Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
New iMac In September
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Nope, the new 30" requires that new graphics card and I just don't see Apple letting the consumer decide what Graphics chip/card that goes into this level of computer. The PRO G5 Tower line, yes... but not this consumer level unit.lem0nayde said:
Of course, I see that you're "wishing out loud" rather than stating what you think Apple will do. I just don't think it'll happen.
Go away, Mr. Troll. No loyal mac user who has experienced OSX would say that. Go back to a Windows world? Sounds like you never left.Michael Vance said:
Speculation alert...
I believe one of the reasons why ONLY the new displays were announced at WWDC was so people who have been riding the consumer/professional fence could finally have a reason to say "I'm going to the Pro lineup now. I just HAVE to have one of these new displays!" So now, Apple will sell a display AND a G5 tower to go with it.
If they announced a great new iMac at the same time, maybe the fence riders would say "Man, I love those new displays, but I think I'll just stay in ConsumerLand a little longer".
Just a thought.
I believe one of the reasons why ONLY the new displays were announced at WWDC was so people who have been riding the consumer/professional fence could finally have a reason to say "I'm going to the Pro lineup now. I just HAVE to have one of these new displays!" So now, Apple will sell a display AND a G5 tower to go with it.
If they announced a great new iMac at the same time, maybe the fence riders would say "Man, I love those new displays, but I think I'll just stay in ConsumerLand a little longer".
Just a thought.
It would have to have a dvi port for conventional computing.Esben said:
Unlike what the others say, it would/could work and does work now to an extent, and I am sure Apple could have some new pixel/font/image scaling technology that would allow you to view images, at least iLife apps and maybe a new Tivo style Ivideo app (ala Itunes for video), on the TV clearly, having used an PM8600 at 800X600 on my TV and a PC Media center on a TV, yea I know. and also playing games on the TV using video out from the Radeon, it is possible to get "limited viewing functionality" on a TV.
However for serious work you would need an HDTV or a separate monitor capable of 1024X768 at least IMHO.
I admit it is very far fetch and I doubt anything close will happen, so no flaming is necessary, just state your views instead.
ChrisH3677 said:WHFO
TVs are multi-user devices. Computers are single or sometimes dual user devices. You can't mix them successfully. Computers most of the time are something we like to use in private. And that's not gunna change.
Dave: Dont underestimate Steve Jobs and company, if anyone can do that they can.
It's totally impractical. Sorry. What's more likely is that future versions of Airport Express will have a SVGA out, so you can do what you suggest. But to replace the monitor with a TV... nah.
Dave:It is not impractical once you realize it does not have to replace the monitor, but instead complement it, with a independent display like AV macs of old. totally separate. One could do regular computing in the computing room, why someone else in the living room is accessing all the ilife apps at the same time, via ethernet, airport express, or a long cable from the imac or some new technology as you suggest an airport with svideo connections on it
All these people who keep demanding a headless iMac annoy me.
Dave: Different stroke for different folks, dont let them annoy you, they want to buy a mac too, that is good for all Apple users.
Here's yet another wild theory....
How about a short aluminum enclosure, say 2 or 3 inches in height, barely deep enough for the SuperDrive, but pretty wide? Apple could have the display hanging off a basethat comes out of the top of the CPU( that is similar to the stand for the new displays), and possibly make the display replaceable if you ever wanted to go larger.
Or am I just mildly bitter because I didn't wait for the 17" iMac to ship?
JayCo said:
Any ideas on how Apple is going to change the iMac? I got a feeling that the round base will change; but in what way?
I wonder if they'll make the base more rectangular so as to allow the G5 to better fit?
How about a short aluminum enclosure, say 2 or 3 inches in height, barely deep enough for the SuperDrive, but pretty wide? Apple could have the display hanging off a basethat comes out of the top of the CPU( that is similar to the stand for the new displays), and possibly make the display replaceable if you ever wanted to go larger.
Or am I just mildly bitter because I didn't wait for the 17" iMac to ship?
