zero marginal cost. It's called elasticity of demand. And Microsoft cannot sell at $400 if Apple comes in at $99.
Click to expand...

Economics lesson? You started kinda well but ended up pretty badly...what you said has NOTHING to do with the definition of elasticity of demand, which is linked to the overall receptiveness to price changes...
 
Rootman said:
Regardless of how much carbon is emitted making computers, the Internet, by cutting transportation waste, is doing more to limit C emissions than any factor other than green plants and algae.
Click to expand...

Actually the only reason I travel on business is because of the internet opening up new markets to us.
 
OSX on generic PC's

I don't see Steve selling OSX on generic hardware.

The only reason that people are giving for this scenario is the "Market Share" gain. Apple could care less about market share, it's all about profits and staying a viable company.

Has everyone already forgotten what Steve said when he came back to Apple?

It's not about Apple vs. Microsoft anymore. It's about Apple being the best at what they do. What is it that they do best? It's all about the user experience, end to end. You won't get the Apple experience by building your killer AMD system and making OSX run on it. Period.
 
nicksoper said:
I love the keynotes. At least you know something is coming! Even if it's small.
Click to expand...
Me too! Doesn't matter what it is... just show me at least iWork'07 - a spreadsheet will be a HUGE thing, even if it is a basic one. Fast forward 24hrs NOW.
 
Xyl said:
But, Apple won't make lots more money, unless the marketshare becomes quite substantial.
Click to expand...
Oh, no! -- you can't make money without substantial market share! Better sell my Apple stock! <pulls out remaining hair>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back