Reverse Halo... iPod kills Mac?

Discussion in 'Apple, Inc and Tech Industry' started by gkroeger, Sep 18, 2007.

  1. gkroeger macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2007
    #1
    I certainly understand Apple's broadening product line and the importance that the iPod has had in Apple's recent strength, but I am concerned about the attendant "my way or the highway" attitude that this has had on Apple and the fallout for the Mac.

    In suggesting to several friends and relatives that they consider the Mac (and it would be perfect for their computing expertise) a major stumbling block has been the inability of the Mac to live and play well with video on the web. For worse or worse, MS has cornered the current market with their DRM strategy. Go to Vongo or Netflix with a Mac and one is greeted immediately with a warning stating that your operating system is incompatible, get XP or Vista. Same with TNT.tv. With Amazon's Unbox it takes a bit more mousing to find out you need XP or Vista.

    Now if Apple intends to supply all of the same content via iTunes, fine and dandy. But lately, they appear to be content to piss off any media suppliers that want some control over the cost and packaging of their content. That doesn't bode well for increasing availability of media from Apple.

    Other issues that could easily be fixed remain impediments. Intuit won't make Mac products feature equivalent to Windows products or even file equivalent so a small 3 person office based on QuickBooks can't switch easily. Even Apple won't make a Keynote player for Windows so that we can show Keynote presentations at conferences... we still have to convert them to PowerPoint losing much of the Keynote advantage. It wouldn't take much of Apple's cash pile to address some of these issues.

    Of course BootCamp, Fusion and Parallels solve these problems, but if one is going to have to live with Windows, one can do it for a lot less money on someone else's hardware... and for the person seeking the Mac for simplicity, this just adds more complexity than they were trying to avoid. Does Apple not see these as significant issues, or do they just not care so long as they can sell as many Macs as they produce?
     
  2. ravenvii macrumors 604

    ravenvii

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2004
    Location:
    Melenkurion Skyweir
    #2
    You can convert your keynote presentation to QuickTime. With the latest QuickTime, you can play movies fullscreen. I think Apple already answered your Keynote issue.

    Intuit is an even worse company than Microsoft I think. They suck, through and through.
     
  3. jczubach macrumors 6502

    jczubach

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Location:
    northwest
    #3
    they probably don't give a squirrels' fart:rolleyes: what you or I think. Go figure...
     
  4. MikeTheC Guest

    MikeTheC

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2004
    Location:
    Gallifrey -- Capitol City, Prydonian Sector
    #4
    There are definitely some issues to be solved out there, but sadly it's a grey area where the merging point of Steve's ego, Apple's arrogance, the equal arrogance, posturing and ego of other companies, and the general wanton, willful ignorance of those in charge of these other companies (Intuit, various web companies, etc.) actually lies.

    Let's also not forget that Microsoft is not in the business of "reaching across the aisle", but rather to make their solutions the de-facto standard. It's a parallel reach for their business strategy to not just have companies and organizations of all sizes running Windows as their "platform of choice" but to also have these various entities utilize Microsoft's content delivery mechanisms and "standards" to distribute their products. It's called a hegemony, and it's called that for a very, very good reason.

    Intuit needs a serious competitor. And frankly, right now, there isn't one. So as a consequence, they'll do whatever they're allowed to get away with, and producing for the Mac simply isn't that much of a priority for them, since the lion's share of their customer base is using -- surprise -- Windows.

    I understand the in-built tendency to try and get "friends and relatives" to switch to a Mac. I've personally gotten to the point where I'm more of a "ask me for my opinion and I'll give it to you, along with all the supporting evidence" but ultimately I no longer give a **** what the other person does. It's not my life, and it's certainly not my problem.

    I mean, technically, the most ethical choice isn't even Mac OS X at this point, though for many people (including myself) it represents the best compromise of ethics and practicality.
     
  5. synth3tik macrumors 68040

    synth3tik

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2006
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    #5
    video content on the internets has nothing to do with the iPod or Apple "forgetting" the Mac. If you want to go to a website and watch a video, but you need XP, then email them and tell them. I myself have no problems with streaming video off the internets, yeah Netflix instant thing-a-ma-do won't work with a Mac, but you can still get your DVDs and thats funner anyway.
     
  6. aristobrat macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    #6
    Google silverlight, as it appears to be Microsoft's answer to streaming DRM for Macs and Linux.
     
  7. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #7
    Netflix doesn't let you watch movies online if you have a Mac? That's a bold statement, seeing as how they're in a fight to the death with Blockbuster. I wouldn't have forseen this (and I even thought about using that online service:eek:).

    Ok, moving on to your main point, no, I don't think that Apple is the aggressor in the situations you're refering to (NBC mostly right?). It seems, from what we saw on this very site, that NBC was determined to dictate tougher terms to Apple, and Apple simply said, "Goodbye." I supported Apple in that decision, because the goal was to keep prices low. NBC claims that their prices weren't going to change, but how much do you believe that?