My two hopes
1) Headless. The switcher has really disappeared now - while people are still switching, it's because of recommendations from friends/family who can help out and most people are more computer-literate than every nowadays.
2) Well priced. The trouble with Apple is that it hates reducing the cost of it's machines. Dell et all have switched down a gear. Look at my uber-**** table below to see what I mean
Apple Dell/PC World
High End Extreme end
Mid Range High End
Low End Mid-range
??? Low End
Most systems you see in the PC world are on price bracket below. You can now get systems (SP though... but it won't be far off before we see dual procs at these prices) which perform aswell as the PM but at current iMac pricing.
Cost is the real reason Apple can't compete for marketshare. A lot of people sadly love getting low priced stuff, even if it is a pile of ****. Look how successful Wal-Mart is.
Marketshare is important. It's the reason no apps are getting ported nowadays. Apple may conceal it with the announcement of Maya Unlimited, but really it's in a dire state. In the mid 90s, a lot of shrinkwrapped software was hybrid - worked on both mac and PC.
Of course I have no doubt that Apple will price it stupidly high (probably even higher than the current iMac) and it will not be headless. It's going to be commercial suicide and it's going to flop again like the LCD iMac did.
Apple's marketing for the consumer is really quite bad. On one end they have great popularity music stuff, but they have nothing to convert these users to. They should be working to convert all these ipod users. On another they haven't advertisted the eMac or iMac for years.
Sadly, Apple just can't muster the demand for really low priced stuff that they need. This is the reason they should of switched to x86 -- cost. It costs Apple way too much to produce a MB, CPU and case than it does Dell or any other PC supplier. Dell can ask Intel for 20 million CPUs and get real discounts on it, Apple can ask IBM to develop a CPU that might sell 1 million.
A previous CEO of Apple went on record saying that the biggest mistake he made was not switiching to x86.
1) Headless. The switcher has really disappeared now - while people are still switching, it's because of recommendations from friends/family who can help out and most people are more computer-literate than every nowadays.
2) Well priced. The trouble with Apple is that it hates reducing the cost of it's machines. Dell et all have switched down a gear. Look at my uber-**** table below to see what I mean
Apple Dell/PC World
High End Extreme end
Mid Range High End
Low End Mid-range
??? Low End
Most systems you see in the PC world are on price bracket below. You can now get systems (SP though... but it won't be far off before we see dual procs at these prices) which perform aswell as the PM but at current iMac pricing.
Cost is the real reason Apple can't compete for marketshare. A lot of people sadly love getting low priced stuff, even if it is a pile of ****. Look how successful Wal-Mart is.
Marketshare is important. It's the reason no apps are getting ported nowadays. Apple may conceal it with the announcement of Maya Unlimited, but really it's in a dire state. In the mid 90s, a lot of shrinkwrapped software was hybrid - worked on both mac and PC.
Of course I have no doubt that Apple will price it stupidly high (probably even higher than the current iMac) and it will not be headless. It's going to be commercial suicide and it's going to flop again like the LCD iMac did.
Apple's marketing for the consumer is really quite bad. On one end they have great popularity music stuff, but they have nothing to convert these users to. They should be working to convert all these ipod users. On another they haven't advertisted the eMac or iMac for years.
Sadly, Apple just can't muster the demand for really low priced stuff that they need. This is the reason they should of switched to x86 -- cost. It costs Apple way too much to produce a MB, CPU and case than it does Dell or any other PC supplier. Dell can ask Intel for 20 million CPUs and get real discounts on it, Apple can ask IBM to develop a CPU that might sell 1 million.
A previous CEO of Apple went on record saying that the biggest mistake he made was not switiching to x86.
aldo said:
Yes... Those previous CEOs did SO much for the company...
Switching to x86 would have ended the company, period. Developers simply would not have stomached the transition to both a new operating system, and processor platform. They might as well have just started doing Windows software.
You don't seem to understand that not only do a lot of developers have an investment in PowerPC, but that it's actually a much better and more well-respected platform than x86.
