Re: Sweet revenge...
Once again this seems to echo most folks' opinion on this forum. Quite frankly although I've been frustrated with Moto and Apple over this, it's really Apple's fault that this happened and not Moto's. Go back to 1995 when Micheal Spindler and Apple's board were screwing Apple up completely. They were a complete disaster internally and once Amelio came in and wrote off $1 billion in one quarter with more losses the following quarters what do you think as a cpu vendor would be thinking of doing to avoid losses to its primary desktop cpu customer.
Remember at this time also IBM failed miserably on their end with providing a competitive (OS/2)/PPC platform. WinNT for PPC being killed off is what truly hurt the PPC computing platform though in the eyes of Moto. All of the fame of AIM was looking like a huge disaster. By 1997 Moto was telling everyone that they were focusing more on the embedded market. IBM was at that time talking about a G3 that could hit 1Ghz. This was around the same time Jobs took over. Look at those dates. Those were years ago. If Apple truly is moving to another vendor for all or most of their cpu's, why take this freaking forever to do it? The writing was on the wall back then just over 5 years ago(an OS can be written in 5 years).
Now this isn't to say that Moto hasn't screwed up since then but you have to keep in perspective that they're all guilty of this screwup and Apple was too stubborn to let it all go. Moto was already demonstrating that they were having business problems. I consider this a screwup for Apple that ranks up there with not listening to Gates in his recommendation of licensing the Mac OS for cloners back in '85.
Now there are several arguments that can be made as to why Apple should have stayed(contracts, no OS for another architecture, etc.). The thing you have to look at though is that even then Apple in '95 Apple only had 10%, if that, of the market. They've never actually had more than 18% if I recall correctly for as long as the Mac has shipped. Simple math and accounting should have told Apple that they better be thinking of how to migrate to other hardware just in case something happened and as for contracts, they can be broken.(something rumors tells us Moto did to Apple instead with the fabled G5)
Anyways when you get down to it, if your favorite restaurant has bad burgers do you blame the restaurant chain, the employess, or the meat provider to the restaurant. I've never heard of anyone blaming the meat provider. Consider Moto the meat provider in this case. The restaurant selects the meat provider just like Apple selects the cpu they go with. Sure there are some other variables but the jist of it is that this is Apple's fault, not Moto's and sales to customers have demonstrated this. It's the Apple faithful that can't bring themselves to point the finger at their beloved computer maker.
I like Macs and the OS quite a bit but I also work in the real world and know where Apple, Moto, and Macs stand and that is certainly not where many here would have others believe. I'm sure I'll get flamed for this but it should be only from those in denial or just don't understand or know the history and logic.
Stuff happens though folks. Get over it. If Moto came out with a brand new fangled cpu next year touted above the IBM chips, more than half of those same bashers now would be crying for Apple to choose it. People will argue that this isn't true but history will tell us otherwise.
Once again this seems to echo most folks' opinion on this forum. Quite frankly although I've been frustrated with Moto and Apple over this, it's really Apple's fault that this happened and not Moto's. Go back to 1995 when Micheal Spindler and Apple's board were screwing Apple up completely. They were a complete disaster internally and once Amelio came in and wrote off $1 billion in one quarter with more losses the following quarters what do you think as a cpu vendor would be thinking of doing to avoid losses to its primary desktop cpu customer.
Remember at this time also IBM failed miserably on their end with providing a competitive (OS/2)/PPC platform. WinNT for PPC being killed off is what truly hurt the PPC computing platform though in the eyes of Moto. All of the fame of AIM was looking like a huge disaster. By 1997 Moto was telling everyone that they were focusing more on the embedded market. IBM was at that time talking about a G3 that could hit 1Ghz. This was around the same time Jobs took over. Look at those dates. Those were years ago. If Apple truly is moving to another vendor for all or most of their cpu's, why take this freaking forever to do it? The writing was on the wall back then just over 5 years ago(an OS can be written in 5 years).
Now this isn't to say that Moto hasn't screwed up since then but you have to keep in perspective that they're all guilty of this screwup and Apple was too stubborn to let it all go. Moto was already demonstrating that they were having business problems. I consider this a screwup for Apple that ranks up there with not listening to Gates in his recommendation of licensing the Mac OS for cloners back in '85.
Now there are several arguments that can be made as to why Apple should have stayed(contracts, no OS for another architecture, etc.). The thing you have to look at though is that even then Apple in '95 Apple only had 10%, if that, of the market. They've never actually had more than 18% if I recall correctly for as long as the Mac has shipped. Simple math and accounting should have told Apple that they better be thinking of how to migrate to other hardware just in case something happened and as for contracts, they can be broken.(something rumors tells us Moto did to Apple instead with the fabled G5)
Anyways when you get down to it, if your favorite restaurant has bad burgers do you blame the restaurant chain, the employess, or the meat provider to the restaurant. I've never heard of anyone blaming the meat provider. Consider Moto the meat provider in this case. The restaurant selects the meat provider just like Apple selects the cpu they go with. Sure there are some other variables but the jist of it is that this is Apple's fault, not Moto's and sales to customers have demonstrated this. It's the Apple faithful that can't bring themselves to point the finger at their beloved computer maker.
I like Macs and the OS quite a bit but I also work in the real world and know where Apple, Moto, and Macs stand and that is certainly not where many here would have others believe. I'm sure I'll get flamed for this but it should be only from those in denial or just don't understand or know the history and logic.
Stuff happens though folks. Get over it. If Moto came out with a brand new fangled cpu next year touted above the IBM chips, more than half of those same bashers now would be crying for Apple to choose it. People will argue that this isn't true but history will tell us otherwise.
