I agree that this is a trial balloon, and while its probably aimed at developers, it is strategically a bad idea right now in the context of the current consumer market.
Specifically, there's a ton of consumer market share sitting on the fence, asking themselves the old "will I get screwed if I change from Windows to Mac?", so for Apple to even tolerate any suggesting of dropping of legacy support at this time is strategically damaging.
Yeah, OK. So let's continue to support floppy disks, serial ports, DB9 ports, parallel ports, and PPC processors because you don't want anyone to be left behind.
Not my point. My point is that legacy support can just as much about
perception as it is about reality.
What "fence sitter" is waiting to see if PPC processors are going to be supported into the second decade of the 21st century? They only know Intel because they've had those stupid stickers on every box since the beginning of time. Move on.
You miss my point.
What's holding many 'fence sitters' from adopting is in many cases a "fear of the unknown", and/or false perceptions.
In general, they won't do serious, objective research, but will merely hook onto
ANY convenient excuse ... no matter how lame ... in order to stay within their comfort zone of the status quo.
Fear of file incompatibility is an excuse.
Fear of Apple going out of business is another excuse.
And so on.
Here, it is the 'fear' is for discontinuation of support.
And this is where rationality becomes blurred: notice that I said just "support", instead of "PPC support". The dilemma is that while dropping PPC support doesn't affect a 'fence sitter' directly, it does influence their perception as to how Apple operates (how long they stand behind their products). As such, the (potential) dropping of PPC support can -- if not done properly -- invoke a fear of "Apple could drop me like that", which can create a reluctance to buy Apple products.
For example, there's currently a lot of loud wailing going on because the video-out on the newest iPods apparently incorportates a new DRM, and as a result, aftermarket 3rd Party video interfaces have been broken. Right or wrong, Apple is taking some heat, and the visibility of these angry buyers will invariably affect iPod sales for awhile.
Overall, the more expensive the product, the more assurances that the consumer likes to have about it being a good investment.
An aspect of this is in creating consumer confidence that the manufacturer will support their products for a good number of years. One hard part is in picking the appropriate number of years to provide this support. Another hard part is in clearly articulating and educating the consumer as to what 'support' means, so as to manage their expectations. And yet another hard part is in being consistant with one's delivered message.
Some approaches will work better than others; they all have trade-offs. I'm of the general personal opinion that Apple could gain customers if they were to have a White Paper that clearly outlines their principles of operation, particularly if the terms thereon were consumer-friendly...for example, having a stated objective of a minimum of 7-10 years worth of corporate support. Lawyers don't like to make such promises, but that doesn't mean that it can never be done...it just means that its something that Lawyers don't like
-hh