I don't know why you use a Mac if all you want to run is PC software. What exactly do you do with your computer, anyway? What kind of apps really aren't out there for you to use? Do you really need 500 choices for every kind of application out there, 495 of which are utter crap and destroy your system and infect you with spyware and all the other totally ridiculous realities of the Windows/x86 world? Mac OS X rocks, developers are actually FLOCKING toward the platform despite your trolling, and you can run many of the best apps out there across many fields, with some particular niches excluded.
You seem to forget that one of the things that makes Macs so great is that many Mac-only apps are out there, apps that often push the envelope well beyond what stuff is doing on the Windows/x86 side.
You are also denying that Apple is one of what, two computer makers that is actually making any money right now? By all accounts the computer is doing very successfully, and in fact weathered the tech industry implosion well better than most. Why? Because of constant innovation -- they made one of the largest platform transitions the industry has seen right in the middle of the tech industry crises, when most companies were being extremely conservative in their actions. But not Apple. "We will innovate our way out of this downturn." And they did!
Sometimes I have to wonder about many of the folks who frequent this board. How many teenage armchair analysts are out there? I wonder how many don't even own a Mac.
aldo said:
Word of mouth continues to be one of the most effective sales tools available, period. As for people being more computer-literate now than ever before, that's a crock of stuff if I ever heard it. I work in tech support, bub, at a call center for one of the major PC sellers. The customers who typically call in are anything but saavy and literate.
Um, no. Sorry. That's not to say that Dell doesn't make high-end systems. They all do. And the highest-end ones are probably made by Alienware. Most people I know who want a high end system build it.
Oh great. You're after the Walmartization of America, aren't you? Yes, you're right inasmuch as people have been brainwashed that "because it is cheaper, it is better." It is such a low-brow mentality demographic you're talking about that most self-respecting PC manufacturers avoid it as much as possible. People who buy cheap crap like that have no taste to begin with, no refinement and no education. Their opinions are irrelevant because they are uninformed.
And you were around during the 1980s? Really? In the 1980s, there was NO standard bearer in the computer world. There were probably at least 9 different platforms out there, not counting custom rigs and other small fry. If a company wanted to produce a program and capture a number of computer users out there, they had to write 3, 4 or 5 different versions of the same app. Most developers stuck with 1-2 platforms because that was all they could afford in development, testing and support staffs.
In the 1980s, Mac users dropped off the radar of computer dealers and retailers because we mostly bought everything via mail order. This was a very stupid tactical mistake made collectively by us users, but it is what it is.
Um, excuse me but the LCD iMac has not been a flop for Apple.
Apple realizes that computer platform conversion is not going to be driven by the iPod. If they thought that, they wouldn't have put out a Windows version or kept it on parity with features. Users in the PC world might be somewhat impressed with an Apple product once they get it in their hands and use it on a regular basis, but this isn't going to cause the majority of them to suddenly jump ship and buy Macs anymore than you would ask your air conditioner guy to build you a car no matter how much you trust his mechanical instincts.
I don't even know why I'm continuing to argue with you. Apple won't switch to the x86 platform because: 1. They would loose their entire hardware sales which would kill them; 2. They would loose whatever credibility they have established by producing their own hardware and be relegated to 2nd, 3rd or worse class status; 3. Your argument is predicated on the theory that Apple wants to attract every last man, woman and child to the Mac. Apple has given every indication over the years that they have no desire to have the dregs of humanity as their customers. I wouldn't want them, either.
That would be John Sculley. He took over when Steve was ousted from Apple (for what were probably legitimate reasons at the time). John and those who followed him are responsible in the capacity of leaders for Apple getting into the deplorable condition they have been in, which has also in turn led to the low market share they currently have. I, frankly, wouldn't trust Mr. Sculley's judgement as far as I could hurtle Mr. Sculley. He is a manager, not a leader.