    Your other points about certain things one can't do on a Mac are valid, and so is the Bootcamp argument. However, I don't think that the vast majority of average computer users (this includes your regular 9 to 5 lineman, your retired grandmother, your computer illiterate uncle, etc), a Mac does just fine. Even with the vast potential of Apple TV and the internet to deliver media content, most people just watch movies the old fashioned way: by renting it(whether it be via Netflix, or a brick and mortar store), and never even think about using their computer to make the process faster and more organized. I think that for this market, the Mac line makes perfect sense, and the iPod continues to be a "gateway drug" for this process.
     
  8. bigandy macrumors G3

    bigandy

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Location:
    Murka
    #8
    Silverlight's main aim is not cross platform DRM, it's designed to kill Flash. DRM just happens to have been included to help with that goal.
     
  9. yadmonkey macrumors 65816

    yadmonkey

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2002
    Location:
    Western Spiral
    #9
    Actually, it's Apple's refusal to license their own DRM management to Vongo and Netflix (or anyone else) which prevents Apple users from using these services.

    Emailing them won't do squat. Their hands are tied, short of inventing their own Mac-compatible DRM system.

    Nobody's talking about streaming video in general - it's about the lack of DRM available to third parties for the Mac platform and thus the lack of certain services for Mac users. I like my DVDs too, but I want to use that instant service of Netflix in a big way. The instant service adds a lot of value to my subscription.
     
  10. GimmeSlack12 macrumors 603

    GimmeSlack12

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2005
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #10
    I think the OP has a point, but his problem is one with quite a limited scope. NetFlix and Renting movies on the internet? How many people do that?

    There are a ton of things that people whine about with Apple, but the fact is, is that Apple is a small company that makes itself seem much much larger than it is. It is growing very quickly at the moment, but they can't grow too fast or else big problems will can arise with long wait times before solutions can appear.

    Things will get better, but the speed that the iPod has rocketed Apple into the mainstream is too fast for the entire company to follow with. These are the growing pains of Apple that we are all experiencing.

    The Mac is doing just fine and without the Mac OS and Macs, the iPod will never survive.
     
  11. yadmonkey macrumors 65816

    yadmonkey

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2002
    Location:
    Western Spiral
  12. twoodcc macrumors P6

    twoodcc

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Location:
    Right side of wrong
    #12
    the OP does have a point.

    but Apple a small company? there might be some growing pains, but not like you tend to describe.
     
  13. yadmonkey macrumors 65816

    yadmonkey

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2002
    Location:
    Western Spiral
    #13
    I've never heard of a multi-billion dollar small company which dominates two industries (portable MP3 players and online music distribution), and is third in the world for manufacturing computers, meanwhile having the resources to attack new markets with products like the iPhone and iTV. I've never heard of a small company which has the advertising capitol to place TV ads during any television event, major or minor. Or a small company with Apple's market cap.

    It's funny how perceptions like this persist - many people still think of Nintendo as a small company.
     
  14. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #14
    3rd in the US maybe, but despite what the American media would like us to believe, the USA is not the entire world ;)
     
  15. yadmonkey macrumors 65816

    yadmonkey

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2002
    Location:
    Western Spiral
    #15
    But what about that song "We Are the World"? We're NOT?! :eek:

    Ahem, correction noted - thanks.
     
  16. aristobrat macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    #16
    But (playing the devils advocate here) can't the size of a company also be qualified by things that aren't financial or market-sized related?

    For example, some could say that Apple's "small" in the sense that they weren't able to release the iPhone without having to delay the release of Leopard?
     
  17. CashGap macrumors 6502

    CashGap

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2007
    Location:
    Music City, USA
    #17
    "For example, some could say that Apple's "small" in the sense that they weren't able to release the iPhone without having to delay the release of Leopard?"

    Hmm, Microsoft is "big" and they weren't able to release much of anything and still dramatically delayed the release of Vista.
     
  18. yadmonkey macrumors 65816

    yadmonkey

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2002
    Location:
    Western Spiral
    #18
    According to the Wikipedia, Apple has over 20,000 employees and does almost $20 billion on annual sales. If that qualifies as a small company, I don't know what my 1-man operation would be... a nano-company?
     
  19. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #19
    put it in perspective:

    Dell: 83,000/55 billion
    HP: 156,000/ 91 billion
    Microsoft: 79,000/51 billion

    so in comparison to its competitors, yes apple is quite small.
     
  20. aristobrat macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    #20
    Vista wasn't late because the Vista guys were also doing Windows Mobile. ;)
     
  21. swampfox macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2007
    Location:
    Louisiana
    #21
    Even if it is small, placing third in computer sales is pretty darn good:apple:
     
  22. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #22
    Perhaps efficient would be a better word?

    Apple has 25% the amount of employees that ms has yet does 39% as much business.

    Apple/HP 13%/22%
     

Share This Page