While it might be possible that ADDING a headless version could be a good idea getting rid of a mid-range all in one is not.aldo said:
Honestly Apple doesn't just have a bunch of people who sit around and say, hmmm I think we will just sell an iMac with an attached monitor. No they do research and look at the market and say, "If we sell an iMac without attached monitor will it help us or hurt us? Will we get more or less sales? Will it be as good a product?"
Ok, Economics 101.
LESSON ONE
You get what you pay for. When you buy a bargain basement priced PC you are getting a bargain basement computer.
LESSON TWO
You can't compare prices on dissimilar products. Yes a $500 Dell PC is available but comparing that to an iMac is absurd. You have to look at what you are getting for your money.
Ok heres the thing, alot of people like comparing Apple to Dell. I think that is really dumb, here's why:
Dell is a company that wants to sell lots and lots and lots of computers. That is there sole focus. Their philosophy is that volume is the key to success.
Apple is a company that wants to sell lots of QUALITY products. Apple probably could sell a watered down Mac, but it wouldn't help them, it would hurt them. They would be selling out on their philosophy that quality is number one. In order to sell cheap computers you have to use cheaper parts. PLUS, and this is a big plus, Apple doesn't just sell boxes. Dell does. They take a case, put in some components, install Windows and off it goes. Apple on the other hand takes the time to make sure it all works well together. Its too different goals and trying to compare the two is like trying to compare the strategy of a Major League Baseball team to that of NHL Hockey team.
Besides games, name one area where there isn't good software available for the Mac. Name one.
How in the world was the LCD iMac a flop, it has sold incredibly well. Also I am sick of hearing this stupidly high argument about the iMac. Yes the current line was a little high-priced, but only because the eMac was spec-wise par and cheaper. If you think the iMac is too high priced by an eMac, for goodness sake they are only $800.
The trouble is you have people on this forum and elsewhere who want PowerMac performance at an eMac price, and sorry but you guys are out of your flipping minds.
What people really need to get is that Apple, right now, if ever, is not trying to capture the whole market. Now Steve may make his comments about going after the other 95% but I hope Apple never does get that high. If they do then they become big and bloated and will lose focus, by being smaller they are more agile and flexible and able to inovate. To become that big they would lose focus on what makes Apple special.
So given that Apple isn't really after 100% market share (nor should they be) why get mad that they are ignoring a market that they don't feel the need to compete in? Low end PC's exist, but Apple doesn't want to lower their standards in order to compete. Imagine what you are saying about Apple offering bottom of the line PC's and think about how absurd it would sound if you walked into a board meeting at Macy's and told them they were missing out on a whole low end market being covered by Kmart/Walmart. You would be laughed out of the meeting. Why? Because Macy's focus is on a different area. In order to attack the low-end would mean they would totally change what the company is, probably lose focus, lose money, there is no point. Likewise Apple doesn't NEED the bottom end, and with the limited resources that they have (like any company does) they have decided to focus elsewhere. And we should all be very glad they do. If Apple starts spending their money on low-end machines that they barely make a profit of off its not going to be a positive thing.
Well replied, Mike, Nick and Kriz. I'll just add, if Apple went x86, then they would be dead coz they'd have had to compete in the same cut-throat market as PC manufacturers. This is why Porsche, Ferrari, BMW et al survive despite having small portions of the overall car marketshare. They have large portions of a specialist area.
Aldo, check this article on Apple and marketshare. It'll change your thinking. Interestingly it was written 12 months ago and the writer continues to be vindicated with Apple still going from strength to strength.
http://www.macopinion.com/columns/engine/03/07/16/
Also, a quote from another article (I reckon we should all get this one stamped on our foreheads):
Here's the link... http://www.codepoetry.net/archives/2003/06/26/on_marketshare.php
So, the iMac will be what it has always been. A machine for a particular market, one that the PC manufacturers just don't seem to be able to crack (coz they just don't understand the elegance of design required) - i.e. the computer as an appliance. (and I'd be guessing, but Apple would have the large majority of that market)
Aldo, check this article on Apple and marketshare. It'll change your thinking. Interestingly it was written 12 months ago and the writer continues to be vindicated with Apple still going from strength to strength.
http://www.macopinion.com/columns/engine/03/07/16/
Also, a quote from another article (I reckon we should all get this one stamped on our foreheads):
Here's the link... http://www.codepoetry.net/archives/2003/06/26/on_marketshare.php
So, the iMac will be what it has always been. A machine for a particular market, one that the PC manufacturers just don't seem to be able to crack (coz they just don't understand the elegance of design required) - i.e. the computer as an appliance. (and I'd be guessing, but Apple would have the large majority of that market)
ChrisH3677 said:
1. please no more car comparisations
bmw has _10% marketshare_ in germany..they sell twice as much cars over here than ford... (and they sell 10 times more cars here than apple sells computers over here)...yeah and bmw are expensive here too
where has apple a 10% marketshare ? ...
porsche and ferrari comparing to apple...you really like that ?.. porsche is working together with vw ... ferrari and fiat on the other side
2. on the list of marketshare/sold computers from computer manufactures,apple is number _12_ here.... try naming 11 computer manufactures...
3. the imac is selling weak here...there are more powermac sold than imacs and emacs together... imac and emac _together_ are less than 25 % of all mac computer sales...and the emac is selling better than the imac..so the imac is perhaps 10% of all mac sales _at best_.. that is very bad for a product which should be a _ consumer flagship_ for the company... imagine only <10% of all vws sold would be golfs...
4.apple marketshare (new sold computers) here : 1.7%...yeah ...one point seven percent...and that after the best year they ever had ...62% !!! increase of computer sales in one year only thanks to ibook g4 and pm g5 ... apple has to pull the head out of the graphic-designer-sand and has to get more agressive in marketing... putting ipod posters up in _two_ cities(berlin munich) is called "nationwide campaign" by them...
edit: and yeah porsche sells more 911er in germany per year than apple sells imacs...
where has apple a 10% marketshare ? ...
this is the closest i could find on a quick search:
apple laptop market share
this is the closest i could find on a quick search:
apple laptop market share
I for one agree with Aldo on the "well priced" idea. No Apple should not be selling computers at Walmart or making cheap commodity boxes. BUT it would be nice if for the next generation of the iMac Apple is able to invovate not just with technology but also with a lower price. If you think it can't be done just look at the iBook line.
Missed Opportunity
The shipping of new iMacs in September is well timed. Some have mentioned that it will be too late for the backtoschool shopping spree (which happens in August). In general schools are requiring laptops of their students so this should be of little concern. Schools fortunate enough to have had a budget that enabled them to purchase new computers (eMacs) for the 0405 school year have already done so. The next best time to have a new small business/consumer version computer on the market would be the endoffiscalyear/holiday season. Purchasing departments and independent retailers are beginning to see holiday marketing material and announcements arrive now. The Apple teaser announcement makes sense in this case. The gap in inventory for a time would seem to be the only quagmire, and it seems Apple has graciously apologized for this.
The shipping of new iMacs in September is well timed. Some have mentioned that it will be too late for the backtoschool shopping spree (which happens in August). In general schools are requiring laptops of their students so this should be of little concern. Schools fortunate enough to have had a budget that enabled them to purchase new computers (eMacs) for the 0405 school year have already done so. The next best time to have a new small business/consumer version computer on the market would be the endoffiscalyear/holiday season. Purchasing departments and independent retailers are beginning to see holiday marketing material and announcements arrive now. The Apple teaser announcement makes sense in this case. The gap in inventory for a time would seem to be the only quagmire, and it seems Apple has graciously apologized for this.
takao said:
1... ok... u pick an analogy in another market. (btw I wasn't talking about your local market - I was referring to world markets)
2... Well point us at the link. And take your argument up with the author of the article i quoted.
3... Yeah, they'd probably like more than 10% for iMacs - but how big is the "computer as an appliance" market?
4... yeah I agree. Apple is US-centric. They don't seem to put as much effort in down here either. But, I reckon they're paying more attention to Europe now. Last year at Paris was big, this year will be bigger.
edit: PS Who knows - maybe Apple may give up on the appliance market. Maybe they are too far ahead of the pack in that thinking. Maybe they will go for something more traditional and flexible. They have been too far ahead of the pack before and pulled out.
No, you guys are getting at the wrong end of my argument. x86-compatible software (apart from games) does not matter to me at all - sure it would be nice, but there is a lot of nice OSX software.
The reason Apple should of switched to x86 is that PPC is too small a market now to produce CPUs in high volume and therefore save money. The trouble is that I 'demand' low priced Macs, and so does the market. I'd say slide every price down by at least 25% to compete well, imo. They just can't do this with the bunch of non-standard and non-commodity parts. They know this and this is why they add more and more standard stuff to the mobo.
RE: WalMart, I didn't say it was a good thing. I just said it was incredibly popular. Sad as it is, the days of exclusive, expensive niches for consumer electronics is dying, mainly because everything is standardized and really, really low cost. Buying a Sony product (used to be quite high quality stuff) was a you buying a product that was ahead of the competition. Sony had flat-CRTs for ages before others came along. Now a load of flat-CRTs, all with the same quality of Sony are on the market and prices have fallen to 25% of what they used to be. Sony is also hemorrhaging money - it can't compete with this.
Oh, and one more thing guys: the PPC arch is nice, but not as great as you guys make it out to be. 99% of code people write now never touches the CPU arch. Assembly and related languages are not an option for people with an ounce of common sense. C/C++ will not care whether you are compiling for x86 or ppc, and C/C++ is the lowest 99.5% of programmers go nowadays. Apple could easily make a tool that would recompile old stuff to x86 arch in one click, assuming it didn't use assembly.
Oh also, look at pearpc.sf.net - they have a fully working PPC emulator for x86 that can run Jaguar and Panther. It's really slow (20% of the speed of the host comp, max) but it's getting fast a lot quicker. Suspiciously one must add, one of the main developers got 'hit by a train' a few days ago. I personally think Apple paid him off - a PPC emulator that ran at 50% speed could potentially ruin Apple, so what better way to say he died and bam, no support for the gobs of code the guy wrote. It's going to put the project behind at least 1 year. Let Stefan RIP, if true though.
The reason Apple should of switched to x86 is that PPC is too small a market now to produce CPUs in high volume and therefore save money. The trouble is that I 'demand' low priced Macs, and so does the market. I'd say slide every price down by at least 25% to compete well, imo. They just can't do this with the bunch of non-standard and non-commodity parts. They know this and this is why they add more and more standard stuff to the mobo.
RE: WalMart, I didn't say it was a good thing. I just said it was incredibly popular. Sad as it is, the days of exclusive, expensive niches for consumer electronics is dying, mainly because everything is standardized and really, really low cost. Buying a Sony product (used to be quite high quality stuff) was a you buying a product that was ahead of the competition. Sony had flat-CRTs for ages before others came along. Now a load of flat-CRTs, all with the same quality of Sony are on the market and prices have fallen to 25% of what they used to be. Sony is also hemorrhaging money - it can't compete with this.
Oh, and one more thing guys: the PPC arch is nice, but not as great as you guys make it out to be. 99% of code people write now never touches the CPU arch. Assembly and related languages are not an option for people with an ounce of common sense. C/C++ will not care whether you are compiling for x86 or ppc, and C/C++ is the lowest 99.5% of programmers go nowadays. Apple could easily make a tool that would recompile old stuff to x86 arch in one click, assuming it didn't use assembly.
Oh also, look at pearpc.sf.net - they have a fully working PPC emulator for x86 that can run Jaguar and Panther. It's really slow (20% of the speed of the host comp, max) but it's getting fast a lot quicker. Suspiciously one must add, one of the main developers got 'hit by a train' a few days ago. I personally think Apple paid him off - a PPC emulator that ran at 50% speed could potentially ruin Apple, so what better way to say he died and bam, no support for the gobs of code the guy wrote. It's going to put the project behind at least 1 year. Let Stefan RIP, if true though.
aldo, yeah maybe i'm wrong. Afterall, linux running on x86 is probably the number reason for its success. How many people with an x86 gave Linux a look because they could?
But that said, Apple would then be reduced to an OS manufacturer - and MS would have pulled out all stops then. While Apple sticks to PPC, MS is happy. Look at the dirtypool MS has played over the years to consolidate its PC market. I don't think Apple would last 5 minutes against MS in the PC market. First they'd pull all MS products for OSX - and probably invalidate all existing licences. Some people say having no MS products is why Linux hasn't cracked the desktop.
And, just coz the chips are the same, doesn't mean the 3rd party software will be ported. If it was that easy, Linux would be king. MS still controls the personal computer market, and as long as Apple stick to their bit of the ocean, MS will leave them alone.
But that said, Apple would then be reduced to an OS manufacturer - and MS would have pulled out all stops then. While Apple sticks to PPC, MS is happy. Look at the dirtypool MS has played over the years to consolidate its PC market. I don't think Apple would last 5 minutes against MS in the PC market. First they'd pull all MS products for OSX - and probably invalidate all existing licences. Some people say having no MS products is why Linux hasn't cracked the desktop.
And, just coz the chips are the same, doesn't mean the 3rd party software will be ported. If it was that easy, Linux would be king. MS still controls the personal computer market, and as long as Apple stick to their bit of the ocean, MS will leave them alone.
ChrisH3677 said:
Well, let's don't forget that the FTC (perhaps the SEC as well) is watching Microsoft. BillG may be power-hungry and he certainly derailed the anti-trust trial, but he isn't stupid. If Microsoft tries to destroy Apple, he's just going to get into hot water needlessly and avoidably.
That being said, I wonder if BillG might not just want to push the envelope and see what happens. After all, he's gotta know the computer industry will not take kindly to Uncle Sam destroying the company that makes their operating system. That and foreign governments who either don't want to switch or haven't yet switched and therefore are dependant on Windows. If you think the rest of the world hates America now, just let our government take out the cornerstone (I hate to put it that way, but it's the truth) of the computer world and you'll probably see stuff that makes the unfortunate recent events in Iraq look like a Sunday picnic.
BTW, Chris, I agree with you: Linux is majority-x86, but from the point of view of the end user, it barely even shows up on the desktop. It's really due to at least 3 reasons: 1. Linux has traditionally been to complicated for the educated regular end user to understand, let alone the uneducated masses; 2. Linux requires you re-acquire all your apps, and regardless of availability this is a financial expenditure and time consuming process that most people and businesses can't or don't want to afford; 3. Office, as you've pointed out, is missing.
Of everyone I personally know (friends and co-workers), there's only like 3 people who take Linux seriously, and only one of them makes his living from it (he works for Earthlink who, you people may be happy to know, pretty exclusively runs Red Hat for all internal operations.)
ChrisH3677 said:
sure apple has a bigger marketshare in the US and i understand it but they have a big potentional marketshare over here and they don't even bother to increase the marketshare...linux has twice the marketshare than apple on preinstalled computers... instead of profiteering from microsoft weaknesses at the moment apple-germany is sitting around doing nothing...
during the the time period where apple sold 37k computers (18k laptops,19 kdesktops) the whole pc market in germany sold _more_ than 2 million computers...simple math...
apple has to do something here.period. (yeah even the ipod isn't selling as good perhaps 1/3 of the marketshare they have in the US maximum)
i really hope that they finally bring on a wide spread itunes promotion here too... perhaps that would improve the public 'mindshare' about apple
Not to toot my own horn, but since I was up late last night working to bring this message to you MacForums people, has anyone looked at post #657?
Mike
Mike